Phx-Suns.Net

Or maybe McD just isn't very good and giving him another go round will only start another 3-4 year cycle of signing vets, drafting 18 yr olds, holding onto disgruntled players too long, firing coaches, etc.

And why are we forced to hire another first time GM if McD is fired?

This is the wrong time to fire McD. This is the right time to find out whether he knows what he's doing. If Bender and Chriss work out, McD has earned the chance to stick around. If they turn out to be busts, that's when he gets canned.

ShelC wrote:Or maybe McD just isn't very good and giving him another go round will only start another 3-4 year cycle of signing vets, drafting 18 yr olds, holding onto disgruntled players too long, firing coaches, etc.

And why are we forced to hire another first time GM if McD is fired?

Yeah, we can always hire Billy King.

Seriously, Phoenix is not a top notch organization anymore and it takes its toll when looking for coaches, GMs etc, as we know.

Maybe I am a masochist but I still believe McD can become a top notch GM, at least while Bender and Chriss are on their honeymoon period. If they suck as prospects at the NBA level, it will probably be time to start looking elsewhere.

EDC wrote:

Marty [Mori Chu] wrote:One problem is that McD is starting to enter the "results or else" portion of his tenure as our GM. He doesn't get infinite time to miss the playoffs every year, and he doesn't want to get fired. So I do think he will start to panic if we are looking bad and might start to make short-term decisions rather than long-term ones. This concerns me. I like what he said in his recent interviews about not loading up with veterans to try to win now, so hopefully that is genuine.

I'm really hoping Sarver has learned that the revolving door in the front office is bad for business. McD has made his mistakes but hopefully he is learning from them. The last thing I want is to go back to another first time GM and watch him go through the learning experience all over again. I thought Kerr was starting to figure things out before he was chased off. Hopefully Sarver doesn't do the same to McD.

Agreed. As much as I don't trust McD, I think it would be dumb to hire one of the youngest GMs in the nba then fire him before he can learn the job.

And I trust Sarver hiring a replacement even less.

Yeah. IN typical Suns fashion he would be fired then hired by say CHI and thrive there.

ShelC wrote:Or maybe McD just isn't very good and giving him another go round will only start another 3-4 year cycle of signing vets, drafting 18 yr olds, holding onto disgruntled players too long, firing coaches, etc.

And why are we forced to hire another first time GM if McD is fired?

Mostly because that is what Sarver has always done. First time head coaches. First time GMs.

I hope we spend a lot of money on player development. And I don't mean just asking current FO guys to teach the come down to the court once in a while. I mean find the best guys you can to develop them.

Indy wrote:I hope we spend a lot of money on player development. And I don't mean just asking current FO guys to teach the come down to the court once in a while. I mean find the best guys you can to develop them.

That much is obvious. The more challenging questions are, who are those best guys, and how do we get them?

Cap wrote:

Indy wrote:I hope we spend a lot of money on player development. And I don't mean just asking current FO guys to teach the come down to the court once in a while. I mean find the best guys you can to develop them.

That much is obvious. The more challenging questions are, who are those best guys, and how do we get them?

If I knew that I wouldn't be doing what I do. I would be running player development for an NBA team. And you say it is obvious, but I am not sure the team realizes it. Or they think they have coaches, and that is their job.

Yeah, let's give our young GM some time to mature. All these quick hooks aren't helping anyone. The gong show has gone on long enough.

Superbone wrote:Yeah, let's give our young GM some time to mature. All these quick hooks aren't helping anyone.

Quick hook?! He's had three seasons.

Anyway, he's not getting fired, and it would be asinine to fire him now after letting him do what he did with the draft.

And to be clear, I don't think Shel was saying fire him now; I think he was challenging the questionable rationale of keeping Ryan just for the sake of stability.

INFORMER wrote:

Superbone wrote:Yeah, let's give our young GM some time to mature. All these quick hooks aren't helping anyone.

Quick hook?! He's had three seasons.

Anyway, he's not getting fired, and it would be asinine to fire him now after letting him do what he did with the draft.

And to be clear, I don't think Shel was saying fire him now; I think he was challenging the questionable rationale of keeping Ryan just for the sake of stability.

Yes, to me that would be a quick hook. It's not like he's been terrible (in most people's opinion). I'd say 6 years would be a fair trial. Basically through another contract. It's not like he's Lance Blanks. If he had been Blanks bad, then sure, remove him as soon as possible.

Incidentally, how long do GMs typically last, if we don't count the outliers? What is considered a fair amount of time to give a GM on the job, if he's a newbie vs. if he's had prior experience?

pickle wrote:Incidentally, how long do GMs typically last, if we don't count the outliers? What is considered a fair amount of time to give a GM on the job, if he's a newbie vs. if he's had prior experience?

It's roughly about 7 years for an NBA GM since the 2000's. I think the joke goes, "Until they fire their second coach" though.

Every situation is different but I think 4-5 years is pretty reasonable to let a guy come in and do his job. First year is usually evaluation, 2nd and 3rd years are making moves and putting his stamp on the team, 3rd and 4th years are where you should see some (somewhat) significant progress.

I can't say we've seen much progress. McD knows how to do the job, which unfortunately is what fools some owners/execs into thinking a guy will make a good GM. But knowing the NBA routine and protocols doesn't mean a guy knows how to build a team, evaluate talent, handle certain situations. I think McD can evaluate talent a bit, but I don't think he knows how to build a team (his philosophy seems flawed), he's put himself and the org in precarious situations, and doesn't seem to position himself well with players/agents. Maybe he's learning on the job, but does he get another 4 years? And how can we evaluate whether or not he's actually learning?

I'm not calling for McD's head, but I think he needs to be put on notice. We just seem to be stuck in neutral and he doesn't seem willing to go in one specific direction, be it rebuilding completely or signing and trading for vets to win now. It's what some of us have been saying for the last year or so...we're always riding the fence with going young or going with vets.

Should we have kept Blanks and kept on giving him chances and let him learn on the job? Or did we cut our losses and move on? Kerr, Blanks, McD...maybe Sarver should try spending some money on a vet executive and let him do his job for a change? Or maybe he likes young, cheap execs he can dictate orders to.

The sad thing is, you just know that the Colangeli will have Philly relevant before the Suns are good. And JC/BC have been out of the game for years. Saver had a head start and hasn't been able to field a good team (that he created or oversaw the creation of) in the entire time he's owned the franchise.

ShelC wrote:Every situation is different but I think 4-5 years is pretty reasonable to let a guy come in and do his job. First year is usually evaluation, 2nd and 3rd years are making moves and putting his stamp on the team, 3rd and 4th years are where you should see some (somewhat) significant progress.

I can't say we've seen much progress. McD knows how to do the job, which unfortunately is what fools some owners/execs into thinking a guy will make a good GM. But knowing the NBA routine and protocols doesn't mean a guy knows how to build a team, evaluate talent, handle certain situations. I think McD can evaluate talent a bit, but I don't think he knows how to build a team (his philosophy seems flawed), he's put himself and the org in precarious situations, and doesn't seem to position himself well with players/agents. Maybe he's learning on the job, but does he get another 4 years? And how can we evaluate whether or not he's actually learning?

I'm not calling for McD's head, but I think he needs to be put on notice. We just seem to be stuck in neutral and he doesn't seem willing to go in one specific direction, be it rebuilding completely or signing and trading for vets to win now. It's what some of us have been saying for the last year or so...we're always riding the fence with going young or going with vets.

Should we have kept Blanks and kept on giving him chances and let him learn on the job? Or did we cut our losses and move on? Kerr, Blanks, McD...maybe Sarver should try spending some money on a vet executive and let him do his job for a change? Or maybe he likes young, cheap execs he can dictate orders to.

Ok, let's say we can put McD on notice. What improvements do you want to see?


I agree with those concerns and weaknesses, but those are the kinds of things that can be learned if you have the mind for it. Even after 3 years, McD is still one of the youngest in the nba. And with his guys being injured last season, I don't think he got a chance to really see the results of his actions.

What we don't know is how big a hand Sarver takes. I believe that Sarver does meddle, and that he is a destructive person. Are we ever going to be positioned well with players and agents? Not while Sarver is in the mix. It's tough to evaluate the work of someone when you suspect assholery from his boss.

The main things I would look for in McD: Does he realize his mistake with the 3 point guard lineup? Does he realize that you can't stock a roster with guys who are athletes but not bball players? Those are the two things I I think he can and must improve on.

It would be nice to know when a change of direction and philosophy takes place, who was at the heart of it. We've been calling for a complete rebuild since Nash left, yet have been riding the fences on it swaying back and forth the whole time, hoping for a clear direction the whole time. I have a feeling that it's not all on McDonough and that Sarver had a change of heart a couple times, hoping to bring back the big free agent to get it going.

I'm hoping that we just sit this free agency period out, but maybe talk to some guys to prime them for when we take the plunge, hopefully next year after another great draft.

I think the front office has been pretty consistent on the theme of of rebuilding through youth. The one exception being the small chase for LA. We ended up taking on Chandler for that but we had to spend money on something and its a bad idea to not have a few vets around.

Even the Knight trade which seemed very reactionary was for a young guy. I think they have consistently been committed to the rebuild but leaving their options open if they can get what they think is a star player. They just don't come out and say that.

EDC wrote:I think the front office has been pretty consistent on the theme of of rebuilding through youth. The one exception being the small chase for LA. We ended up taking on Chandler for that but we had to spend money on something and its a bad idea to not have a few vets around.

Even the Knight trade which seemed very reactionary was for a young guy. I think they have consistently been committed to the rebuild but leaving their options open if they can get what they think is a star player. They just don't come out and say that.

Right on. EDC gets it.