Per Woj - Suns waiving Rivers

[SirStefan32]

Yeah Chris, I am not getting it either, and I deal with budgets on regular basis. I read over your posts a couple of times, and I am just not getting it.

 

[Chris_Sanders]

Sorry I am slammed with end of year business. I wish I had time to rehash it. Even coming to this forum is a five minute break from spreadsheets. Excuse my peevishness.

 

[Chris_Sanders]

High level I am just answering what all these talking heads are talking about. Why oh why did the Suns do what they did. Why didn't they wait to make a better trade?

Because the players weren't worth keeping. The organization saw a chance to save money and took that because they determined that the extra money paid out wouldn't equate to a better offer down the road.

Does that clear it up?

 

[Chris_Sanders]

And yes it is Sarver doing Sarver things but this really is pretty justified.

 

[elindholm]

Yeah Chris, I am not getting it either, and I deal with budgets on regular basis. I read over your posts a couple of times, and I am just not getting it.

Google "circular reasoning" and you'll get it. Basically the argument is:

Sarver is believed to be cheap.
Therefore, he will make questionable moves to save money.
The Suns have recently made some questionable moves.
Since Sarver is cheap, it follows that the moves must have been to save money.
Since we have now concluded that the moves saved money, it follows that Sarver is cheap, justifying the original premise.

The hilarious thing is that Excel will reject a circular reference, but I guess professional skills don't always transfer to real-life scenarios.

 

[Chris_Sanders]

Google "circular reasoning" and you'll get it. Basically the argument is:

Sarver is believed to be cheap.
Therefore, he will make questionable moves to save money.
The Suns have recently made some questionable moves.
Since Sarver is cheap, it follows that the moves must have been to save money.
Since we have now concluded that the moves saved money, it follows that Sarver is cheap, justifying the original premise.

The hilarious thing is that Excel will reject a circular reference, but I guess professional skills don't always transfer to real-life scenarios.

Close! My point was

Sarver is believed to be cheap.
Therefore, he will make questionable moves to save money.
The Suns have recently made some questionable moves.
Did questionable move save money?
Questionable move did save money
Is Sarver being cheap?
No Sarver made a business decision that actually makes sense

 

[CardsSunsDbacks]

What I disagree with is the idea that the trade itself was about saving money. First of all it wasn't even the Suns that initiated waiving Rivers as it was Rivers that expresed that he didn't want to be here. Had he expressed that he wanted to stay then he is likely still on the team and we aren't saving anything. You could argue that part of why they decided to let him go was because there would be money savings, but it doesn't line up to say that the trade was about saving money.

 

[Chris_Sanders]

What I disagree with is the idea that the trade itself was about saving money. First of all it wasn't even the Suns that initiated waiving Rivers as it was Rivers that expresed that he didn't want to be here. Had he expressed that he wanted to stay then he is likely still on the team and we aren't saving anything. You could argue that part of why they decided to let him go was because there would be money savings, but it doesn't line up to say that the trade was about saving money.

Eh I just don't think they made the trade blindly not checking if the player even wanted to be here. They worked on this trade for over a week asking for medicals from the team and talking to agents. So the buyout was already agreed upon before the trade was even finished.

 

[Chris_Sanders]

I also don't really buy into that we ever really wanted Rivers in the first place. I believe they only wanted to replace Ariza with a younger and more affordable player. Rivers was just filler that they rightfully dumped.

 

[CardsSunsDbacks]

Eh I just don't think they made the trade blindly not checking if the player even wanted to be here. They worked on this trade for over a week asking for medicals from the team and talking to agents. So the buyout was already agreed upon before the trade was even finished.

I don't know of players hardly ever being consulted about how they feel about a trade before it happens. Players typically don't even know they're being traded untill the trade has already been agreed to.

 

[CardsSunsDbacks]

I also don't really buy into that we ever really wanted Rivers in the first place. I believe they only wanted to replace Ariza with a younger and more affordable player. Rivers was just filler that they rightfully dumped.

I am not a fan of Rivers by any stretch of the imagination, but he would have almost certainly been better starting next to Booker than Melton. Had he expressed any interest in playing for us I doubt he gets waived as he would have been an upgrade to at least someone in our rotation currently.

 

[Chris_Sanders]

I don't know of players hardly ever being consulted about how they feel about a trade before it happens. Players typically don't even know they're being traded untill the trade has already been agreed to.

When the trade blew up Gambo was running on how the Suns did their homework on both players including medical, agents, and what not.

I am taking that at face value. You are correct that a player may not be in the loop an agent would make sense.

 

[Chris_Sanders]

I am not a fan of Rivers by any stretch of the imagination, but he would have almost certainly been better starting next to Booker than Melton. Had he expressed any interest in playing for us I doubt he gets waived as he would have been an upgrade to at least someone in our rotation currently.

This is why I believe that we were fine with not getting him and he was just salary filler

By signing the National Basketball Association’s Uniform Player Contract, a player agrees to “give his best services, as well as his loyalty, to the Team,” to “conduct himself on and off the court according to the highest standards of honesty, citizenship, and sportsmanship,” and “not to do anything that is materially detrimental” to the team or the league. Refusing to play in a game against a coach’s orders could therefore be considered a breach of contract. The team could justifiably withhold payment, terminate his contract, or sue him for monetary damages. (Nearly every professional sport requires players to sign a similar contract.)

So if Rivers came here we could justifiably not pay him if he refused to report.

If we thought he had value at his contract, you could just sit on him and spin him for something. Or we could REALLY just pocket the cash, but then he might report and if you don't really want him then that is disaster.

So yes we could have just blindly traded for a guy and then bought him out when he said "I don't like you and I am willing to risk my career over that"

But that just seems way less likely then both the player and the team actually got what they wanted the whole time.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

Eh I just don't think they made the trade blindly not checking if the player even wanted to be here. They worked on this trade for over a week asking for medicals from the team and talking to agents. So the buyout was already agreed upon before the trade was even finished.

Exactly. It didn’t come as a surprise that rivers didn’t want to be here or that they were going to buy him out. To believe that is to believe the suns are even more stupid than we believe.

 

[JCSunsfan]

I think it was half way between. Rivers' salary was necessary to make the deal. They also thought they would give him a look at guard here. But when he said he didn't want to come here, they just weren't interested enough with him to bother. Rivers holding out would be more bad press for the Suns when they are trying to get a arena renovation project done.

 

[Hoop Head]

Igor did make the comment about how he looked forward to adding Rivers and Oubre to the team right after the trade was made official and then the next day the news about Rivers being waived came out and Igor was asked if he knew that would happen and just said that's typical NBA. He'll coach the players he has. Can't find the quotes but found reference to that. I think they planned on adding Rivers and then for some reason he changed his mind or perhaps he was told he'd need to earn the starting PG spot rather than have it gifted to him. In the middle of a winning streak if they just subbed Melton for Rivers that would be questionable. People can say Rivers is better but Melton has played well enough that he shouldn't have been sat for Rivers simply because we acquired him.

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media

 

[Mr. Boldin]

Rivers was never going to be on the Suns come March anyway. This just expedites the process for everyone. Considering the mess that this entire situation was, forcing Rivers to report, only to haggle over his buyout would have been another negative press item for the franchise.

 

[devilalum]

This is why I believe that we were fine with not getting him and he was just salary filler



So if Rivers came here we could justifiably not pay him if he refused to report.

If we thought he had value at his contract, you could just sit on him and spin him for something. Or we could REALLY just pocket the cash, but then he might report and if you don't really want him then that is disaster.

So yes we could have just blindly traded for a guy and then bought him out when he said "I don't like you and I am willing to risk my career over that"

But that just seems way less likely then both the player and the team actually got what they wanted the whole time.

It all happened way too fast to not be a mutual feeling.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[devilalum]

The Suns are in the extremely difficult position of trying to change their culture. They need players that will play hard every night in spite of all the jokes and ridicule the team receives.

They can’t afford to have players on the roster that are half in or feel entitled.

They need to have a chip on their shoulder every night. Enter Kelly Oubre.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JCSunsfan]

It all happened way too fast to not be a mutual feeling.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There is no way the Suns could afford for the idea that NBA players don’t want to play here to be in the news right now. They need that renovation vote to go through. It took them all of five seconds to decide to do a buyout—especially with Austin Rivers reputation of being a locker room problem.

Sarver cares about his reputation I think. I know he reads his own press clippings. He knows what people are saying about him.

 

[95pro]

I think this is where James Jones is more aware of these intangibles that affect an organization.

 

[Hoop Head]

We can debate when a buyout was discussed, agreed upon, and offered but that doesn't really matter at this point. What's done is done. Is anyone mad that we don't have Austin Rivers? Beyond that, are you happy with trading Oubre for Ariza? That's what the trade was, buyout aside.

We will be in the same spot at the end of the season, minus Ariza's salary and we didn't take on any long term commitment. Now we have the option of keeping someone who fits the timeline and whose age and skillset meshes with the rest of our core. While it might have been nice to add some picks, I don't trust James Jones to make those extra selections and we also don't need even more rookies next season. We'll have enough of our own with our 1st and 2nd round pick plus the Bucks pick, potentially. We don't need more than 2 on guaranteed contracts. We added 5 this year as is, with 3 of them starting and playing 25+ minutes a game. Jamal Crawford is the only veteran we have seeing a good amount of playing time and he may or may not return next year. I'd be fine with retaining him as a player or adding him to the coaching staff, if he calls it a career.

 

[CardsSunsDbacks]

We can debate when a buyout was discussed, agreed upon, and offered but that doesn't really matter at this point. What's done is done. Is anyone mad that we don't have Austin Rivers? Beyond that, are you happy with trading Oubre for Ariza? That's what the trade was, buyout aside.

We will be in the same spot at the end of the season, minus Ariza's salary and we didn't take on any long term commitment. Now we have the option of keeping someone who fits the timeline and whose age and skillset meshes with the rest of our core. While it might have been nice to add some picks, I don't trust James Jones to make those extra selections and we also don't need even more rookies next season. We'll have enough of our own with our 1st and 2nd round pick plus the Bucks pick, potentially. We don't need more than 2 on guaranteed contracts. We added 5 this year as is, with 3 of them starting and playing 25+ minutes a game. Jamal Crawford is the only veteran we have seeing a good amount of playing time and he may or may not return next year. I'd be fine with retaining him as a player or adding him to the coaching staff, if he calls it a career.

Depending on the interest we can get from free agents we might even be able to afford to overpay Oubre a little if it's a three year deal. That would have his contract expiring around the same time as guys like Ayton and Bridges. Not advocating for a huge overpay and also realize that Oubre still has more to prove to even get to that point, but assuming he does prove to be valuable to our future than it could warrant a bit of an overpay if we can get the contract for 3 years instead of 4.

 

[AzStevenCal]

Depending on the interest we can get from free agents we might even be able to afford to overpay Oubre a little if it's a three year deal. That would have his contract expiring around the same time as guys like Ayton and Bridges. Not advocating for a huge overpay and also realize that Oubre still has more to prove to even get to that point, but assuming he does prove to be valuable to our future than it could warrant a bit of an overpay if we can get the contract for 3 years instead of 4.

I agree with you on most of this but I'm curious why you'd prefer a 3 year deal? Is it just to hedge your bet in case he doesn't improve? I think given his reputation for being a hard worker, I'd prefer 4 years if we can settle on reasonable contract numbers. That's assuming he's a fit in the locker room. I have no idea what it was based on but reading a little bit of a Wizards forum I did see a Washington fan referring to him as a locker room cancer.

 

[Mainstreet]

We can debate when a buyout was discussed, agreed upon, and offered but that doesn't really matter at this point. What's done is done. Is anyone mad that we don't have Austin Rivers? Beyond that, are you happy with trading Oubre for Ariza? That's what the trade was, buyout aside.

We will be in the same spot at the end of the season, minus Ariza's salary and we didn't take on any long term commitment. Now we have the option of keeping someone who fits the timeline and whose age and skillset meshes with the rest of our core. While it might have been nice to add some picks, I don't trust James Jones to make those extra selections and we also don't need even more rookies next season. We'll have enough of our own with our 1st and 2nd round pick plus the Bucks pick, potentially. We don't need more than 2 on guaranteed contracts. We added 5 this year as is, with 3 of them starting and playing 25+ minutes a game. Jamal Crawford is the only veteran we have seeing a good amount of playing time and he may or may not return next year. I'd be fine with retaining him as a player or adding him to the coaching staff, if he calls it a career.

Adding Crawford to the coaching staff is a great idea when he hangs it up.