Suns News: 2019 Off-Season

[O_Gardino]

So, right now we are looking at

Rubio - Johnson - Jerome - Lecque - Carter - Okobo
Booker - Bridges - Cam - Johnson - Jerome
Oubre - Bridges - Cam
Saric - (Kaminsky - hasn't signed yet) - (desired 3rd string pf) - Cam
Ayton - Baynes

It sucks to spend assets on "NBA ready" college players when we don't even think they are going to beat out the guys who helped us win 19 games. Moving on.

Assuming we drop one of Okobo or Carter, we have 4 slots to fill. We need guys who can set screens and rebound.

[jonh]

Gambo said no to Sauce.

Im glad. Gambo should have been saying no to the Sauce for years.

[Split T]

They kinda did beat out the guys who helped us win 19 games. Warren, Jackson, Melton, Crawford are all gone. That’s who they replace.

I do see the rotation and wonder where they will play, but it’s kinda nice to not be counting on production from our rookies. Plus, If Ty or Cam prove to be worthy of rotation minutes, they’ll play. The only bench guard guaranteed minutes is Tyler Johnson, so we can incorporate the rookies pretty easily.

[Superbone]

Gambo said no to Sauce.

Im glad. Gambo should have been saying no to the Sauce for years.

Right?

[JeremyG]

How about Kenneth Faried at PF? We need the rebounding!

[Superbone]

[Ring_Wanted]

That's only depth if you compare it to a team that incurred in malpractice last season. It looks like a 'complete' roster but it still has huge holes given the specific players added, all of which bring a concerning amount of question marks.

Also, as proposed by that tweet, the bench is terribly hollow and the starting five unbalanced. I'd start Bridges over Oubre. That way the starters have more defense and one fewer guy that needs the ball in his hands, while the second unit gets a go-to guy offensively.

In any case, we are not fighting against the 18-19 Suns, but against 29 teams in a league that, with few exceptions has improved across the board with talent distribution or has not gotten worse enough to be within reach. Who are we beating on paper with that roster? CHA, NYK, MIN, WAS, MEM, OKC? I don't see 30 wins in there, although maybe I am underrating the impact of getting rid of Jackson.

[Superbone]

That's only depth if you compare it to a team that incurred in malpractice last season. It looks like a 'complete' roster but it still has huge holes given the specific players added, all of which bring a concerning amount of question marks.

Also, as proposed by that tweet, the bench is terribly hollow and the starting five unbalanced. I'd start Bridges over Oubre. That way the starters have more defense and one fewer guy that needs the ball in his hands, while the second unit gets a go-to guy offensively.

In any case, we are not fighting against the 18-19 Suns, but against 29 teams in a league that, with few exceptions has improved across the board with talent distribution or has not gotten worse enough to be within reach. Who are we beating on paper with that roster? CHA, NYK, MIN, WAS, MEM, OKC? I don't see 30 wins in there, although maybe I am underrating the impact of getting rid of Jackson.

The Suns aren’t paying Oubre 15 Mil per to come off the bench. And luckily, the games aren’t played on paper.

[carey]

That's only depth if you compare it to a team that incurred in malpractice last season. It looks like a 'complete' roster but it still has huge holes given the specific players added, all of which bring a concerning amount of question marks.

Also, as proposed by that tweet, the bench is terribly hollow and the starting five unbalanced. I'd start Bridges over Oubre. That way the starters have more defense and one fewer guy that needs the ball in his hands, while the second unit gets a go-to guy offensively.

In any case, we are not fighting against the 18-19 Suns, but against 29 teams in a league that, with few exceptions has improved across the board with talent distribution or has not gotten worse enough to be within reach. Who are we beating on paper with that roster? CHA, NYK, MIN, WAS, MEM, OKC? I don't see 30 wins in there, although maybe I am underrating the impact of getting rid of Jackson.

The Suns aren’t paying Oubre 15 Mil per to come off the bench. And luckily, the games aren’t played on paper.

No, but I said this on Real GM - I think Oubre gets subbed out first for Bridges then gets subbed back in to be the go-to for the second unit. Aside from Booker he's the only guy that can reliably get his own shot when the offense breaks down. Rubio is good with the ball in his hand but he's never been a guy that gets his own shot though his percentage at the rim has improved over the last two years.

I also think we do the "positionless" thing with Bridges, Oubre, and Cam all on the floor together. Jones said he thinks Cam can play the two through four. So he'll be out there in a variety of roles.

[Ring_Wanted]

The Suns aren’t paying Oubre 15 Mil per to come off the bench. And luckily, the games aren’t played on paper.

The Suns would make a mistake if that's their train of thought. To me his contract is irrelevant, what I want is the best distribution of whatever resources I have.

[Hermen]

That's only depth if you compare it to a team that incurred in malpractice last season. It looks like a 'complete' roster but it still has huge holes given the specific players added, all of which bring a concerning amount of question marks.

Also, as proposed by that tweet, the bench is terribly hollow and the starting five unbalanced. I'd start Bridges over Oubre. That way the starters have more defense and one fewer guy that needs the ball in his hands, while the second unit gets a go-to guy offensively.

In any case, we are not fighting against the 18-19 Suns, but against 29 teams in a league that, with few exceptions has improved across the board with talent distribution or has not gotten worse enough to be within reach. Who are we beating on paper with that roster? CHA, NYK, MIN, WAS, MEM, OKC? I don't see 30 wins in there, although maybe I am underrating the impact of getting rid of Jackson.

The Suns aren’t paying Oubre 15 Mil per to come off the bench. And luckily, the games aren’t played on paper.

I think the Suns invested more into Bridges than Oubre, despite his new contract.

[Flagrant Fowl]

I think this group will figure it out on offense in time. Defense and rebounding are looking like massive weaknesses, but those areas are more about will than skill. Unfortunately, Baynes is really the only guy on the roster that has committed to both of those areas thus far in his career.

We're really going to find out about Ayton this year. I'm sure he'll have a long career, but I'm expecting Monty to put it on him and I want to see how he responds.

[Split T]

That's only depth if you compare it to a team that incurred in malpractice last season. It looks like a 'complete' roster but it still has huge holes given the specific players added, all of which bring a concerning amount of question marks.

Also, as proposed by that tweet, the bench is terribly hollow and the starting five unbalanced. I'd start Bridges over Oubre. That way the starters have more defense and one fewer guy that needs the ball in his hands, while the second unit gets a go-to guy offensively.

In any case, we are not fighting against the 18-19 Suns, but against 29 teams in a league that, with few exceptions has improved across the board with talent distribution or has not gotten worse enough to be within reach. Who are we beating on paper with that roster? CHA, NYK, MIN, WAS, MEM, OKC? I don't see 30 wins in there, although maybe I am underrating the impact of getting rid of Jackson.

Cleveland? Dallas? Chicago? Atlanta? New Orleans? Detroit? Orlando? Sacramento? What makes these teams better than us on paper?

[Indy]

That's only depth if you compare it to a team that incurred in malpractice last season. It looks like a 'complete' roster but it still has huge holes given the specific players added, all of which bring a concerning amount of question marks.

Also, as proposed by that tweet, the bench is terribly hollow and the starting five unbalanced. I'd start Bridges over Oubre. That way the starters have more defense and one fewer guy that needs the ball in his hands, while the second unit gets a go-to guy offensively.

In any case, we are not fighting against the 18-19 Suns, but against 29 teams in a league that, with few exceptions has improved across the board with talent distribution or has not gotten worse enough to be within reach. Who are we beating on paper with that roster? CHA, NYK, MIN, WAS, MEM, OKC? I don't see 30 wins in there, although maybe I am underrating the impact of getting rid of Jackson.

Cleveland? Dallas? Chicago? Atlanta? New Orleans? Detroit? Orlando? Sacramento? What makes these teams better than us on paper?

With our current roster, fully healthy, and guys playing about where expected, we are much better than the 19 win team last year. Probably 10-12 extra wins this year. Based on last year, that puts us at... last in the West.

As of right now, I think the only team that got clearly worse and are in danger of a big fall is OKC.

I hope I am wrong and this team shows a lot more than expected, but if we are not in the bottom 2-3 in the west, I will be extremely surprised.

[ShelC]

I'm hoping, HOPING, we can be one of those under-the-radar, surprised teams early in the year that can get off to a good start. Won't mean playoffs, but if we can really click in training camp and catch some early Ws, it'll go a long way in terms of confidence and looking like we're a team on the rise. And we'll have some cushion for the inevitable come-down/losing streak.

[O_Gardino]

That's only depth if you compare it to a team that incurred in malpractice last season. It looks like a 'complete' roster but it still has huge holes given the specific players added, all of which bring a concerning amount of question marks.

Also, as proposed by that tweet, the bench is terribly hollow and the starting five unbalanced. I'd start Bridges over Oubre. That way the starters have more defense and one fewer guy that needs the ball in his hands, while the second unit gets a go-to guy offensively.

In any case, we are not fighting against the 18-19 Suns, but against 29 teams in a league that, with few exceptions has improved across the board with talent distribution or has not gotten worse enough to be within reach. Who are we beating on paper with that roster? CHA, NYK, MIN, WAS, MEM, OKC? I don't see 30 wins in there, although maybe I am underrating the impact of getting rid of Jackson.

Or the removal of Igor. Just having everyone know what is expected on both ends of the court will be a huge help.

[O_Gardino]

I think this group will figure it out on offense in time. Defense and rebounding are looking like massive weaknesses, but those areas are more about will than skill. Unfortunately, Baynes is really the only guy on the roster that has committed to both of those areas thus far in his career.

We're really going to find out about Ayton this year. I'm sure he'll have a long career, but I'm expecting Monty to put it on him and I want to see how he responds.

Agreed about Ayton. We blamed coaching and guard play last year, and those were the excuses in college, too. This year will make or break his rep around the league.

[O_Gardino]

That's only depth if you compare it to a team that incurred in malpractice last season. It looks like a 'complete' roster but it still has huge holes given the specific players added, all of which bring a concerning amount of question marks.

Also, as proposed by that tweet, the bench is terribly hollow and the starting five unbalanced. I'd start Bridges over Oubre. That way the starters have more defense and one fewer guy that needs the ball in his hands, while the second unit gets a go-to guy offensively.

In any case, we are not fighting against the 18-19 Suns, but against 29 teams in a league that, with few exceptions has improved across the board with talent distribution or has not gotten worse enough to be within reach. Who are we beating on paper with that roster? CHA, NYK, MIN, WAS, MEM, OKC? I don't see 30 wins in there, although maybe I am underrating the impact of getting rid of Jackson.

Cleveland? Dallas? Chicago? Atlanta? New Orleans? Detroit? Orlando? Sacramento? What makes these teams better than us on paper?

Can't tell if you're joking or not.

[Split T]

It’s hard to not base our outlook on last season and compare everything off that, but this is a completely different season. Just because Sacramento won 38-40 games last year doesn’t mean they will again. They have a brand new coach, debatable whether that was a step up or a step down. New Orleans had a great off season in replacing Anthony Davis, but they’ve got to fit a lot of pieces together and completely figure out a new identity. Can Jrue be the man? Is Zion ready? Will they have enough shooting?

You can go through just about every team not in the top 6 and bring up legitimate questions, including the suns. I don’t see more concerns for us than I do these other teams. Yes we only won 19 games last year, but that has zero bearing on how many wins we get this year.

If our team plays hard, which I think they will. Plays smart, which I think they will, and has good chemistry, I think we’ll be pleasantly surprised. Our offense should be pretty decent. The defense is a concern, we’d need a huge jump from Ayton to be a good defensive team. If we can put together an above average offense, with a slightly below average defense, no reason we can’t approach .500 and have a year similar to last year’s Kings

[Split T]

That's only depth if you compare it to a team that incurred in malpractice last season. It looks like a 'complete' roster but it still has huge holes given the specific players added, all of which bring a concerning amount of question marks.

Also, as proposed by that tweet, the bench is terribly hollow and the starting five unbalanced. I'd start Bridges over Oubre. That way the starters have more defense and one fewer guy that needs the ball in his hands, while the second unit gets a go-to guy offensively.

In any case, we are not fighting against the 18-19 Suns, but against 29 teams in a league that, with few exceptions has improved across the board with talent distribution or has not gotten worse enough to be within reach. Who are we beating on paper with that roster? CHA, NYK, MIN, WAS, MEM, OKC? I don't see 30 wins in there, although maybe I am underrating the impact of getting rid of Jackson.

Cleveland? Dallas? Chicago? Atlanta? New Orleans? Detroit? Orlando? Sacramento? What makes these teams better than us on paper?

Can't tell if you're joking or not.

Not joking at all, feel free to try and show me how they are better