Grayson Allen Extension [WOJ Official]

[kenwood3333]

If you replace Allen with Austin Reeves, who signed a 53m/4 year deal last year, I expect the team remain where they are record wise. So this is an overpaid.

[Charlesareed]

Great, another player the Pistons can't sign. Just keeps getting better and better. If monk signs, im out on the Pistons man. They are never gonna get better at this rate.

Hopefully the Pistons don't do something stupid and offer kcp like 25 million per year

lol I doubt kcp meet with the pistons no way he goes back to Detroit other then a visiting player

[ghillphx]

He should have tested FA. He would make a lot more money.

What is he tore his ACL during the playoffs? Your logic has failed for many men before him. Look it up.

Plus once PHX sees how bad Allen is in the postseason they will immediately regret this decision. He cashed in at the right time.

He had an extremely large sample size in clutch games reg season. When you've got the wide open looks that Beal, Booker and Durant give you, and you shoot at a higher percentage than anyone in the league... I think Grayson's at least got a 60% chance of showing his worth in the playoffs. You're basically just speaking from a pessimistic view, a generalized view of negativity.

[HotelVitale]

Interesting, feels like he could've bet on himself and maybe made more this summer...but he also gets the security of staying put and being on a good/relevant team.

I think it all would have depended on his playoffs. He's been targeted in the past as a defensive weak link. If that happens again he might get the Malik Beasley treatment as the guy who can't be counted on in the playoffs and thus you don't want to pay him starter money. Now, obviously Beasley is the extreme case due to him being a terrible defender in both the regular season and playoffs but I think Allen could have suffered some earnings potential if he can't hold up in the playoffs. $17-18m seems like a good compromise for Allen because one bad playoff round might have knocked him down to MLE-level guy. He was also going to have to some competition in the "3 & not-so-great at D" SG market as a UFA with Hield, Trent, Gary Harris, Melton and Beasley all being UFA. I think Allen avoided a lot of downside risk by taking this deal (at least more so than the upside, which I would have put at 4/80 max).

Yeah but even Beasley made more than the equivalent of $17m/season on his biggest FA deal. That's what I mean, this seems definitely on the low end for his likely potential FA market. But it's also a big sum (and a lot of years) and it sounds like he wanted to have the security.

[aminiaturebuddha]

Good deal for Allen but how are the Suns affording this team? Durant, Booker and Beal on max deals. Nurkic and Allen on fairly large deals. Rest are basically minimums but it's still very expensive.

And they want to re-sign O'Neale as well. Basically Matt Ishbia has said "screw it, we're going above the second apron". The question is if they'll hit the 3 in 5 years above the apron threshold and then they start getting nailed with draft pick penalties. Although they've basically traded away all of their picks, so I'm not sure how that'll work.

My guess would be the protections get stripped away.

The issue is going to be that some of the penalties for over apron teams is that their 1st round picks get dropped to the end of the round. If those picks are already owned by other teams, I'm not sure how that ends up being a punishment on the over apron team.

This is all new to everyone, so it'll be interesting to see how it works out, and if they feel they need to make some tweaks to the rules.

[HotelVitale]

If you replace Allen with Austin Reeves, who signed a 53m/4 year deal last year, I expect the team remain where they are record wise. So this is an overpaid.

Bad way to look at it. Everyone agreed Reeves was good value, partly because the Lakers could only give him so much and partly because so few teams had significant cap space. Guys like Reeves aren't generally available for $12m/year so there's no sense setting the market by them.

[sodmoraes]

Sweep the leg!

[bwgood77]

Good deal for Allen but how are the Suns affording this team? Durant, Booker and Beal on max deals. Nurkic and Allen on fairly large deals. Rest are basically minimums but it's still very expensive.

And they want to re-sign O'Neale as well. Basically Matt Ishbia has said "screw it, we're going above the second apron". The question is if they'll hit the 3 in 5 years above the apron threshold and then they start getting nailed with draft pick penalties. Although they've basically traded away all of their picks, so I'm not sure how that'll work.

I am curious how that works. They still have swaps in 24, 26, 28 and 30 because of the Stepien rule, but it doesn't seem like they'd have a rule that took their picks away there or it would counter the Stepien rule.

Some or maybe all of those are 3 way swaps too where they get the worst ones. Luckily this year the other two teams were Washington and Memphis...that's who it is most years except 2028 where Brooklyn is in there too.

[ConSarnit]

Interesting, feels like he could've bet on himself and maybe made more this summer...but he also gets the security of staying put and being on a good/relevant team.

I think it all would have depended on his playoffs. He's been targeted in the past as a defensive weak link. If that happens again he might get the Malik Beasley treatment as the guy who can't be counted on in the playoffs and thus you don't want to pay him starter money. Now, obviously Beasley is the extreme case due to him being a terrible defender in both the regular season and playoffs but I think Allen could have suffered some earnings potential if he can't hold up in the playoffs. $17-18m seems like a good compromise for Allen because one bad playoff round might have knocked him down to MLE-level guy. He was also going to have to some competition in the "3 & not-so-great at D" SG market as a UFA with Hield, Trent, Gary Harris, Melton and Beasley all being UFA. I think Allen avoided a lot of downside risk by taking this deal (at least more so than the upside, which I would have put at 4/80 max).

Yeah but even Beasley made more than the equivalent of $17m/season on his biggest FA deal. That's what I mean, this seems definitely on the low end for his likely potential FA market. But it's also a big sum (and a lot of years) and it sounds like he wanted to have the security.

I'm of the belief that guys of Allen's ilk almost always follow the same structure for contracts. Beasley, Harris, Trent, Hield. They all got the same deals: show promise on your rookie deal, get paid somewhere between 14-18% of the cap coming off their rookie deal due to potential, never really develop further (defense, playmaking, etc) and then see a reduced salary for their 3rd deals (usually somewhere around the MLE). Allen never got that "potential" deal and I think he's past the age to get one. I would have had his salary range between $13-20m, largely dependent on playoff performance. Even then I thought $20m would have been crazy.

Do I think Allen deserved a raise? For sure. I just can't see anyone wanting to give him 4/80m+ given that he's a pretty finished product. To me 4/70 was closer to his high end then his low end and that's why I think he probably did pretty well.

[flranger]

And they want to re-sign O'Neale as well. Basically Matt Ishbia has said "screw it, we're going above the second apron". The question is if they'll hit the 3 in 5 years above the apron threshold and then they start getting nailed with draft pick penalties. Although they've basically traded away all of their picks, so I'm not sure how that'll work.

My guess would be the protections get stripped away.

The issue is going to be that some of the penalties for over apron teams is that their 1st round picks get dropped to the end of the round. If those picks are already owned by other teams, I'm not sure how that ends up being a punishment on the over apron team.

This is all new to everyone, so it'll be interesting to see how it works out, and if they feel they need to make some tweaks to the rules.

It's the pick that is seven years out that gets locked.

The first time you are over the 2nd apron, you lose the ability to trade your pick 7 years out. That pick is now frozen.

If you then go over the 2nd apron multiple years, the "frozen" pick is stuck with you and now drops to the end of the round.

Starting 2024-25, a team’s pick is frozen the first year it exceeds the second apron and then is moved to the end of the first round if it exceeds in 2 of the next 4 years (a total of 3 out of 5 seasons).

Examples they gave:

If the Suns are a second apron team during the 2024-25 season, they are not allowed to trade their 2032 first-round pick. The pick is deemed frozen.

If the Suns are a second apron team in 2024-25, 2025-26, and 2026-27, then their 2032 first will be moved to the end of the first round.

[HotelVitale]

I think it all would have depended on his playoffs. He's been targeted in the past as a defensive weak link. If that happens again he might get the Malik Beasley treatment as the guy who can't be counted on in the playoffs and thus you don't want to pay him starter money. Now, obviously Beasley is the extreme case due to him being a terrible defender in both the regular season and playoffs but I think Allen could have suffered some earnings potential if he can't hold up in the playoffs. $17-18m seems like a good compromise for Allen because one bad playoff round might have knocked him down to MLE-level guy. He was also going to have to some competition in the "3 & not-so-great at D" SG market as a UFA with Hield, Trent, Gary Harris, Melton and Beasley all being UFA. I think Allen avoided a lot of downside risk by taking this deal (at least more so than the upside, which I would have put at 4/80 max).

Yeah but even Beasley made more than the equivalent of $17m/season on his biggest FA deal. That's what I mean, this seems definitely on the low end for his likely potential FA market. But it's also a big sum (and a lot of years) and it sounds like he wanted to have the security.

I'm of the belief that guys of Allen's ilk almost always follow the same structure for contracts. Beasley, Harris, Trent, Hield. They all got the same deals: show promise on your rookie deal, get paid somewhere between 14-18% of the cap coming off their rookie deal due to potential, never really develop further (defense, playmaking, etc) and then see a reduced salary for their 3rd deals (usually somewhere around the MLE). Allen never got that "potential" deal and I think he's past the age to get one. I would have had his salary range between $13-20m, largely dependent on playoff performance. Even then I thought $20m would have been crazy.

Do I think Allen deserved a raise? For sure. I just can't see anyone wanting to give him 4/80m+ given that he's a pretty finished product. To me 4/70 was closer to his high end then his low end and that's why I think he probably did pretty well.

Eh, maybe, and the defense in the PO thing is a good point. But this really isn't a huge contract--he's making about $15m/season to start the deal, which is about 10% of the cap and should be about that throughout the length of the deal. This deal is basically a MLE contract.

My thinking is that he's going to be the best shooter in FA, teams will have money to spend (including some who really need shooting), and maybe most importantly PHX really needed to bring him back. But yeah I guess he could have slipped through the cracks in FA, and that's probably why he took the $ now.

[flranger]

When you think about what the Suns are doing, they are really f....d.

They have either traded or swapped every pick through 2030, and if they keep on this course within a couple more years not only will they have picks they cannot trade from 2032 on, those picks that they cannot trade will also end up at the end of the first round.

Obviously they are stuck with Beal, but one of Booker or KD will get traded before they hit 3 out of 5 over the 2nd apron.

[aminiaturebuddha]

My guess would be the protections get stripped away.

The issue is going to be that some of the penalties for over apron teams is that their 1st round picks get dropped to the end of the round. If those picks are already owned by other teams, I'm not sure how that ends up being a punishment on the over apron team.

This is all new to everyone, so it'll be interesting to see how it works out, and if they feel they need to make some tweaks to the rules.

It's the pick that is seven years out that gets locked.

The first time you are over the 2nd apron, you lose the ability to trade your pick 7 years out. That pick is now frozen.

If you then go over the 2nd apron multiple years, the "frozen" pick is stuck with you and now drops to the end of the round.

Starting 2024-25, a team’s pick is frozen the first year it exceeds the second apron and then is moved to the end of the first round if it exceeds in 2 of the next 4 years (a total of 3 out of 5 seasons).

Examples they gave:

If the Suns are a second apron team during the 2024-25 season, they are not allowed to trade their 2032 first-round pick. The pick is deemed frozen.

If the Suns are a second apron team in 2024-25, 2025-26, and 2026-27, then their 2032 first will be moved to the end of the first round.

Interesting. Thanks for the run down.

That hardly seems like much of a disincentive then, looking at it like that, especially for a front office that may not even be around by 2032. But I assume it was hard to get agreement on these things in the Board of Governors meetings. It would have been even harder had the proposed penalties been really severe.

[flranger]

Interesting. Thanks for the run down.

That hardly seems like much of a disincentive then, looking at it like that, especially for a front office that may not even be around by 2032. But I assume it was hard to get agreement on these things in the Board of Governors meetings. It would have been even harder had the proposed penalties been really severe.

Hell of a disincentive if you are the owner though.....presumably planning to keep the team hopefully competitive for the long term

[ghillphx]

When you think about what the Suns are doing, they are really f....d.

They have either traded or swapped every pick through 2030, and if they keep on this course within a couple more years not only will they have picks they cannot trade from 2032 on, those picks that they cannot trade will also end up at the end of the first round.

Obviously they are stuck with Beal, but one of Booker or KD will get traded before they hit 3 out of 5 over the 2nd apron.

They have a small window with KD, and yes, as a lifelong suns fan, new owner Mat Isbhia truly f***ed them in the same style as the Russian owner did with Brooklyn many years ago (KG and Pierce gutting trade). These new owners come in with big balls and think they can buy a championship. I was 100% against the KD/Bridges Johnson pick swap trade. Suns might surprise people in the playoffs this year, but KD is now in the decline. His stats hardly show it this year, but you'll see next year, he'll begin the statistical decline.

[In-N-Out 247]

Their starting 5 next year is on the books for about $184.5M. That's almost at the second apron by themselves - crazy

[RIPskaterdude]

Monk is going to get PAID

[Richard4444]

Seems like a solid deal all around. Im sure with the season he had, he couldve spent some time in free agency and maybe have gotten a better deal.

Led the league in 3pt% and 2nd in TS%. Also most nights he is asked to spend a ton of energy on defense defending the opposing team's best perimeter player. Not saying he is some stud defender, but that has been his role for the majority of the year with the starting group.

And even if you think this year he's playing well beyond his capability. Outside of his rookie year, he has been as consistent of a shooter as you can ask for. 5 seasons and his worst season from 3 is 39%, the other 4 seasons are 39.9% or higher.

I know the 70 mil number looks big, but that is about 12% of the cap next year. If you can get a super consistent elite shooter who you know will at minimum play with high energy on the defensive end, for 12% of the cap. That is a pretty damn good deal.

Its the same deal the Knicks gave to Tim Hardway Jr. In 2017.

[Revived]

He should have tested FA. He would make a lot more money.

What is he tore his ACL during the playoffs? Your logic has failed for many men before him. Look it up.

Plus once PHX sees how bad Allen is in the postseason they will immediately regret this decision. He cashed in at the right time.

What makes you think he’ll be bad in the playoffs? The gravity Booker/Durant/Beal create is lot different than what Middleton/Giannis/Holliday creates.

[Revived]

If you replace Allen with Austin Reeves, who signed a 53m/4 year deal last year, I expect the team remain where they are record wise. So this is an overpaid.

Reaves just has a terrible agent otherwise if he waited he could’ve got paid and played with Wemby under Popovich for years to come.