Wages of Wins: Once Upon a Time in Phoenix

[JMarkJohns]

You're reading too much into the grammar. If your biggest issue is that I used quotations in an instance where summary was used, then I'm afraid there's not much I can say, because it's obvious you're just looking for a reason to hate the piece.

Again, that's a brief summary of a week-long conversation Sarver had with media/fans. He did say the offer would be matched. He did say Johnson wasn't going anywhere. Maybe not in so many words, which is why I used "blustered" to play up the over-the-top undertones of my argument.

[Mel_13]

Considering my qualifications, that I received an "A" on the piece in my CAPSTONE journalism class,

I know you weren't going for a laugh, but defending the quality of your writing by citing your college grades is hilarious.

[JMarkJohns]

And for the record, the source of Sarver's quote's was a radio interview done by Gambo, with the content's of the "He's not going anywhere" sentiments being echoed by Johnson in several articles at the time. Quoting Johnson, "He [Sarver] said he's going to match." This quote was run in EVT and on ESPN.

However, in my search for this, I did stumble upon verification of your claim that Johnson was offered the six-year, 60 million deal before Atlanta made their first offer. However, the greater context is as follows: Suns play the market, Redd, Allen and Hughes all go for 70 million, Suns offer to accept previous 6-year, 50 million deal from previous summer, then offer 6-year, 60 million deal. Johnson balks, engages in contract talks with Atlanta. Sarver tells the fans in Phoenix Johnson isn't going anywhere, JJ confirms Sarver has told him that the Suns will match. The match never comes.

So, the greater context, I wasn't off. Sarver still lowballed, then lied about keeping JJ. However, I was off on the timing of when the 6-year, 60 million offer was made. Congratulations. I hope this makes your day. In the end, it will paint me in a negative light, only the greater context of what was said never changes. Had this been picked up, such is the exact type of detail a fact checker catches and lets the writer know about before its published, so it can be fixed. Like I said, I had myself and the internet sources from almost five years ago. My original finds dictated my first attempt. My most recent says otherwise. Thanks. Wouldn't want to maliciously deceive anyone, being that I'm attempting to have such published under my real name, and make money. An intent to deceive costs me my reputation - my real one, not message board one - and the chance at publication. So, before you bad mouth me anymore, how about you let such a context sink in.

[JMarkJohns]

I know you weren't going for a laugh, but defending the quality of your writing by citing your college grades is hilarious.

Why? My instructor for that class had won awards for her journalistic contributions throughout the years. I value her opinion as much as anyone's. If she deems the style of writing and content to be an "A", then that's a very good thing, because she doesn't just hand those out - I did receive a handful of B's in her class as well, as did most. It's further qualification. It was a CAPSTONE class, and this, albeit small in size, was part of roughly 15,000 words I had to write in five small (1,000-to-2,000 word) and one large, 8,000 minimum investigative feature. It wasn't a 100-level class where A's are passed out to make beginners feel good.

EDIT: In hindsight, I can see why you found it funny.

[RonMexico]

None of those draft picks would have cracked D'Antoni's 6-man rotation, so some of it may be a moot point.

[RonMexico]

Much like Arizona will most likely lose to Arizona State so all these close wins and losses will mean little. They're simply going to bear down on themselves.

[Mel_13]

Why? My instructor for that class had won awards for her journalistic contributions throughout the years. I value her opinion as much as anyone's. If she deems the style of writing and content to be an "A", then that's a very good thing, because she doesn't just hand those out - I did receive a handful of B's in her class as well, as did most. It's further qualification. It was a CAPSTONE class, and this, albeit small in size, was part of roughly 15,000 words I had to write in five small (1,000-to-2,000 word) and one large, 8,000 minimum investigative feature. It wasn't a 100-level class where A's are passed out to make beginners feel good.

I don't know you and I don't care about your debate with DSF. I do appreciate good writing when I read it. I was able to follow the narrative in your piece because I am very familiar with the ground you covered. A person with less knowledge would find several parts quite confusing because of how it was written. That your piece graded out at the top of your class may only prove that is was better than the work of your fellow students.

I do not wish to debate this with you and would never have commented had you not been so over the top with your defense. Feel free to ignore my opinion, but if you are serious about your writing I would offer the following suggestion:

Take the following part of your piece and ask a few people to read it. Pick people who have no knowledge of the Joe Johnson contract fiasco. After they have read it ask them to describe, in their own words, the sequence of events and what offers were made by which parties. I think you will find much confusion among that group.

The 2005 offseason became crucial to the Suns future. Key players were up for free agency or contract extensions and the Suns needed to address the issues of experience and toughness exposed in their series versus the Spurs.

Sarver, unlike most owners, did more than just sign the checks. He dealt with contract negotiations himself, only occasionally taking the input of those hired for the process.

Sarver told the players he’d allow the market to dictate the total of the extensions he’d offer. Only, once the market surprised Sarver with the cost, Sarver balked at the expense it would take to re-sign everybody.

The main player left on the cutting board was Joe Johnson. The versatile swingman had one year prior offered a contract of 6-years, $50 million – a typical contract value for a player of his production. Sarver left this offer on the table, telling Johnson to earn his money the next season and that he’d get paid. When Johnson received a 5-year, $70 million deal from the Hawks, Sarver scrambled, first attempted to accept the offer he turned down the offseason prior, then counter-offering a contract of 6-years, 60 million. Johnson got angry at the repeated low-ball offers, and accepted the Hawks offer.


The bolded portion is the most confusing. The part before the hyphen reads as if Johnson or his agent made the 6/50 proposal while the next sentence implies that the offer may have been from ownership. It is simply not clear. If the purpose of journalism is to inform, this piece has flaws. While your piece may have been rejected due to tone and content, do not blind yourself to the possibility that the quality of the writing may have been a factor.

Good luck with your writing career.

[JMarkJohns]

None of those draft picks would have cracked D'Antoni's 6-man rotation, so some of it may be a moot point.

May be true, but at least then the blame is transferred to D'Antoni. Can't not play players you don't have. I'm sure even D'Antoni could have stumbled into a player or two out of eight.

And, even if you trade them, trade them for something more than 3 million in cash. Trade them for assets that will help the team, not just save you money, since much of that "saved for players" money never went to players at all.

Trade a bad contract and a 1st for a player who can contribute for 20 minutes a night. It's not like the Suns bench in 04-05/05-06 was so stacked they couldn't use the help. It was better in 06-07, but even then a backup PG was needed.

[JMarkJohns]

I don't know you and I don't care about your debate with DSF. I do appreciate good writing when I read it. I was able to follow the narrative in your piece because I am very familiar with the ground you covered. A person with less knowledge would find several parts quite confusing because of how it was written. That your piece graded out at the top of your class may only prove that is was better than the work of your fellow students.

I do not wish to debate this with you and would never have commented had you not been so over the top with your defense. Feel free to ignore my opinion, but if you are serious about your writing I would offer the following suggestion:

Take the following part of your piece and ask a few people to read it. Pick people who have no knowledge of the Joe Johnson contract fiasco. After they have read it ask them to describe, in their own words, the sequence of events and what offers were made by which parties. I think you will find much confusion among that group.

The 2005 offseason became crucial to the Suns future. Key players were up for free agency or contract extensions and the Suns needed to address the issues of experience and toughness exposed in their series versus the Spurs.

Sarver, unlike most owners, did more than just sign the checks. He dealt with contract negotiations himself, only occasionally taking the input of those hired for the process.

Sarver told the players he’d allow the market to dictate the total of the extensions he’d offer. Only, once the market surprised Sarver with the cost, Sarver balked at the expense it would take to re-sign everybody.

The main player left on the cutting board was Joe Johnson. The versatile swingman had one year prior offered a contract of 6-years, $50 million – a typical contract value for a player of his production. Sarver left this offer on the table, telling Johnson to earn his money the next season and that he’d get paid. When Johnson received a 5-year, $70 million deal from the Hawks, Sarver scrambled, first attempted to accept the offer he turned down the offseason prior, then counter-offering a contract of 6-years, 60 million. Johnson got angry at the repeated low-ball offers, and accepted the Hawks offer.


The bolded portion is the most confusing. The part before the hyphen reads as if Johnson or his agent made the 6/50 proposal while the next sentence implies that the offer may have been from ownership. It is simply not clear. If the purpose of journalism is to inform, this piece has flaws. While your piece may have been rejected due to tone and content, do not blind yourself to the possibility that the quality of the writing may have been a factor.

Good luck with your writing career.

Fair enough. Johnson and his agent actually were the ones making the offer, and Sarver was the one sitting on it - not accepting it at the time, because he felt, at that point, JJ had yet to earn that much, even though such was a market-value deal for that offseason.

It happened exactly the way I said it. JJ/Agent offered. Sarver sat on it until the next offseason. I can see how the writing needs to be cleaned up. Again, this is my initial draft, with a quick once through by a former colleague, and the grading of the professor. She made a similar critique, only of my conclusion, which was trimmed. Anyways... No big deal. I obviously have not passed this off as the world's greatest article. Just thought it a fitting place to post it.

EDIT: Also, this isn't a news story. This was and is a feature. It assumes a level of familiarity with the content. Nobody unfamiliar is going to read through a feature story. The intent of features is not to strictly inform. Yes, I wanted to inform, but only to provide a basis for the feature of the eulogy and to show why the fun of the Suns had died (at that time, it certainly appeared it had).

[Mel_13]

Fair enough. Johnson and his agent actually were the ones making the offer, and Sarver was the one sitting on it - not accepting it at the time, because he felt, at that point, JJ had yet to earn that much, even though such was a market-value deal for that offseason.

It happened exactly the way I said it. JJ/Agent offered. Sarver sat on it until the next offseason. I can see how the writing needs to be cleaned up. Again, this is my initial draft, with a quick once through by a former colleague, and the grading of the professor. She made a similar critique, only of my conclusion, which was trimmed. Anyways... No big deal. I obviously have not passed this off as the world's greatest article. Just thought it a fitting place to post it.

This is the perfect place to post such a piece. Whether the content is politically correct or not, I believe the writing needs some polishing before it will be accepted by a major newspaper.

As to the content itself, all Spurs fans should have to read this before they start complaining about giving Scola away. The record of incompetence you detail is almost criminal in its scope.

[JMarkJohns]

This is the perfect place to post such a piece. Whether the content is politically correct or not, I believe the writing needs some polishing before it will be accepted by a major newspaper.

When you shop these proposals, it's always as a draft. If a writer ever took a hard-line stance on his column, it would be unlikely to ever run. I never resent comments on things that need improving. If I had, I would have never been published. I wasn't shopping it as a "take it as is" piece. That's just stupid. It was a "This is what I have, can you use it" kind of shopping. Anyways...

[RonMexico]

May be true, but at least then the blame is transferred to D'Antoni. Can't not play players you don't have. I'm sure even D'Antoni could have stumbled into a player or two out of eight.

And, even if you trade them, trade them for something more than 3 million in cash. Trade them for assets that will help the team, not just save you money, since much of that "saved for players" money never went to players at all.

Trade a bad contract and a 1st for a player who can contribute for 20 minutes a night. It's not like the Suns bench in 04-05/05-06 was so stacked they couldn't use the help. It was better in 06-07, but even then a backup PG was needed.

Yeah, but my point is although there are players of major talent in Deng, Rondo, and Iggie, do you think D'Antoni would have given them the time to have growing pains like they did while getting reps with losing teams? I can't see that Rondo would have progressed into the player he is now if D'Antoni pulled him at every mistake. I don't know if his brother Dan could have mentored both Rondo and Barbosa, but Rajon may be of a stronger for ude anyway.

Obviously, the selling of picks did nothing for the bottom line because the Kurt Thomas trade was one of the most desperate moves of all time. Then they went and paid for an infinitely more expensive, slower model with a poorer shooting touch. Sure, he (with D'Antoni's help at GM) s ed out too much money for Diaw and Barbosa, but I'd rather have made Boris work for it and enjoyed the ups and downs with Sergio Rodriguez at backup.

I still could be wrong on any of this. I also don't know which would frustrate me more: talented draft picks flaming out because of a short rotation or not having them at all...

[JMarkJohns]

All of which is why I celebrated the day D'Antoni left town. Unfortunately Lopez and Dragic are not the same talents that could have been had by similar pick just years prior. Clark has some potential. Unfortunately, now the Suns are with a coach who will play young players, and have the ability to do so without fear of failure, since the Suns aren't going anywhere in the playoffs (if they even make the playoffs), but the abundance of picks are no more.

[RonMexico]

Is there a point that a disgruntled fan rips his foam finger off and stomps on it in protest? Would he finally get the message?

[Agloco]

They were right there though for just a moment until they let themselves get "Horryed"...they have august company though: Sacramento got worse "Horryed" and Detroit even worser "Horryed."

Horry is the prince of ing darkness.

+1

But I think the Suns demise was long in the making. Getting repatedly ass-raped by San Antonio had them thinking that change was needed. Unfortunately, change just for the sake of change isn't always good (an allusion to current events.....).

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

DSF is just mad cause the #22 college football team in the country is stylin' on him.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

I never figured it an article for fans like yourself.

Unless it's a rambling optimistic fluff article talking about how much fun Nash is having, chances are it isn't.

[da_suns_fan]

Yeah, but my point is although there are players of major talent in Deng, Rondo, and Iggie, do you think D'Antoni would have given them the time to have growing pains like they did while getting reps with losing teams? I can't see that Rondo would have progressed into the player he is now if D'Antoni pulled him at every mistake. I don't know if his brother Dan could have mentored both Rondo and Barbosa, but Rajon may be of a stronger for ude anyway.

Obviously, the selling of picks did nothing for the bottom line because the Kurt Thomas trade was one of the most desperate moves of all time. Then they went and paid for an infinitely more expensive, slower model with a poorer shooting touch. Sure, he (with D'Antoni's help at GM) s ed out too much money for Diaw and Barbosa, but I'd rather have made Boris work for it and enjoyed the ups and downs with Sergio Rodriguez at backup.

I still could be wrong on any of this. I also don't know which would frustrate me more: talented draft picks flaming out because of a short rotation or not having them at all...

I dont agree with your assessment. I dont know how you could say that D'Antoni wouldnt have played Rondo or Igoudala since he didnt play the likes of DJ Strawberry and Piatowski. The bottom line is DAntoni played the guys who belonged in the league.

And no one has proven him wrong. Theres not a single guy who didnt get minutes with D'Antoni and then went on to prove he could play in this league with another team. Four seasons, and not one scrub amounted to anythng.

[da_suns_fan]

All of which is why I celebrated the day D'Antoni left town. Unfortunately Lopez and Dragic are not the same talents that could have been had by similar pick just years prior. Clark has some potential. Unfortunately, now the Suns are with a coach who will play young players, and have the ability to do so without fear of failure, since the Suns aren't going anywhere in the playoffs (if they even make the playoffs), but the abundance of picks are no more.

Who should have D'Antoni given more minues to? He gave minutes to James freaking Jones for Christ's sake. You continue to be LAZY with your opinions.

[JMarkJohns]

Who should have D'Antoni given more minues to? He gave minutes to James freaking Jones for Christ's sake. You continue to be LAZY with your opinions.

This is old news, as is the grudge your harboring. If you cared to look, you'd note plenty of opportunity was there for Kurt Thomas and James Jones - as well as Jalen Rose - to be played more minutes. Not gonna rehash this. Everyone who's been here for a lengthy time knows D'Antoni used a terribly short bench, and it cost them at times.

[Culburn369]

+1

But I think the Suns demise was long in the making. Getting repatedly ass-raped by San Antonio had them thinking that change was needed.

But perhaps "change" wasn't needed. Just repeat/mirrored opportunities to bust thru against San Antonio. They were close, they had the Spurs genuinely attentive & concerned---but, they did not trust themselves to make the repeated attempts for the summit.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

I dont know how you could say that D'Antoni wouldnt have played Rondo or Igoudala since he didnt play the likes of DJ Strawberry and Piatowski.

To quote him exactly, Antoni said, "We're not here to develop players." He had just as much to do with selling draft picks as anyone, and it was cause he had no interest in using rookies and was too stubborn to live with their growing pains.

Remind me, how many draft picks have been sold since Antoni left?

[da_suns_fan]

This is old news, as is the grudge your harboring. If you cared to look, you'd note plenty of opportunity was there for Kurt Thomas and James Jones - as well as Jalen Rose - to be played more minutes. Not gonna rehash this. Everyone who's been here for a lengthy time knows D'Antoni used a terribly short bench, and it cost them at times.

Exactly my point. To say he didnt play his bench and point to KT and James Jones proves how far you'll stretch. After all, James Jones STARTED 24 games in 2006 and averaged over 18 minutes a game in 2007. Kurt Thomas started 13 games in 2007 and 50 (of the 53 he played) in 2006.

Jalen Rose was D-O-N-E when he came to Phoenix. So much so that he called it a career after his one year there. But apparently, YOU saw opprotunities to give him more minutes even though he could barely still run.

Yeah, great evidence that D'Antoni didnt "play his bench" or develop players.

Its a stupid talking point that has absolutely no merit. And again, who proved D'Antoni wrong? James Jones has CAREER highs in minutes and games started while he was in Phoenix. Evidently, its not just D'Antoni who didnt give him enough minutes, but Nate McMillian and Erik Spoelstra as well, yes?

D'Antoni had a short bench because Sarver filled out the roster with minimum salary guys who didnt even belong in the league. If this wasnt true, there would at least be ONE PLAYER who went on to prove he could play in the league after leaving the Suns.

btw you arrogant asshole, this has nothing to do with you. Ive started mutliple threads on how stupid this cliche is over at azsportforum and phxsuns.net. I dont really care about you personally.

[da_suns_fan]

To quote him exactly, Antoni said, "We're not here to develop players." He had just as much to do with selling draft picks as anyone, and it was cause he had no interest in using rookies and was too stubborn to live with their growing pains.

Remind me, how many draft picks have been sold since Antoni left?

Youre ing ignorant. How old were you when he said that? What you are basically doing is harping on ONE COMMENT and throwing out the rest of the four years he was coach. Are you aware that he had limited funds and desire to re-sign Tim Thomas when he said that? Are you aware that the Suns signed Marcus Banks (who was also very young) shortly after that because they thought he was more of a sure thing for a backup pg?

Blaming D'Antoni for not developing young players is the dumbest ing thing Ive ever heard.

You ever heard of Joe Johnson? Amare Stoudemire? Leandro Barbosa?

You must have not been around when Joe Johnson refused to shoot. You must not have been here when Amare Stoudemire had no jumpshot and Leandro Barbosa was a human turnover.

And of course, what about Boris Diaw? A third year player thrust into a starting role after only playing limited minutes for the worst team in the NBA. That sounds like a coach who doesnt want to experience growing pains. Same with James Jones.

Do you have a ing brain or do you and JMJ just share one?
Youre so ing clueless every time you type. I read this "too stubborn to live with their growing pains" and just laugh because you have NO IDEA what you are talking about.

[Culburn369]

Are you aware that the Suns signed Marcus Banks (who was also very young) shortly after that because they thought he was more of a sure thing for a backup pg?

Something had to be done. Banks had locked himself in his bedroom and wouldn't come out until the Suns tendered that offer. Least ways that what Banks dad claimed.