Phx-Suns.Net

Shooting is a major concern. We have guys who CAN shoot, but aren't shooters. Bledsoe CAN shoot, but isn't a knockdown shooter. Warren's gotten better but he's a scorer. Chriss can pop out, but he's not really a stretch 4. The only hope IMO is Bender, but he was very disappointing last year. So yea, taking Jackson doesn't really help that problem and that's why, if we take him, I'd be open to moving Warren at some point because we wouldn't need 2 SFs who can't shoot it. I love the defensive potential and athleticism Jackson could bring, but I fear his offense regressing and us ending up with MKG, Corey Brewer, Thabo Sefolosha.

Isaac seems to fill more holes for us than Jackson. Every write up of Jackson I read seems to say, "he is really great, except for these 9 worrisome things." All the ones for Isaac are the exact opposite; "He is a good player, and here are all of the things he can do better than most"

I, too, worry about shooting. I actually don't believe in the Milwaukee Bucks model of just drafting a bunch of long athletic jumpers and hoping that they can run and jump their way to a title. You need 3-point shooting and defense. That's pretty much it. The Rockets have a much more sound model if you ask me.

While Jackson is a nice prospect, part of me says we should just draft the guy who's the best knock-down shooter with 3-point range and who cares what his position is.

Indy wrote:Isaac seems to fill more holes for us than Jackson. Every write up of Jackson I read seems to say, "he is really great, except for these 9 worrisome things." All the ones for Isaac are the exact opposite; "He is a good player, and here are all of the things he can do better than most"

I believe what you are seeing is more of an issue of how writers are framing these players, rather than core issues about the players themselves. You could easily flip the framing when it comes to either of them.

n4th4n wrote:

Indy wrote:Isaac seems to fill more holes for us than Jackson. Every write up of Jackson I read seems to say, "he is really great, except for these 9 worrisome things." All the ones for Isaac are the exact opposite; "He is a good player, and here are all of the things he can do better than most"

I believe what you are seeing is more of an issue of how writers are framing these players, rather than core issues about the players themselves. You could easily flip the framing when it comes to either of them.

That being said, defense and shooting are our two most important needs. I would rank secondary playmaking next, but a solid tier below both of these issues. We should be looking at the player who projects to fill these needs the best within the next 4 years rather than the player who fills these needs the best coming out of college right this very minute.

I really don't know who I want out of the expected players available. I guess I'll be happy with any of Jackson/Isaac/Tatum. I'm just going to have to trust MickeyD to get us the BPA. He's done pretty well for us in the past although his highest picks are still TBD. We might say we already know what we have in Len but Bender is still a work in progress.

The Sixers writer doesn't think Jackson falls past Philly. I tend to agree with him.

Btw, where is INFORMER? I look forward to his takes on the draft and his general disdain of every move that McD does. I also like hearing his strategy he thinks the Suns should follow.

In2ition wrote:The Sixers writer doesn't think Jackson falls past Philly. I tend to agree with him.

Btw, where is INFORMER? I look forward to his takes on the draft and his general disdain of every move that McD does. I also like hearing his strategy he thinks the Suns should follow.

Just wait until after the draft for his giant red F. Just kidding (mostly). I also like to hear his draft strategy and knowledge prior to the draft. I'd be really curious to hear how he thinks we should play it.

I feel like, based on how he drafts, Ryan is the guy at the poker table holding the 3, 4, 5, and 7 of diamonds, and is still hoping for an ace because it is the highest card in the deck. Just imagine how good it would be to get an ace!

So you're saying he shouldn't draft best card available?

Indy wrote:I feel like, based on how he drafts, Ryan is the guy at the poker table holding the 3, 4, 5, and 7 of diamonds, and is still hoping for an ace because it is the highest card in the deck. Just imagine how good it would be to get an ace!

I don't get it. It would be better to get a 6 of diamonds but an ace of diamonds is the 2nd best. So, he wants the 2nd best player? He doesn't know who the best player is? I'm not following you.

Marty [Mori Chu] wrote:So you're saying he shouldn't draft best card available?

No, that's who the Arizona NFL football team should draft.

Superbone wrote:

Indy wrote:I feel like, based on how he drafts, Ryan is the guy at the poker table holding the 3, 4, 5, and 7 of diamonds, and is still hoping for an ace because it is the highest card in the deck. Just imagine how good it would be to get an ace!

I don't get it. It would be better to get a 6 of diamonds but an ace of diamonds is the 2nd best. So, he wants the 2nd best player? He doesn't know who the best player is? I'm not following you.

If you wish for an Ace and get your wish, it's 75% likely to be crap. Maybe he means McD wants somebody with a 25% chance of panning out.

Cap wrote:

Superbone wrote:

Indy wrote:I feel like, based on how he drafts, Ryan is the guy at the poker table holding the 3, 4, 5, and 7 of diamonds, and is still hoping for an ace because it is the highest card in the deck. Just imagine how good it would be to get an ace!

I don't get it. It would be better to get a 6 of diamonds but an ace of diamonds is the 2nd best. So, he wants the 2nd best player? He doesn't know who the best player is? I'm not following you.

If you wish for an Ace and get your wish, it's 75% likely to be crap. Maybe he means McD wants somebody with a 25% chance of panning out.

Oh, so Indy is saying he's wishing for any Ace, not just the Ace of diamonds. That hand does have quite a lot of outs though. Any diamond, any 6, so 13-4 + 4 = 13 outs.

I'm saying he plays for the individual card, not the hand.

Indy wrote:I'm saying he plays for the individual card, not the hand.

So BPA? Versus best for the team? I think he's already stated that is what he's doing (BPA).

What if he's playing Uno?

ShelC wrote:What if he's playing Uno?

Then he keeps hoping he draws 12s. He just doesn't understand what a team looks like. He collects players like they are individual assets, not part of a whole. It drives me crazy.

Indy wrote:

ShelC wrote:What if he's playing Uno?

Then he keeps hoping he draws 12s. He just doesn't understand what a team looks like. He collects players like they are individual assets, not part of a whole. It drives me crazy.

I get what you are saying, but I don't mind as much as I did last year. Last summer I was fuming about this, but I've mellowed a bit. For one thing, I'm trying not to hold McD responsible for the roster he inherited, and last year was pretty much they first year he was drafting onto bis own team.

It's true that He has often taken payers in draft and FA without thinking about how they will fit in together. But it is also true that we haven't had a star to build around until Booker. So why not just get the most valuable asset you can and keep drafting until you have enough stars to win, or enough assets to flip for a star? And even if this is a flaw in how he sees the team, that's a flaw he can grow out of. People often grow in how they see others and understand the bigger picture in their 30sand 40s.

Indy wrote:I feel like, based on how he drafts, Ryan is the guy at the poker table holding the 3, 4, 5, and 7 of diamonds, and is still hoping for an ace because it is the highest card in the deck. Just imagine how good it would be to get an ace!

Do you feel the Suns are one 6 of diamonds away from being unbeatable? I know that wasn't really your point, but I'm curious if you think a worse player that fits better would be better for us long term.