Phx-Suns.Net

Worth listening to McD's take on firing Hornacek:

http://arizonasports.com/player/?a=318776

I don't know how any coach can get anything accomplished when he shows up in midseason. Don't most teams essentially stop practicing all year? Which I don't get at all, especially for a young team.

Not sure when he took over but I remember immediate improvement defensively when Skiles took over the club.

There are also instances of full-on player revolts where the guys just tank and get a coach fired, then start winning games when the new one takes over, like the Jason Kidd Nets pulled when Scott was canned and Frank took over. But if you're a totally new coach with a new system/staff, it's pretty impossible to get immediate results. It's more about evaluation and who fits/doesn't fit.

"A lot of this is obviously on me," McDonough told "Doug & Wolf." "I take responsibility for the state of the team right now and the roster. I need to do a better job. I know that. My staff and I know that. We know we're on the clock and we know we need to step it up and improve our talent level."

I'm glad Ryan Mc realizes that.

Drop the high risk high reward approach to free agency already. It's messed up things two summers in a row. Focus on drafting well and look for predatory trades. Today it's all about what you can do for the player. You need to build sustained success first, then the stars want to come; not the other way around.

Ring_Wanted wrote:Drop the high risk high reward approach to free agency already. It's messed up things two summers in a row. Focus on drafting well and look for predatory trades. Today it's all about what you can do for the player. You need to build sustained success first, then the stars want to come; not the other way around.

And it almost never works. There are very few championship teams led by an acquired FA (or even acquired via trade). It really has only been a couple guys in the history of the NBA. Focus on drafting the right key couple of players, then build around them.

Indy wrote:

Ring_Wanted wrote:Drop the high risk high reward approach to free agency already. It's messed up things two summers in a row. Focus on drafting well and look for predatory trades. Today it's all about what you can do for the player. You need to build sustained success first, then the stars want to come; not the other way around.

And it almost never works. There are very few championship teams led by an acquired FA (or even acquired via trade). It really has only been a couple guys in the history of the NBA. Focus on drafting the right key couple of players, then build around them.

The Suns were nearly one of them.

Superbone wrote:

Indy wrote:

Ring_Wanted wrote:Drop the high risk high reward approach to free agency already. It's messed up things two summers in a row. Focus on drafting well and look for predatory trades. Today it's all about what you can do for the player. You need to build sustained success first, then the stars want to come; not the other way around.

And it almost never works. There are very few championship teams led by an acquired FA (or even acquired via trade). It really has only been a couple guys in the history of the NBA. Focus on drafting the right key couple of players, then build around them.

The Suns were nearly one of them.

We didn't really have much of a chance against Jordan.

Indy wrote:

Superbone wrote:

Indy wrote:

Ring_Wanted wrote:Drop the high risk high reward approach to free agency already. It's messed up things two summers in a row. Focus on drafting well and look for predatory trades. Today it's all about what you can do for the player. You need to build sustained success first, then the stars want to come; not the other way around.

And it almost never works. There are very few championship teams led by an acquired FA (or even acquired via trade). It really has only been a couple guys in the history of the NBA. Focus on drafting the right key couple of players, then build around them.

The Suns were nearly one of them.

We didn't really have much of a chance against Jordan.

Actually, we did.

Superbone wrote:

Indy wrote:

Superbone wrote:

Indy wrote:

Ring_Wanted wrote:Drop the high risk high reward approach to free agency already. It's messed up things two summers in a row. Focus on drafting well and look for predatory trades. Today it's all about what you can do for the player. You need to build sustained success first, then the stars want to come; not the other way around.

And it almost never works. There are very few championship teams led by an acquired FA (or even acquired via trade). It really has only been a couple guys in the history of the NBA. Focus on drafting the right key couple of players, then build around them.

The Suns were nearly one of them.

We didn't really have much of a chance against Jordan.

Actually, we did.

We couldn't even get it to a game 7. And it took us 3 over times to get to win 1 out of the first 4 games. At that point, Chicago didn't care too much about Game 5.

Indy wrote:

Indy wrote:

Superbone wrote:

Indy wrote:

Ring_Wanted wrote:Drop the high risk high reward approach to free agency already. It's messed up things two summers in a row. Focus on drafting well and look for predatory trades. Today it's all about what you can do for the player. You need to build sustained success first, then the stars want to come; not the other way around.

And it almost never works. There are very few championship teams led by an acquired FA (or even acquired via trade). It really has only been a couple guys in the history of the NBA. Focus on drafting the right key couple of players, then build around them.

We didn't really have much of a chance against Jordan.

Actually, we did.

We couldn't even get it to a game 7. And it took us 3 over times to get to win 1 out of the first 4 games. At that point, Chicago didn't care too much about Game 5.

We'll just have to agree to disagree. Both of the first two games were winnable. Just winning one of those changes the complexion of the series.

Superbone wrote:Both of the first two games were winnable.

So was the sixth.

It's weird, as a younger fan I pretty much just have a memory of games 3, 5, and of course 6 in that series.

Little did I know (until much later that is) that we never won a home game, and that KJ actually played better defense on Jordan (I think?) while unfortunately laying a couple eggs in games 1 and 2 (more sure of this one).

Our four losses were by a total of 18 points — same as our two wins.

Cap wrote:

Superbone wrote:Both of the first two games were winnable.

So was the sixth.

Yep, that alone would have taken us to a winner takes all game 7.

When you lose 3 out of 4 close games in a series, you weren't in it. Again, we will likely have to disagree on this, but it wasn't as close as most Suns fans want to remember.

Please, the Suns during the Barkley era didn't try to improve on defense and work on their halfcourt offense which sometimes struggled. That team practiced in jeans, boots, and golf shirts. They were lazy.

They should've beat Houston twice.

I see (or rather feel) a lot of similarities between the Barkley and Nash eras.

What's still amazing to me is that the Barkley Era got further, and that our last finals appearance is now 20 + years removed.

Charlie Smithy! wrote:I see (or rather feel) a lot of similarities between the Barkley and Nash eras.

What's still amazing to me is that the Barkley Era got further, and that our last finals appearance is now 20 + years removed.

The Barkley Era wouldn't have been the Barkley Era had it not been for KJ and Chambers apex years. So you had a reboot of an already successful program. I think the Barkley teams also were deeper and the coaches didn't hesitate to use the bench.

Barkley, KJ, Majerle, Chambers, Dumas, Miller, West, Ainge, Frank Johnson, Ceballos - that team was 10 deep with quality players.

The Bobster wrote:Barkley, KJ, Majerle, Chambers, Dumas, Miller, West, Ainge, Frank Johnson, Ceballos - that team was 10 deep with quality players.

And not only 10 deep, but 10 deep the right way. There wasn't a glut at any position, and for the swing positions you had very different types of guys to give different looks on offense.