Phoenix would have matched!

[Lascar78]

Normally I don't listen to vescey, but when he's saying that he just found out that he was wrong, I'm much more inclined to believe him

February 28, 2006 -- UNLIKE everyone else who leaves Arizona in a hurry, Bryan Colangelo didn't head for the hills south of the border. Instead, the Suns' president/GM yesterday became the first person to cross north of the border when it was announced he'd accepted a challenge/opportunity to run the Raptors' basketball operations.

Like most of us have done when we were in the same position, Colangelo caved when presented with roughly a $2 million pay raise from a franchise with the 25th-best record (20-35 entering last night) and arguably the fourth-best city in North America (New York, San Francisco, Chicago, Toronto) and bolted, oh, so regretfully.

The move is indeed lucrative and may prove independently gratifying, but the decision was no doubt heart-wrenching.

Since 1968, the Suns and the Colangelos have been synonymous. Bryan's father, Jerry, was the expansion team's first GM, twice became its head coach (59-60; replaced Red Kerr and Butch Van Breda Kolff) and later its owner.

Nearly two years ago, the Suns were sold to Robert Sarver for a record $401M. Jerry is under contract as chairman and CEO for the next 16 months.

But, of course, Bryan's departure, and the breakup of their 40-year father-son team, may very well influence Jerry prematurely to cut the umbilical cord.

Except for attending college back east and working several years for a powerful New York real-estate firm, Bryan's existence has been dominated by the Suns, whom he's critically helped soar to the top of the NBA's Must-Watch teams.

Last season, the Suns earned the best record, resulting in Bryan's peers voting him their elite executive. Despite losing Amare Stoudemire to injury and Joe Johnson in a sign-and-trade, the Suns (37-17) again are peering over the Pacific Division.

Don't misunderstand; as far as I know, nobody in Phoenix is writing or saying anything remotely negative about Bryan Colangelo. His draft (Shawn Marion, Stoudemire), free-agent signings (Steve Nash, Raja Bell, Eddie House), trades (cap room when he dumped Stephon Marbury and Penny Hardaway on New York, Quentin Richardson for now-injured Kurt Thomas, Johnson for Boris Diaw and a pair of first rounders, Leandro Barbosa, James Jones) have been spectacular.

In three seasons he has almost completely restocked the team's talent base (excepting Marion) and revitalized its fan appeal and season-ticket holders.

Yet, in all fairness, it must be stressed, the majority of what's gone on for almost two seasons couldn't have happened without Sarver's financial support or spend-wisely, business acumen.

Yet the city's media is making Sarver out to be cheap because he didn't match the Hawks' $68M, five-year offer sheet to Johnson. Truth be told, Sarver was prepared to do exactly that when Johnson told him he didn't want to be a caddy for Stoudemire, Marion and Nash.

Don't take my word for it. Bryan Colangelo dropped that info on me earlier this season, after I'd written the Hawks were foolish to have compensated the Suns as much as they did.

Sarver also is under attack for not showing Bryan enough respect, as in not matching the Raptors' offer; in other words, not doing whatever it took to keep him in Phoenix.

Truth is, Sarver gave Bryan a three-year deal when he bought the Suns, raising him from the 750G his father was paying him to $1M per. In addition, Bryan was rewarded with a 100G bonus and equity in the team worth between 250G and 500G, which he now cashes in for between 600G and 650G. Astoundingly, he also verbally agreed to allow Bryan to interview for another team job should he ask permission.

Contrary to consensus Phoenix perception, Sarver tried his best to satisfy Bryan and keep him a Sun.

You don't need a source to know how much that seeming lack of loyalty upset and disappointed Sarver. Still, though principle prevented him from renegotiating Bryan's remaining 16 months, Sarver offered him a three-year extension at $1.7M, excluding equity, which would've begun when his current deal ended.

In the final analysis,Sarver adhered to Jerry Colangelo's long-established tenet: if you're going to overpay someone, make it a player and not a coach or a GM.

peter.vecsey@nypost.com

So to those who said BK was dumb and should have just signed JJ and they wouldn't have matched, looks like you were wrong.

So like I've said before, I can understand criticism of how this team was put together with mostly swingmen, but you have to give BK credit for knowing when it will pay off to be patient, when to take a risk, etc... He has a very good feel for what it takes to sign a player.

For instance:

-his patience got Jax for dirt cheap

-he turned that into a SNT for Al

-he knew that they would match JJ and we would have to put a generous trade together to get him here

-he knew that the Bucks would not match Zaza, even for cheap

-he refused to overpay for dampier

So to those freaking out about Al, I think BK has more than earned the benefit of our doubt on these kind of things. If he thought that it was likely that Al would just leave with no compensation (or if he had gotten great offers), he would have gotten something.

Here's hoping we can have a near complete team next year.

[joannes3000]

Good way to clarify the offseason signing. All along I felt that even if we had to overpay to get JJ it was going to be worth it both short term and long term and the only way to be 100% sure of getting JJ on board was to go forward with the trade.

This keeps me optimistic looking forward to the offseason with Al's status being in the air as of now, but I don't have any concerns that we made the right move by not moving him at the deadline and holding off for a better deal (keep him or trade him). It would take an absolute meltdown for Al to just walk away.

[AHF]

The only part of the trade I disagreed with was not getting more protection on our pick in 2007. If we would have offered the same package but with the pick top 7 protected that would have made a big difference for me because I think there will be some studs in the 2007 draft at least 5 deep. My nightmare is us losing the #4 pick in draft in a draft like the 2002 where it went Melo #3, Wade #4 and Bosh #5.

[Wretch]

Boris Diaw and a token 1st was always good with me. It's the protection on that pick next year that worries me. Still, it's the little things like reading this that give me more and more confidence in Knight.

I got a question though...

What happens if we pick up a 1st rounder via trade between now and next summer? Like a late pick from some contending team? Could we convey that pick to Phoenix instead of our own? LoL, that'd be sweet...

[Lascar78]

no

[joannes3000]

Quote:

---

no

---

Yeah, I do believe it has to be one of our own picks and not one acquired from another team.

[Wretch]

Crappage...

So what's the wording on the trade then? They get OUR 1st rounder in 2007 and not just A 1st rounder...?

[WraithSentinel]

From what I have heard. That 2nd pick has to come from the Suns. No way the Suns take for example a Spurs pick when the Hawks pick will be better. If the Hawks are in the top-10 next year in the lottery. This team may not make to the playoffs next year. That pick at should be between 12-14. If not, Hawks are in deeper trouble than we thought. BK and Woodson will be fired. Let's hope Woodson can develop into the coach we need and BK plan does workout. I don't won't another 5 year plan.

[Wretch]

I expect Toronto to get it turned around. Man, Pheonix has ALWAYS had such strong decision making in the front office...their drafts, trades, FA acquisitions... Good stuff for Toronto.

[Wretch]

So we don't "convey" the pick...Pheonix gets the "choice of"

Hmmm...yeah, lol I'll be sweating every game next season.

[Lascar78]

Quote:

---

Crappage...

So what's the wording on the trade then? They get

OUR

1st rounder in 2007 and not just

A

1st rounder...?

---

I mean it's not like I've seen the actual contract, but that's what they pay their lawyers for. I'm sure it says that it's our pick. Otherwise this would happen all the time

[Wretch]

Well...I've seen it happen quite often. It would depend on the bargaining and the wording of the trade. What teams are willing to give up vs. what the other team wants... Some specify "a future 1st round pick" some specify "(Team)'s fisrt round pick." If a team has two picks, sometimes that team has the right to "convey" a pick and sometimes the other team is given the "choice of" the two picks. Trades can get very specific

I was just wondering how our trade was worded...and have found exactly what I'm looking for:

"Phoenix receive a first round pick from Atlanta (Joe Johnson trade 081905) The Suns will receive Atlanta's own first round pick no later than the 2008 NBA Draft. That pick which is "lottery" protected (1-14) in 2006, has protection through No. 3 in 2007 and has no protection in 2008."

[WraithSentinel]

This is in Marc Stein chat going on right now.

Josh (Atl)

News flash: Joe Johnson can play the point and play it effectively. It took him 20 games or so, but he has really come to understand how to run an offense, especially off the pick and roll. The Bucks zone gave the Hawks a problem, but not because they couldn't hit open jumpers in that game. The Nets tried the zone last night and got burned when they played it.

MARC STEIN

Last time I spoke to Joe, his reservations about playing the point were not ability-based. He simply wondered if he could handle the physical toll of handling the ball and defending top perimeter scorers all night because the Hawks are so young and thin at this point. I'm not surprised at all that he's playing well now. I've written numerous times since last summer that, no matter how many times someone suggests that Atlanta gave up too much to get him, that's the nature of restricted free agency. You have to give up a ton to get an asset away from a team that has the right to match. Very, very rarely does a team just let a guy go. Phoenix was NOT going to let an asset like Joe just walk.

[lifelong]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Crappage...

So what's the wording on the trade then? They get

OUR

1st rounder in 2007 and not just

A

1st rounder...?

---

I mean it's not like I've seen the actual contract, but that's what they pay their lawyers for. I'm sure it says that it's our pick. Otherwise this would happen all the time

---

well, it seems the hawks forgot to pay their lawyers with the latest snag in the belkin divorce, so don't put it past them.

[AHF]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Crappage...

So what's the wording on the trade then? They get

OUR

1st rounder in 2007 and not just

A

1st rounder...?

---

I mean it's not like I've seen the actual contract, but that's what they pay their lawyers for. I'm sure it says that it's our pick. Otherwise this would happen all the time

---

well, it seems the hawks forgot to pay their lawyers with the latest snag in the belkin divorce, so don't put it past them.

---

That is a bizarre contract. I am 99% certain Belkin pulled the wool over their eyes on that one and proposed the key language that would allow him to pick both the evaluators. You notice that he objected less than 60 seconds after receiving a 70 page evaluation? Anybody think he actually read it before objecting?