Suns lose to Wemby-less Spurs

[highwhey]

damn that's crazy

[Axe]

No giraffe, no problem.

[Real Men Wear Green]

He's a useful player and I'm certainly not going to pin the loss on him because I didn't watch this game, I'm just looking at the box score. But if you are a guy that can get a 6 point, 2 assist 4 rebound statline and yet not get blamed for the loss then you're a roleplayer. If a full third of your games are single-digit scoring and you are a shooting guard then you're a roleplayer.

[tontoz]

That has to be the worst loss of the season. All their starters are healthy and they are trying to stay out of the play in.

The $50 million dollar man needs to show up.

[Real Men Wear Green]

That has to be the worst loss of the season. All their starters are healthy and they are trying to stay out of the play in.

The $50 million dollar man needs to show up.

It's hard to be the third scorer when you're only the team's second best player at your natural position. At least one of their top 3 should be traded for a point guard, some depth, some strong defensive roleplayers, etc...some combination of those things. It would make them a better. They have redundant scoring in the easiest scoring eta of our lifetimes, when scoring is easiest to find. A 3 and D guy could be more valuable to a lot of teams than a 20ppg guy because that roleplayer can spam 3s to a 15 point average.

[Manny98]

Spurs play good basketball without the statpadder

[ImKobe]

Spurs play good basketball without the statpadder

They have the same W/L% without him so not really. Suns just love playing down to their competition too much. They beat the Suns twice with Wemby as well. I think KD played in all 4 games too which makes it funnier.

[warriorfan]

some guys here said beal’s contract wasn’t that bad







lmaoooooo

[tontoz]

It's hard to be the third scorer when you're only the team's second best player at your natural position. At least one of their top 3 should be traded for a point guard, some depth, some strong defensive roleplayers, etc...some combination of those things. It would make them a better. They have redundant scoring in the easiest scoring eta of our lifetimes, when scoring is easiest to find. A 3 and D guy could be more valuable to a lot of teams than a 20ppg guy because that roleplayer can spam 3s to a 15 point average.

I didn't like the Beal trade for them when it happened. I thought they would be better than this though.

Glad to be rid of Beal's contract....but then we replaced it with Poole's awful deal.

[Real Men Wear Green]

I didn't like the Beal trade for them when it happened. I thought they would be better than this though.

Glad to be rid of Beal's contract....but then we replaced it with Poole's awful deal.

Injuries have made their record worse than it should be but even at full strength they don't look like a great team. The Beal trade wasn't good for them long-term but the goal was to win now and if you think having three scorers automatically makes you a contender it makes some sense. Unfortunately for them these three players don't fit well together. They aren't awful but the idea was to be offensively overwhelming but instead of having everyone's talent unleashed they've had injury problems and haven't been special even when healthy.

[Kblaze8855]

some guys here said beal’s contract wasn’t that bad







lmaoooooo

it is pretty unremarkable. By percentage, it’s nothing we have not seen dozens of times for similar and worse players with contracts you don’t even remember because nobody cared. That it could be on a roster people consider loaded enough to complain they’re gonna win around 50 games while being healthy for like 30 kind of makes that hard to argue against.

but you’re well past the point of thinking on this subject. You’re gonna repeat yourself so long as they don’t win the title and even if by some miracle they did you would say they would’ve won three if he were paid 39 million instead. Seems you would like to keep talking about it though. It’s one of your things at this point and I will indulge you every couple of months till telling you truths your feelings don’t accept gets old.

I didn’t feel a need to keep going on about Sheed making 16 of 44 to not be an all star. Don’t know why you want to keep talking about Beal making 46 of 142. Nine none All stars alone were making more money than Beal is now at the time.

He makes like a percentage point off of washed Keith VanHorn on the Knicks money. And it’s going down the next several years, because the built-in cap increases are greater than the increases built into his contract.

The greatest trick the owners pulled is convincing both the players and fans that make too much money now.

It has never been easier to pay these guys and still build a talented team around them because contracts looked at as devastatingly large to fans are of less consequence than they have ever been. Rasheed was the second highest paid player on a middling playoff team and he made more of the cap than Steph Curry does now as the top paid player in the league.

The NBA PR department pulled the wool over your eyes with terms like Supermax. they fit more players near the top level of smaller contracts, which makes it easier to build super teams because You can fit several on one team.

it really was pretty smart. Gave the stars the idea they get more at the same time they fooled the fans into taking their side in arguments, while they decrease costs and make it easier to build teams than ever.

The owners have their issues, but their negotiators consistently kick the players ass. They manipulated the situation to where contracts like Beals don’t really even matter. You can have three at the time if you feel like it. Everybody can definitely have two. I don’t know how much anyone would have to make to actually prevent a good team from forming around them, but nobody is making it right now

[Kblaze8855]

I didn't like the Beal trade for them when it happened. I thought they would be better than this though.

Glad to be rid of Beal's contract....but then we replaced it with Poole's awful deal.

Jordan Poole makes less of the wizards than Matt Geiger made One year he was literally retired. He makes considerably less than Kris Humphreys did. You’re a tanking team which, depending on some decisions might be scraping the salary floor soon, and have to pay the exact same money into a fund to be distributed to the players at the end of the season. Jordan Pooles contract isn’t costing you little. It’s costing your team literally nothing. Jordan Poole playing well is what would hurt your team because you’d win more games When I look at your roster, suggest you should be shooting for lottery picks the entire length of his deal.

This is one of those things that has to be pure emotion Just defeating your common sense. I don’t have any evidence you are stupid person, so I can’t see what else the problem would be.

His contract is nothing and he is helping a team lose that needs to lose. Is there some reason you want to win 43 games instead? What were you hoping he would do? Winning is something you’re in favor of right now? Do you just principally not like to see a player make good money, even when it serves your purposes and does no tangible harm?


right now you would have the second best odds at the top pick. You can’t fall out of the top four I believe. Would you prefer Jordan had played better this year so you’re 10th hanging around the nets? How would Jordan Poole playing better help you? I just don’t get it. You have implied you would be better without him. Would that be desirable? 31 wins instead of 18? If so….why?

[tontoz]

Jordan Poole makes less of the wizards than Matt Geiger made One year he was literally retired. He makes considerably less than Kris Humphreys did. You’re a tanking team which, depending on some decisions might be scraping the salary floor soon, and have to pay the exact same money into a fund to be distributed to the players at the end of the season. Jordan Pooles contract isn’t costing you little. It’s costing your team literally nothing. Jordan Poole playing well is what would hurt your team because you’d win more games When I look at your roster, suggest you should be shooting for lottery picks the entire length of his deal.

This is one of those things that has to be pure emotion Just defeating your common sense. I don’t have any evidence you are stupid person, so I can’t see what else the problem would be.

His contract is nothing and he is helping a team lose that needs to lose. Is there some reason you want to win 43 games instead? What were you hoping he would do? Winning is something you’re in favor of right now? Do you just principally not like to see a player make good money, even when it serves your purposes and does no tangible harm?

I DGAF what Matt Geiger made. Just because there have been bad contracts in the past doesn't mean that Poole's contract doesn't suck.

We had Beal and Porzingis on the team last year and still won only 35 so how exactly were we going to win 43 this year without them? That is just an idiotic strawman argument. I understand though. You have to make up a strawman to pretend you are making sense. News flash, nobody is buying it.

[warriorfan]

Kblaze as a defense attorney

“If you really think about it, murder isn’t that bad, I mean it’s happened plenty of times in the past”

[Kblaze8855]

The downside of a contract being too big, is it not allowing you to add other talented players. His contract still allows him to play with Kevin Durant and Devin Booker. It obviously isn’t a devastating contract. If he were paid what many players of the past were paid cap wise, you would not be able to add two more of them. Ewing making the modern equivalent of $90 million is why he couldn’t play with two more players like him. It doesn’t work that way anymore.

your problem is you think it’s about Bradley Beal. It isn’t. It’s about the NBA changing the system so nobody has a contract big enough you can’t build a great team around it. The entire basis of the argument was removed by the league subtly changing how this works while revenue increased. It doesn’t matter who the player is. there is no such thing as a crippling contract in the NBA anymore.

Fans just do the bidding of the league when they talk about these giant numbers and help cheap owners and bad GM’s get off the hook by believing nothing can be done. It’s straight up manipulation of the uninformed and fans fall for it every time.

One would think people would catch on when guys in the top 20 range are signing contracts that will pay them $70 million for one season but it’s easier to believe multimillion dollar accounting firms don’t have calculators then to accept you’ve been hoodwinked into thinking these giant figures actually hurt the teams giving them out.