• Phoenix Suns

    10Feb/0912:18 PM

    If trading Stoudemire is a financial move Sarver should step aside

    Most reports surrounding the possibility of trading Amare Stoudemire focus on his play and locker room presence as the onus for a deal. What if it has less to do with those reasons and more to do with something else? What if the buzz surrounding the deal is just that, buzz created to mask a less palatable explanation?

    What if the Suns are thinking of dealing Amare to alleviate financial problems?

    While most of fans and media have been entrenched in thought that a player move is necessary to jump start the Suns TNT’s David Aldridge had a different take.

    Almost no one has picked up on the real story behind the shopping of Amar’e Stoudemire in Phoenix, and Tyson Chandler in New Orleans, and the impetus of many teams to be active before the Feb. 19 deadline. It has nothing to do with basketball, no matter what you hear about Amar’e’s lack of defense and Chandler’s history of injuries.

    This year, the trade deadline is being influenced like never before because owners who’ve lost millions in the plunging U.S./global economy are determined not only not to be luxury tax payers, but to cut costs as much as possible as quickly as possible, with no intention of allowing their team’s salaries to ever rise near the tax threshold in the foreseeable future.

    ESPN.com’s Chad Ford agrees and has heard the Suns may be trying to shed as much as $40 million from their payroll (Amare and Shaq gone?).

    With the financial crisis rising and with the Suns sinking in the West, it sounds as if owner has had enough of his team’s underachievement and its $75 million payroll. The general manager for another team said the Suns’ goal in the next two weeks before the trade deadline was to clear $40 million off the 2009-10 payroll.

    It’s understandable that NBA owners and were hit hard by the economic down turn just like everyone else. What isn’t understandable is making moves that could potentially hurt the on-court product for years to come.

    If shedding $40 million off of the 2009-2010 payroll is the goal and there is no intention of raising the payroll much higher than that, then what’s the point?

    The goal in Phoenix has never been to make the playoffs. The goal has always been to bring a championship to the Valley of the Sun. While the new ownership group seems to view the Suns as just a cash-generating venture, always understood that.

    If isn’t willing to make moves that elevate the Suns and their fans closer to their ultimate goal, it is time he steps aside and sells the team to someone who will.

    The Suns need, no deserve, someone who will keep a competitive payroll and will make moves that are basketball savvy rather than business savvy. Trading talent to shave payroll, selling draft picks and being reluctant to pay the luxury tax just won’t cut it.

    The ironic part of the entire thing is a few of the “business moves” that were made to save money in the short term have put the Suns in their financial issues here in the long run. If draft picks weren’t sold for money the Suns would have the infusion of cheap talent needed to keep the team competitive while having a smaller payroll. Instead the Suns invested in higher-paid aging veterans to lead the way. Instead of Rajon Rondo, Rudy Fernandez, Nate Robinson and others the Suns have had the likes of Matt Barnes, Marcus Banks and Jalen Rose.

    Rebuilding or retooling with the goal of making the team better is acceptable. Rebuilding or retooling for the sole purpose of saving money isn’t. It may save some cents, but in the long run, it will keep fans from attending games and the cash flow from coming in.

    Mr. Sarver, the only way to assure you won’t lose money on the Suns or have to pay the luxury tax while staying popular with the fans of Phoenix is to sell the team to someone who will attempt to win a championship. Maybe try giving a call. He probably has some money available now that he didn’t get the Cubs.

    The Dish: Poor economy influencing trade decisions [NBA.com]

    Who wants Amare? How about Shaq? [ESPN.com]

    Subscribe to Fanster.com - All Sports. All Phoenix. Subscribe to your favorite Phoenix team or sport or Follow us on Twitter.

    Tags: , , , ,

    • michael
      Owners overpaid for aging stars for many years. I applaud owners who have seen their errors and are now willing to dump overpaid athletes. Most guys shouldnt have gotten the enormous deals in the first place.
    • Mark
      My problem is that the front office has been penny wise and pound foolish in most of their personnel decisions since Sarver took over. Colangelo made decisions with his heart instead of his wallet, and while it brought excitement to the Suns and a title to the Dbacks, it also put both franchises behind the 8ball at times when it came to paying out deferred contracts and giving big money to players who ended up not being worth it.

      Sarver has spent some money, but the front office has done an awful, awful job of managing their assets. If they needed to trim, or at least manage payroll, more astute front office folks would have found ways to be creative in maximizing the return and identifying pieces that could play a role instead of, you know...just giving away all their stuff. Now not only is the team in the tank, they don't hace the young pieces or draft picks that would help them rebuild. Suns fans could be in for a long stretch of bad basketball if they don't manage things juuuust right...and does anyone have any confidence in Sarver/Kerr/Porter to have that kind of touch?
    • matt
      As someone who lived in the DC area for 10 years and suffered through an entire decade of a team with promise spoiled by a cheapskate owner let me tell ya - you are right, this is something you shouldn't let go as a fan.
    • As much as I agree with your sentiment, its hard to tell someone how to spend or not spend their money. If Sarver wants to field a team of D-Leaguers next year, that's really his prerogative. We, as consumers have the opportunity not to support an inferior product that is not competing for a championship.

      Suns fans will know what KC Royals and Pittsburgh Pirate fans have felt for a long time.
    • This is true but the customer is always right and if Sarver is about making money he is going to have to appease the fans. It's pretty simple. If you don't have the money to run a NBA team right than don't be an owner.
    • Very well said, Greg.

      Slight quibble...Barnes and his bricks don't get paid squat, same went for Jalen Rose and his bench-ridden butt.
    • This is true but they still get paid more than a rookie deal would and those were one year deals instead of the cheap multi-year contract that draft picks would make. They basically got rid of those draft picks to fill the roster with guys like that.
    • A Dogg
      If Sarver was looking for a way to cash in a few years ago, that U of A douche should have invested in gold when it was $260.00 an ounce. No our Phoenix freakin Suns. Give it back to JC and let him handle it from here. Kerr and Porter need to go too. Kerr said the Shaq deal was gonna put him to the moron test and if they are they are trying to deal him, Kerr is admitting he failed. And any person who has followed this team knew immediately that Porter was a bad fit. He has always been the enemy. Why don't they just hire Mario Elie, Jerome Kersey and Robert Horry as assistants? This is literally making me sick.
    blog comments powered by Disqus