Phx-Suns.Net

jonh wrote:

carey wrote:Y'all are pretty down on McDonough, huh? Lol.

Perhaps my post was a little strong--I actually think that he could be a good GM, and I have generally liked his approach up to this point. I just think its funny how McD has often talked about using draft picks to trade for a star.

Because that is what happened in Boston that got them a championship. He has been unable to make that big move so far.

ShelC wrote:I think McD is a guy who knows how to do the job from a functional and technical standpoint, but his ability to put a winning roster together is very questionable and we still haven't seen or heard a coherent plan. Even now...are we rebuilding? Trying to make the playoffs with vets? What's our identity as a team? We drafted two guys last year who play the same position but in different ways. It's been 4 years already, where we going with this?

All great questions. I like a lot of the players he has brought in but the resultant roster has been disjointed thus far. It seems to have two agendas that fight against each other.

TheOriginalOriginal wrote:Why wouldnt you keep Warren if you draft Tatum? A team can have more than 1 SF. Tatum has the frame that can fill into a small ball 4, even Warren can do that now, they also have completely different games, I think they could play together.

Completely different games? They've got very similar games, I'm not sure Warren brings anything to the table that Tatum doesn't already bring. And we'd be one of the worst perimeter defending teams in the league.

carey wrote:

Lol!

That is hilarious!

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/why-m ... t-ceiling/

Read this article, realize that Isaac is the only guy we've brought in twice (that we know of) and this rumor (http://www.sbnation.com/2017/6/14/15800 ... tics-magic) that Isaac isn't working out for anyone outside the top 4 and try and tell me he's not our pick.

That article just hits everything Watson and McD want in their prospects.

Here's my new draft plan if Fultz-Ball-Jackson go 1-2-3.

Trade 4 and 32 to Sacramento for 5 and 10. I'd be willing to offer up the Miami pick next year instead of 32. Draft Isaac at 5 and either Ntilikina, Monk, or Mitchell, in that order, at 10.

PG Bledsoe/Ulis
SG Booker/Ntilikina or Monk or Mitchell
SF Warren/Jones Jr
PF Chriss/Isaac/Dudley
C Chandler/Bender/Williams

Split T wrote:http://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/why-m ... t-ceiling/

Read this article, realize that Isaac is the only guy we've brought in twice (that we know of) and this rumor (http://www.sbnation.com/2017/6/14/15800 ... tics-magic) that Isaac isn't working out for anyone outside the top 4 and try and tell me he's not our pick.

That article just hits everything Watson and McD want in their prospects.

If true, then yeah, we're taking Isaac. However according to the article:
Probability this is true: 4/10

Split T wrote:

TheOriginalOriginal wrote:Why wouldnt you keep Warren if you draft Tatum? A team can have more than 1 SF. Tatum has the frame that can fill into a small ball 4, even Warren can do that now, they also have completely different games, I think they could play together.

Completely different games? They've got very similar games, I'm not sure Warren brings anything to the table that Tatum doesn't already bring. And we'd be one of the worst perimeter defending teams in the league.

This tells me you have watched zero Tatum games.

Care to explain how they're different?

Split T wrote:Here's my new draft plan if Fultz-Ball-Jackson go 1-2-3.

Trade 4 and 32 to Sacramento for 5 and 10. I'd be willing to offer up the Miami pick next year instead of 32. Draft Isaac at 5 and either Ntilikina, Monk, or Mitchell, in that order, at 10.

PG Bledsoe/Ulis
SG Booker/Ntilikina or Monk or Mitchell
SF Warren/Jones Jr
PF Chriss/Isaac/Dudley
C Chandler/Bender/Williams

Why would sac do that? Trade a guaranteed top 10 for an unknown?

Because they want to move up to 4 for Fox

Split T wrote:Care to explain how they're different?

One guy makes a living on cuts, transition and garbage buckets, rarely creating for himself.

The other guy has an advanced half court game that doesn't rely on others creating for him because he can get his own.


I really don't see how you don't see the difference, but whatever. I will gladly solo this Tatum wagon

Split T wrote:Because they want to move up to 4 for Fox

We aren't taking him, not with this glut of guards. Sacramento knows this.

TheOriginalOriginal wrote:

Split T wrote:Care to explain how they're different?

One guy makes a living on cuts, transition and garbage buckets, rarely creating for himself.

The other guy has an advanced half court game that doesn't rely on others creating for him because he can get his own.


I really don't see how you don't see the difference, but whatever. I will gladly solo this Tatum wagon

My point is Warren's game offers nothing that Tatum doesn't also offer. I know Tatum has a more advanced game, but they're still very similar. They both live in the mid range and have shaky outside shots. Tatum's will probably develop better than Warren's, but that doesn't change my point. I feel like you're taking this as a knock on Tatum when it's not at all. I'm saying anything Warren can do, Tatum can do better. Why keep Warren in that situation? I'd much rather bring someone in with different skills, namely defense.

TheOriginalOriginal wrote:

Split T wrote:Because they want to move up to 4 for Fox

We aren't taking him, not with this glut of guards. Sacramento knows this.

We've loaded up on guards before and we don't have to be picking him for ourselves. There may even be another team out there who covets fox. We pit them and sacramento against each other and see who offers more for the pick.

Yea TJ and Tatum are almost exactly opposite in terms of offense.

If we take Issac...I just don't know. I can see why a coach and exec would fall in love with Issac but I wouldn't be thrilled. We just be taking another guy with a ton of potential and crazy physical attributes, but where does he fit?

Pasting this from a Philly article as we have also wondered about trading with the Kings



We’ve heard this countless times before, but league sources keep saying the Sacramento Kings are seriously considering packaging picks No. 5 and 10 in a trade for the 76ers' No. 3 in the June 22 draft.

One league source said Tuesday that former Kentucky point guard De’Aaron Fox and former Kansas small forward Josh Jackson were mentioned as targets at the third pick for the Kings. Another league source said Fox wouldn’t slip past the Kings at five if they remained there. Time will tell.

What we do know is that an undisclosed NBA team had representatives in Fox’s hometown of Houston asking questions about him. The team wanted to get as much background on him before deciding whether to trade up to get him. Was that squad the Kings?

ShelC wrote:Yea TJ and Tatum are almost exactly opposite in terms of offense.

Exactly opposites? They're very similar sized, ok athletes, that love the mid range and don't create a lot of offense for others. Their big difference is Tatum is a better ISO scorer and Warren plays more without the ball.

Their big difference is Tatum is a better ISO scorer and Warren plays more without the ball.

Yea, that's a pretty big difference in terms of offense.

Split T wrote:

ShelC wrote:Yea TJ and Tatum are almost exactly opposite in terms of offense.

Exactly opposites? They're very similar sized, ok athletes, that love the mid range and don't create a lot of offense for others. Their big difference is Tatum is a better ISO scorer and Warren plays more without the ball.

You're gonna see what you wanna see.

Just like me with Isaac, I want no parts of that guy, all I see is a skinny kid with no position who just like Bender wont be strong enough to do anything but stand in a corner and hope his 3 goes in before Earl benches him. Bleh.