Phx-Suns.Net

Len is questionable (which means OUT) against the Nets after re-spraining his ankle. Because of course.

Btw, I really liked Jenkins in the draft and thought the Hawks got a good player. Hard to believe that was 4 drafts ago. Even harder to believe Drummond went 9th.

Indy wrote:

carey wrote:What do you think holding players accountable means?

I hope it means things like:

A) During film sessions you point out the blown plays by defenders
B) Develop a way to have those missed plays reinforced (could be drills, could be extended film study, could be better review of scouting reports, etc), especially for the repeat offenders
C) Have an accountability system in place where there are detriments to repeated poor performance (which could include less in-game playing time)
D) Eventually get to the point where most of the players on the court can see the missed rotations/missed scouting report/etc and immediately hold each other accountable in front of everyone and his/her brother at the arena and on TV, so that it doesn't keep happening.

What Indy said!

Episode 2 of Rookie/Vet:

[youtube][/youtube]

Not sure if this was posted yet but this guy just goes full retard when it comes to trades. This something that a good GM could say like 5 years after the intital trade, not less than a year. Total buffoonery.

"I think in retrospect trading Isaiah Thomas when we did was a mistake,” he said of last season's trade deadline deal with the Boston Celtics. “I think sometimes in the recruitment process things sound better in July (luring Thomas in free agency) than they do in November."

"In retrospect, we should have carried him into the summer. If there's one (decision) that stands out, if I could get a mulligan, that'd be it.”


http://www.cbssports.com/nba/eye-on-bas ... -a-mistake

I don't see a problem with what he said other than he is still talking about the value. As in, dang I could have probably gotten more or a better pick, which at this point is silly.

Dragic caused him to panic and he bungled the whole thing. Just as he bungled the whole Morris situation. He has acquired assets and has all of his eggs in that basket. We'll see what he turns them into. I have very little faith in him right now. I hope he just keeps every single pick because he's only shown competence in drafting. I'm fearful of any trade he'd try to pull off for those picks.

I just hope one day that it changes from acquiring assets to assembling a team.

Superbone wrote:I just hope one day that it changes from acquiring assets to assembling a team.

Word.

djy2j wrote:Dragic caused him to panic and he bungled the whole thing. Just as he bungled the whole Morris situation. He has acquired assets and has all of his eggs in that basket. We'll see what he turns them into. I have very little faith in him right now. I hope he just keeps every single pick because he's only shown competence in drafting. I'm fearful of any trade he'd try to pull off for those picks.

I don't think anyone says that what he got for Dragic was bad. In fact, I think he did a wonderful job in that. And same with Keef.

Getting us to the point where we had to trade Dragic and Keef, well that is another story.

djy2j wrote:Dragic caused him to panic and he bungled the whole thing. Just as he bungled the whole Morris situation. He has acquired assets and has all of his eggs in that basket. We'll see what he turns them into. I have very little faith in him right now. I hope he just keeps every single pick because he's only shown competence in drafting. I'm fearful of any trade he'd try to pull off for those picks.

I think a lot of this stems from the (misplaced) desire to compete ASAP in order to lure free agents. BTW - the Knight trade was roundly criticized, but I remember being alone in the wilderness in my disapproval of the IT trade. I have a TON of faith in McD, but again, I may be alone in the wilderness. I would be devastated if we let McD go.

Superbone wrote:I just hope one day that it changes from acquiring assets to assembling a team.

I'm not as worried about this. IMO, acquiring assets is just as hard as putting together a team, and you have to do the former before you do the latter; otherwise, you end up smack dab in the middle of the pack. We're going about this the right way, even if not every move was a clear winner. The overall direction is right. I'm confident that the pieces will start coming together, though it may require losing value in a trade or two to get the right players. The key is keeping the core pieces (Len, Booker, Warren, Mr. 2016) and not jumping the gun on splashy moves (like the Nets did with Williams, or as some mediocre team might do with Hayward or Cousins). The time has to be right, as it was for the Suns in 2004, when they already had Amare, the Matrix and JJ primed to take off. We're not there - Len's almost there, and I have a feeling TJ's further along than most think, but Booker's probably two years off. Whoever we draft this year will also need time. I think next summer, or the summer after, we'll be primed to take a step toward contender status. P-a-t-i-e-n-c-e.

OE32 wrote:

djy2j wrote:Dragic caused him to panic and he bungled the whole thing. Just as he bungled the whole Morris situation. He has acquired assets and has all of his eggs in that basket. We'll see what he turns them into. I have very little faith in him right now. I hope he just keeps every single pick because he's only shown competence in drafting. I'm fearful of any trade he'd try to pull off for those picks.

I think a lot of this stems from the (misplaced) desire to compete ASAP in order to lure free agents. BTW - the Knight trade was roundly criticized, but I remember being alone in the wilderness in my disapproval of the IT trade. I have a TON of faith in McD, but again, I may be alone in the wilderness. I would be devastated if we let McD go.

Superbone wrote:I just hope one day that it changes from acquiring assets to assembling a team.

I'm not as worried about this. IMO, acquiring assets is just as hard as putting together a team, and you have to do the former before you do the latter; otherwise, you end up smack dab in the middle of the pack. We're going about this the right way, even if not every move was a clear winner. The overall direction is right. I'm confident that the pieces will start coming together, though it may require losing value in a trade or two to get the right players. The key is keeping the core pieces (Len, Booker, Warren, Mr. 2016) and not jumping the gun on splashy moves (like the Nets did with Williams, or as some mediocre team might do with Hayward or Cousins). The time has to be right, as it was for the Suns in 2004, when they already had Amare, the Matrix and JJ primed to take off. We're not there - Len's almost there, and I have a feeling TJ's further along than most think, but Booker's probably two years off. Whoever we draft this year will also need time. I think next summer, or the summer after, we'll be primed to take a step toward contender status. P-a-t-i-e-n-c-e.

Are you still saying that he was just pretending to go after Aldridge this summer?

Yeah, I don't know how you can preach patience when the front office isn't.

Indy wrote:Are you still saying that he was just pretending to go after Aldridge this summer?

I don't think they wouldn't have signed him - I just think they saw failing to get him as more likely in any case, and that it would give them a pretext to move Marcus. I think it was also a pretext to convince Chandler to sign. I can't imagine Chandler would have signed had we not traded for and extended Brandon. We gave FA's the impression that we would compete, and we got one to believe it. That way, we would acquire assets both by the draft and free agency. I think that's been the plan.

I suspect there's been a lot of misdirection from the front office. Parsing it is tough. The reason I think the Aldridge attempt was mere pretext is because, at the time, moving Marcus was my #1 offseason goal, and the whole thing looked awful fishy to me (making the trade to show LA that we were "serious"? I didn't buy it then, and I don't buy it now). I was happier the day we traded Marcus than I would have been had we actually signed LA.

Now, the result of all of this is that we have Chandler and Knight on the roster, and they don't look like great fits. But I continue to believe that they are valuable assets. Losing this bad obviously wasn't part of the plan. But we're in tremendous position. The only issue now is converting the value on our roster into pieces that fit. The hardest part will be getting that PG, because I don't think it's Bled when all's said and done, and I'm not under the impression that this year's PG crop is going to dazzle either.

The most important thing at this point is winning games with this roster. We don't have enough defense or competent passing. Warren and Alex need to be focal points, which is hard if Bled and Knight are pounding the rock and turning it over. To move our non-core pieces, we have to make them look good, which means winning. Then, a year from now, or two at most, we can add the right vets to the puzzle.

Part of my optimism stems from the fact that my favorite NBA event is the draft, and McD has ensured me that I'll have something to watch for every year going forward. I think it's exciting. I'm happy with this FO.

What makes you think Tyson Chandler wanted to play with Brandon Knight?

Indy wrote:What makes you think Tyson Chandler wanted to play with Brandon Knight?

I just don't think we could have convinced him that we were trying to compete after trading away Dragic for picks unless we had already acquired a replacement (and an almost all-star replacement at that).

OE32 wrote:

Indy wrote:What makes you think Tyson Chandler wanted to play with Brandon Knight?

I just don't think we could have convinced him that we were trying to compete after trading away Dragic for picks unless we had already acquired a replacement (and an almost all-star replacement at that).

Tyson wasn't going to buy that awful argument from the Suns. There were 7 guards named to the team (including Wade's replacement), and he wasn't among them. So maybe someone would buy that he was the 10th best guard in the Least conference, but that wouldn't attract anyone. The reason Tyson signed was because we over paid, and paid longer than others. And we had a good sales pitch about Aldridge. We clearly thought we had a good chance with him, otherwise we wouldn't have over paid so much for Tyson (and done it so early).

Indy wrote:

OE32 wrote:

Indy wrote:What makes you think Tyson Chandler wanted to play with Brandon Knight?

I just don't think we could have convinced him that we were trying to compete after trading away Dragic for picks unless we had already acquired a replacement (and an almost all-star replacement at that).

Tyson wasn't going to buy that awful argument from the Suns. There were 7 guards named to the team (including Wade's replacement), and he wasn't among them. So maybe someone would buy that he was the 10th best guard in the Least conference, but that wouldn't attract anyone. The reason Tyson signed was because we over paid, and paid longer than others. And we had a good sales pitch about Aldridge. We clearly thought we had a good chance with him, otherwise we wouldn't have over paid so much for Tyson (and done it so early).

The AASE thing was tongue-in-cheek. But I don't think he would have signed here if he thought we were going to be cellar-dwellers. We paid early because someone else would have paid him otherwise - maybe somewhat less, but my guess is the Mavs would have given him a pretty similar deal. I also don't think we could have walked into that room with Eric, Tyson and Earl Watson and made a reasonable argument to Aldridge - and I think Tyson would have understood that, too. So yes, I think Brandon was a but-for for this whole scenario to play out. I'm not defending it - going the tank route would have put us in a position to grab those Kings picks and Stauskas, and we'd be in the Sixers' position of trying to get two top 5 picks this year instead of just one. I'm just stating what I think their reasoning was.

djy2j wrote:Dragic caused him to panic and he bungled the whole thing. Just as he bungled the whole Morris situation. He has acquired assets and has all of his eggs in that basket. We'll see what he turns them into. I have very little faith in him right now. I hope he just keeps every single pick because he's only shown competence in drafting. I'm fearful of any trade he'd try to pull off for those picks.

I think he's good, but I have been revisiting this lately. Booker is the only pick he's made where to this point we can say with some confidence that he took the best player available. I know that's a hard criteria to judge him on, especially this early, but every draft choice he made in 2013 and 2014, he left better players on the table.

Again - still too early to tell with guys like Len and Warren.

Shabazz wrote:

djy2j wrote:Dragic caused him to panic and he bungled the whole thing. Just as he bungled the whole Morris situation. He has acquired assets and has all of his eggs in that basket. We'll see what he turns them into. I have very little faith in him right now. I hope he just keeps every single pick because he's only shown competence in drafting. I'm fearful of any trade he'd try to pull off for those picks.

I think he's good, but I have been revisiting this lately. Booker is the only pick he's made where to this point we can say with some confidence that he took the best player available. I know that's a hard criteria to judge him on, especially this early, but every draft choice he made in 2013 and 2014, he left better players on the table.

Again - still too early to tell with guys like Len and Warren.

Is there a GM that has picked in similar spots that you can say usually takes the best player?