Bradly Beal, 50 mil to score 9 points in 31 mins in an elim game (Kblaze get in here

[DMAVS41]

Interested and actually making an offer aren't the same thing. A team is just doing it's due diligence if Beal is willing to go there

If they decline due to his contract then that just shows that his contract is tough to trade.

Sorry if you can't accept this, or are too dumb to comprehend it.

Traded for positive value or basically for free? Which is it?

I said interested. So you agree they were interested.

Already explained my position about low cost for the Suns and positive value for the Wizards. These are just facts...I'm not even arguing they got some great package. I don't even care if you call in neutral, even though we both know it wasn't, it wasn't negative value and the Wizards got something for trading Beal. I don't know what there is here to even debate. Just facts.

What floors me, but I guess it shouldn't....is that you and your camp are acting like if the Suns didn't exist...Beal just couldn't have been traded. Things evolve...maybe everyone refuses and then get more desperate at the deadline.

Did you watch Tobias Harris last game? You think the Sixers wouldn't be interested in a swap of Beal for Harris and some future assets if he was still on the Wizards? You think the Nets just hang up the phone if the Wizards call about Simmons?

I mean, I just can't believe fans diehard enough to be on message boards are capable of such blind spots. It is pretty remarkable.

When you say "tough to trade"...I think I agree with you in the sense you are using it, but I think that is the wrong phrase. Tough to trade, imo, is when you have to attach assets to get rid of a player that has true negative value. Perhaps now Beal falls into that category after this year, but he didn't when we were discussing this.

Simmons has a contract tough to trade. Wiggins, when on Minny, had a contract tough to trade...the Wolves had to give up the 7th pick to get rid of him for DLO...when a player gets moved within days / weeks of coming available and for positive value...I just don't consider that tough to trade....because it is nowhere near as hard as truly tough to trade players that have been on much worse contracts.

[tontoz]

If teams are interested in Beal as a player, but decline due to his contract, do you really think that helps your case?



Of course teams would be interested in him as a player. If he was making $20 million per year I have no doubt that a bunch of teams would make offers.

If nobody was interested in him as a player then his contract wouldn't matter.

Simmons and Wiggins weren't making the vet supermax with a no trade clause.

[DMAVS41]

If teams are interested in Beal as a player, but decline due to his contract, do you really think that helps your case?



Of course teams would be interested in him as a player. If he was making $20 million per year I have no doubt that a bunch of teams would make offers.

If nobody was interested in him as a player then his contract wouldn't matter.

Simmons and Wiggins weren't making the vet supermax with a no trade clause.

Of course it helps my case. I said multiple teams were interested...then you responded asking me to list the teams...and I did....now you are saying, "fine, they were interested"...but they didn't ultimately make a trade for him. I honestly don't understand your point...I never argued every team would love to trade for Beal on his contract. I truly don't understand your point.

Again, you can't act as if nobody else would have ultimately traded for Beal if he didn't go to the Suns. You simply can't do that...all we know is that as soon as he became available, multiple teams were interested and he was traded rather quickly for positive value. The rest is just conjecture....but we also know that in the NBA teams consistently make desperate moves. It's like you can't wrap your brain around this fact. If I thought all teams would be perfect EV solvers...I wouldn't have argued my side...I would have been more on yours...but it is like you are ignoring or just maybe not realizing that there is always at least one team...usually more...that feel the need to make a move in a win now situation and deals we call "weird" get done all the time.

The Gobert trade of recent infamy comes to mind. I actually liked it for the Wolves at the time, well, I didn't think it was dumb. Why did the Wolves do that? Because they felt they needed exactly what Gobert provides and felt like they could contend for titles with him...this isn't GTO poker dude....this is messy and teams do things like this all the time. That isn't the odd thing...the odd thing is you and your camp pretending that this shit doesn't happen on repeat.

Lastly, Simmons and Wiggins have and had much tougher to trade contracts than Beal did at the time he was traded. Doesn't matter what label you put on them. These are simple facts. Again, not sure what point you are making.

[tontoz]

I agree that you don't understand. Teams being interested in Beal, but declining to make an offer due to his contract, just shows how bad the contract is.

That is basic common sense which you clearly lack

I don't need to "act" like another team wouldn't have traded for Beal. He said so himself.

[DMAVS41]

I agree that you don't understand. Being interested in Beal, but declining to make an offer due to his contract, just shows how bad the contract is.

That is basic common sense which you clearly lack

More shifting...but good thing we have that thing called reality that shows that Beal was traded for positive value.

You can call his contract whatever you want...end of the day...Wizards got a return for Beal.

Now, Beal after this season....I'd be more in line with you on what value Beal has....but that wasn't the debate.

Sorry.

[tontoz]

More shifting...but good thing we have that thing called reality that shows that Beal was traded for positive value.

You can call his contract whatever you want...end of the day...Wizards got a return for Beal.

Now, Beal after this season....I'd be more in line with you on what value Beal has....but that wasn't the debate.

Sorry.

Technically getting a second round pick is positive value. So what?

Just because there was one team willing to take on that contract, a new owner who was clueless, doesn't make his contract easy to trade. That is just nonsense.

Teams with experience were interested in Beal as a player but declined to make an offer. If his contract was easy to trade we would have gotten multiple offers, hence his contract wasn't easy to trade.

Sorry

[DMAVS41]

Technically getting a second round pick is positive value. So what?

Just because there was one team willing to take on that contract, a new owner who was clueless, doesn't make his contract easy to trade. That is just nonsense.

Teams with experience were interested in Beal as a player but declined to make an offer. If his contract was easy to trade we would have gotten multiple offers, hence his contract wasn't easy to trade.

Sorry

Well, we don't know if they got multiple offers. Windhorst reported that Miami actually did make an offer around Lowry and a future first....but again, this is more shifting. I never said it was a great contract or that it would be easy to trade in the sense you are talking about. Never did I imply that all teams would be lining up to trade for Bradley Beal.

My point was quite simple...signing Beal to that contract was not the disaster you and your camp made it out to be for the Wizards because if they decided to tank, they could get positive value for the contract...especially if they had been willing to take on truly terrible contracts like the Simmons contract.

I truly don't know or understand how you and others, after watching what played out, could come on here and act like exactly what Blaze and I said didn't basically happen.

It's both hilarious and a little depressing.

You can have the last word...

[tontoz]

Well, we don't know if they got multiple offers. Windhorst reported that Miami actually did make an offer around Lowry and a future first....but again, this is more shifting. I never said it was a great contract or that it would be easy to trade in the sense you are talking about. Never did I imply that all teams would be lining up to trade for Bradley Beal.

My point was quite simple...signing Beal to that contract was not the disaster you and your camp made it out to be for the Wizards because if they decided to tank, they could get positive value for the contract...especially if they had been willing to take on truly terrible contracts like the Simmons contract.

I truly don't know or understand how you and others, after watching what played out, could come on here and act like exactly what Blaze and I said didn't basically happen.

It's both hilarious and a little depressing.

You can have the last word...

You actually did say he was traded easily, just like you said he was traded basically for free. Seems like you can't keep your story straight.

Beal said very clearly that other teams refused because the money was too high. He didn't say anything about the wizards asking price being too high.

What is hilarious is how you keep changing your story to for whatever point you are trying to make at that time.

In your narrative another year on the treadmill to nowhere and missing out on the top picks of a strong draft aren't costs of the Beal signing. In reality they are. I have no doubt wizards fans would give up the pick swaps and Bilal for Brandon Miller or one of the Thompson twins, not to mention Wemby.

Multiple teams being interested in Beal but declining because of his contract, according to Beal himself, is clear evidence of just how bad the contract is.

[NBAGOAT]

Yea, I never said it was stupid to let him walk and tank. I just thought it was slightly better to sign him and move him. I would have wanted to take on Simmons from the Nets. I think the Wizards messed up not taking back a contract as bad as Simmons to get more

We disagree on the overpay because it was so marginal, but I understand your argument about the Suns being better off doing something else. I likely agree depending on the specifics.

The supermax is meant for players that qualify for it. The players negotiated it that way. I never even argued Beal was worth that, because he obviously isn't....but we all just need to make peace with this big contracts because they aren't stopping. The players fought for that and they aren't going to be cool with guys that qualify for something not getting at least 90% of their personal max in most situations.

Agree or disagree...doesn't matter...it is what it is.

I didn’t say you said it was stupid. I disagree with you about it being slightly better to sign him and move him. I think it was clearly a bad decision and laid out why alternative was better with actual options they could’ve done like Holmes and bertans. how do you know Simmons was ever an option for nets. They’re going big game hunting according to every report beal isn’t good enough for that.

I’m fine with big contracts but the overpay was not marginal. I don’t think it’s an unpopular opinion that a lot of guys are overpaid on a supermax. A borderline all-nba guy like a towns or gobert don’t deserve a supermax(why gobert got a discount). Possibly even a star like Booker/Mitchell isn’t worth one because only a top 10 superstar should get one. Beal was 1 tier below a borderline all-nba guy and 2 tiers below Booker/Mitchell. He had one great year with wb in his career and that’s it and got him the supermax. The year he got the supermax he wasn’t even an all star. He’s by far the worst player to ever get the supermax and no the players union wouldn’t have complained if he got even 2/3 of what he actually got(4yrs 140 around the 25% rookie max wat upcoming guys like herro/Poole and good vets like jrue were getting). People were calling him worst contract in league pre suns trade.

[GimmeThat]

I’m fine with big contracts but the overpay was not marginal. I don’t think it’s an unpopular opinion that a lot of guys are overpaid on a supermax.

the idea that wealth can be accumulated over night is baffling.

[NBAGOAT]

And if a player doesn’t have the market he’s not going get 90% of his max. Sabonis technically couldn’t get the supermax even if he made all-nba this year because the kings traded for him but on his current deal he doesn’t even make 30% of the salary cap which is the normal max even though he made all-nba last year and didn’t drop off this ywae. Siakam would’ve been eligible if he made all-nba last year but the raptors already made it well known they were not giving it him no matter what. Now I doubt he’s getting 90% of the 30% max(5yrs 250) it be a clear overpay by the pacers and siakam doesn’t have the market(think most would agree). The wizards ignored that market and consensus opinion with beals deal.

[GimmeThat]

The wizards ignored that market and consensus opinion with beals deal.

it's really the Michael Jordan ownership deal. now the argument revolves around how arenas with unsold tickets should affect a players pay.

it should be a family outing, but the general population is still too concerned with education, instead of skills.


the occurence of the current education happened prior to the unify theory, so it severly hinders pattern recognition skills.

[DMAVS41]

I didn’t say you said it was stupid. I disagree with you about it being slightly better to sign him and move him. I think it was clearly a bad decision and laid out why alternative was better with actual options they could’ve done like Holmes and bertans. how do you know Simmons was ever an option for nets. They’re going big game hunting according to every report beal isn’t good enough for that.

I’m fine with big contracts but the overpay was not marginal. I don’t think it’s an unpopular opinion that a lot of guys are overpaid on a supermax. A borderline all-nba guy like a towns or gobert don’t deserve a supermax(why gobert got a discount). Possibly even a star like Booker/Mitchell isn’t worth one because only a top 10 superstar should get one. Beal was 1 tier below a borderline all-nba guy and 2 tiers below Booker/Mitchell. He had one great year with wb in his career and that’s it and got him the supermax. The year he got the supermax he wasn’t even an all star. He’s by far the worst player to ever get the supermax and no the players union wouldn’t have complained if he got even 2/3 of what he actually got(4yrs 140 around the 25% rookie max wat upcoming guys like herro/Poole and good vets like jrue were getting). People were calling him worst contract in league pre suns trade.

I could ask you the same question...how do you know they could have gotten more than Beal or that those guys would ultimately be better? I don't think it is an overpay, but also think it is reasonable to say the Suns could have or should have gone a different direction. But just getting Beal on a team that is only concerned for the next 3 years....for what the Suns got Beal for...I don't think it is fair to call it an overpay.

Almost nobody is worth their contract when they get to Beal's age outside of the truly best guys in the league...which of course Beal isn't among. Never did I argue he was worth his contract worth it in the sense you are talking about. All I ever argued was that the deal wasn't as bad as everyone said it was for the Wizards and that it would be able to be moved...which it was.

That's it.

[DMAVS41]

You actually did say he was traded easily, just like you said he was traded basically for free. Seems like you can't keep your story straight.

Beal said very clearly that other teams refused because the money was too high. He didn't say anything about the wizards asking price being too high.

What is hilarious is how you keep changing your story to for whatever point you are trying to make at that time.

In your narrative another year on the treadmill to nowhere and missing out on the top picks of a strong draft aren't costs of the Beal signing. In reality they are. I have no doubt wizards fans would give up the pick swaps and Bilal for Brandon Miller or one of the Thompson twins, not to mention Wemby.

Multiple teams being interested in Beal but declining because of his contract, according to Beal himself, is clear evidence of just how bad the contract is.

I've already, repeatedly, addressed everything you just said.

Beal is gone and the Wizards are tanking...you should be happy.

[BarberSchool]

Mat Ishbia deserves to suffer like this.