2021-22 Suns Depth Chart

[Mainstreet]

I disagree. Well, sort of. Yes, that's what happened but it worked because our strength had been negated by injuries.

If Payne hadn't sprained his ankle and if Chris hadn't injured his shoulder, wrist and finger and if Booker hadn't tweaked his hamstring, we would have made them pay for going big just like we did during the season. Losing Saric made us even more vulnerable but having our guards limited by injury was the real killer.

I'm not a fan of going down the excuse trail in the playoffs other fans have used to explain their losses to the Suns.

 

[Hoop Head]

I'm not a fan of going down the excuse trail in the playoffs other fans have used to explain their losses to the Suns.

It's not really finding excuses if you're looking to the future of how they can avoid it happening again. When looking to the future you should recognize that's its incredibly unlikely we have Paul, Payne, and Booker ailing from various injuries. If you look at the games played while those guys were healthy, the Bucks weren't a problem.

 

[AzStevenCal]

I'm not a fan of going down the excuse trail in the playoffs other fans ave used to explain their losses to the Suns.

We wouldn't have been there without good luck and the Bucks wouldn't have won the title without being the benefit of our bad luck, the Hawks bad luck and the Nets bad luck. It happens. Ignoring that it happened makes no sense to me. Also, ignoring that it happens leaves you open to bad decisions, trying to fix something that isn't broken or trying to fix the wrong problem.

 

[Mainstreet]

It's not really finding excuses if you're looking to the future of how they can avoid it happening again. When looking to the future you should recognize that's its incredibly unlikely we have Paul, Payne, and Booker ailing from various injuries. If you look at the games played while those guys were healthy, the Bucks weren't a problem.

It sounded a lot like excuses not that there isn't some validity to it. A lot of teams can claim the same thing. The truth is we don't know what is going to happen this coming season. Hopefully injuries are not a serious problem.

I think the best thing a team can do is build 3 x 5 depth at every position and hope a star does not get seriously injured. Unfortunately injuries are a part of the game. A lot of "what if" games can be played but I don't look for opponents or their fans to feel sorry for the Suns.

I didn't feel sorry for the Lakers, Clippers, Nuggets when they were missing star players. Also when it was feared Giannis might miss some games in the Finals I would have taken this as well. The truth is even a top team needs some luck and good health to win a title.

 

[Mainstreet]

We wouldn't have been there without good luck and the Bucks wouldn't have won the title without being the benefit of our bad luck, the Hawks bad luck and the Nets bad luck. It happens. Ignoring that it happened makes no sense to me. Also, ignoring that it happens leaves you open to bad decisions, trying to fix something that isn't broken or trying to fix the wrong problem.

As discussed with Hoop Head injuries are part of the game. Luck is definitely a part of a playoff run no matter how good the team.

 

[AzStevenCal]

As discussed with Hoop Head injuries are part of the game. Luck is definitely a part of a playoff run no matter how good the team.

Of course they are. It's not like I started a thread bemoaning our bad luck with injuries in an effort to excuse away our failure to win it all. We are having a conversation about our needs and IMO some of us are making too much out of a need to add another deep bench big man due to failures that were primarily brought about by one too many injuries. AFAIC we've tried to correct those shortcomings by adding another penetrator, another threat from the shooting guard position and a true backup big man.

As it stands now, we'd improve mostly by upgrading our core talent level (through player growth or acquisition) rather than simply adding another low level big man. What we need is a player that forces one of our rotation players to the bench. It would be nice to add a player willing to watch most nights even though he's capable of beating out one of our rotation players but those guys are few and far between.

 

[Mainstreet]

Of course they are. It's not like I started a thread bemoaning our bad luck with injuries in an effort to excuse away our failure to win it all. We are having a conversation about our needs and IMO some of us are making too much out of a need to add another deep bench big man due to failures that were primarily brought about by one too many injuries. AFAIC we've tried to correct those shortcomings by adding another penetrator, another threat from the shooting guard position and a true backup big man.

As it stands now, we'd improve mostly by upgrading our core talent level (through player growth or acquisition) rather than simply adding another low level big man. What we need is a player that forces one of our rotation players to the bench. It would be nice to add a player willing to watch most nights even though he's capable of beating out one of our rotation players but those guys are few and far between.

Nothing says improving the Suns core talent can't be done by adding the right big man. It doesn't have to be low level talent. A lot will depend on who becomes avalable. Torrey Craig wasn't a traditional big man.

 

[Hoop Head]

Nothing says improving the Suns core talent can't be done by adding the right big man. It doesn't have to be low level talent. A lot will depend on who becomes avalable. Torrey Craig wasn't a traditional big man.

And we should be improved without any further additions. We should have a healthy Booker, Paul, and Payne. Those guys being healthy will improve the team as a whole more than anyone available right now to be signed as a backup or 3rd string PF. There might be a better PF available later but its highly unlikely they'll contribute more than our 3 best guards at full strength.

 

[Mainstreet]

And we should be improved without any further additions. We should have a healthy Booker, Paul, and Payne. Those guys being healthy will improve the team as a whole more than anyone available right now to be signed as a backup or 3rd string PF. There might be a better PF available later but its highly unlikely they'll contribute more than our 3 best guards at full strength.

I don't believe in standing still. We really don't know who might become available. Why limit options? It's about improving the rest of the team.

 

[Hoop Head]

I don't believe in standing still. We really don't know who might become available. Why limit options? It's about improving the rest of the team.

Where did I suggest we limit our options? We can add someone else but its still unlikely they contribute more than having a healthy backcourt would.

You keep mentioning adding someone and no has disagree with that. However you refuse to accept that we had injuries in the finals last year and those injuries played just as much, if not more, of a role in us losing than not having a serviceable big other than Ayton. bringing our guys back healthy will help us improve. Plus the moves we made to address depth in certain position Monty favors.

We can add someone later also but we need to make sure its the right player. Until then, we'll be fine.

 

[Mainstreet]

Where did I suggest we limit our options? We can add someone else but its still unlikely they contribute more than having a healthy backcourt would.

You keep mentioning adding someone and no has disagree with that. However you refuse to accept that we had injuries in the finals last year and those injuries played just as much, if not more, of a role in us losing than not having a serviceable big other than Ayton. bringing our guys back healthy will help us improve. Plus the moves we made to address depth in certain position Monty favors.

We can add someone later also but we need to make sure its the right player. Until then, we'll be fine.

IMO, the potential value of adding another player should not be minimized even though internal growth should improve the team.

To be clear, the Suns had injuries and illness even before Saric got injured in the Finals. It's not like the Suns had an injury free run through the playoffs.

I simply don't want to play the excuse card like many other fans of playoff opponents whose teams had injuries as well.

 

[Hoop Head]

IMO, the potential value of adding another player should not be minimized even though internal growth should improve the team.

To be clear, the Suns had injuries and illness even before Saric got injured in the Finals. It's not like the Suns had an injury free run through the playoffs.

I simply don't want to play the excuse card like many other fans of playoff opponents whose teams had injuries as well.

I don't think anyone is playing the excuse card like our playoff opponents did. Its different to acknowledge we were down some players and presume we'll be better going forward because they're healthy vs blaming our losses on health entirely and trying to make excuses before a series began. Even going as far as not crediting us with beating them. Everyone here that I've seen has acknowledged the Bucks were the better team when it mattered. No one taking away from their accomplishment.

 

[Chaplin]

I don't believe in standing still. We really don't know who might become available. Why limit options? It's about improving the rest of the team.

I’m not sure about the narrative that if we don’t sign a 15th man we’re limiting our options.

 

[Cheesebeef]

I’m not sure about the narrative that if we don’t sign a 15th man we’re limiting our options.

I think this twists what Mainstreet’s point is. He’s not saying we need to just fill a 15th man slot with just any big man and that makes all the difference. He’s saying we need to fill an open roster spot with someone who can actually play backup PF. People continually dismissing any addition because they’d be “the 15th man” are making a specious argument because he’s not asking for end of never get off the bench size. He’s asking for a solid role player to take an open roster spot.

 

[Mainstreet]

I think this twists what Mainstreet’s point is. He’s not saying we need to just fill a 15th man slot with just any big man and that makes all the difference. He’s saying we need to fill an open roster spot with someone who can actually play backup PF. People continually dismissing any addition because they’d be “the 15th man” are making a specious argument because he’s not asking for end of never get off the bench size. He’s asking for a solid role player to take an open roster spot.

Well said.

 

[AzStevenCal]

I think this twists what Mainstreet’s point is. He’s not saying we need to just fill a 15th man slot with just any big man and that makes all the difference. He’s saying we need to fill an open roster spot with someone who can actually play backup PF. People continually dismissing any addition because they’d be “the 15th man” are making a specious argument because he’s not asking for end of never get off the bench size. He’s asking for a solid role player to take an open roster spot.

No, I think you've missed part of the conversation. Whether he did so intentionally or not, he's voiced concerns about adding a 15th man and he's been disappointed that we haven't added an additional rotation big man and we've been responding in an attempt to distinguish between those two actions. He's talked about needing a 15th man and he's talked about needing a big man that can fit into the rotation and he hasn't, until recently, clearly separated the two points.

Everyone would absolutely love it if we could add someone that would be an upgrade over what we have starting or backing up at the 4. We don't all believe that such a player is out there and available to us right now and many of us believe our best chance will be around midseason. And that we might be better off saving that 15th roster spot until we can actually grab someone good enough to fight for that backup big man spot.

 

[Chaplin]

No, I think you've missed part of the conversation. Whether he did so intentionally or not, he's voiced concerns about adding a 15th man and he's been disappointed that we haven't added an additional rotation big man and we've been responding in an attempt to distinguish between those two actions. He's talked about needing a 15th man and he's talked about needing a big man that can fit into the rotation and he hasn't, until recently, clearly separated the two points.

Everyone would absolutely love it if we could add someone that would be an upgrade over what we have starting or backing up at the 4. We don't all believe that such a player is out there and available to us right now and many of us believe our best chance will be around midseason. And that we might be better off saving that 15th roster spot until we can actually grab someone good enough to fight for that backup big man spot.

Exactly.

 

[Mainstreet]

No, I think you've missed part of the conversation. Whether he did so intentionally or not, he's voiced concerns about adding a 15th man and he's been disappointed that we haven't added an additional rotation big man and we've been responding in an attempt to distinguish between those two actions. He's talked about needing a 15th man and he's talked about needing a big man that can fit into the rotation and he hasn't, until recently, clearly separated the two points.

Everyone would absolutely love it if we could add someone that would be an upgrade over what we have starting or backing up at the 4. We don't all believe that such a player is out there and available to us right now and many of us believe our best chance will be around midseason. And that we might be better off saving that 15th roster spot until we can actually grab someone good enough to fight for that backup big man spot.

Let's use full quotes. If you have anything to say, quote me so I can explain any question about the quote but I suspect I already have... probably several times.

 

[AzStevenCal]

Let's use full quotes. If you have anything to say, quote me so I can explain any question about the quote but I suspect I already have... probably several times.

Help yourself, your quotes on this subject are all over the board. I'm not trying to misrepresent what you've said but up until recently your posts came across exactly as I said. Not once, not twice, not three times but over and over again and across several threads. It's why some of us finally started challenging your comments.

I don't want to go to war with you on this, save all of us some trouble and just search on your own comments from 4 days ago and beyond. Perhaps you intended otherwise but I swear they did NOT make the points you've made the past couple of days. If they had, there would have been no pushback.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Help yourself, your quotes on this subject are all over the board. I'm not trying to misrepresent what you've said but up until recently your posts came across exactly as I said. Not once, not twice, not three times but over and over again and across several threads. It's why some of us finally started challenging your comments.

I don't want to go to war with you on this, save all of us some trouble and just search on your own comments from 4 days ago and beyond. Perhaps you intended otherwise but I swear they did NOT make the points you've made the past couple of days. If they had, there would have been no pushback.

i thought it was pretty clear what Mainstreet was saying... and how others kept focusing just on the 15th of it all to dismiss a sound argument.

 

[Mainstreet]

Help yourself, your quotes on this subject are all over the board. I'm not trying to misrepresent what you've said but up until recently your posts came across exactly as I said. Not once, not twice, not three times but over and over again and across several threads. It's why some of us finally started challenging your comments.

I don't want to go to war with you on this, save all of us some trouble and just search on your own comments from 4 days ago and beyond. Perhaps you intended otherwise but I swear they did NOT make the points you've made the past couple of days. If they had, there would have been no pushback.

Your response is not fair or adequate.

If you one to challenge one or more of my posts do it with a quote. Also do it one post at a time so I can properly respond.

I have had to answer multiple posts to clarify a particular point. If some of the information is repeated it was done to satisfy a question.

 

[AzStevenCal]

Your response is not fair or adequate.

If you one to challenge one or more of my posts do it with a quote. Also do it one post at a time so I can properly respond.

I have had to answer multiple posts to clarify a particular point. If some of the information is repeated it was done to satisfy a question.

If I've misrepresented your position it was unintended. But ask yourself this, now that you are saying the exact same thing that Hoophead, myself and a few others have been saying for several weeks, why was this a disagreement in the first place? We are talking about posters that are almost always in agreement with you so there is no axe to grind from any of us.

 

[Yuma]

If I've misrepresented your position it was unintended. But ask yourself this, now that you are saying the exact same thing that Hoophead, myself and a few others have been saying for several weeks, why was this a disagreement in the first place? We are talking about posters that are almost always in agreement with you so there is no axe to grind from any of us.

Lots of times I read these arguments and they start off thinking someone said "B" when they said "A". Ten pages later everyone agrees it is "A". I have learned to wait over all these pages of "argument" when it's really a misreading of what the original post is actually.

 

[Mainstreet]

If I've misrepresented your position it was unintended. But ask yourself this, now that you are saying the exact same thing that Hoophead, myself and a few others have been saying for several weeks, why was this a disagreement in the first place? We are talking about posters that are almost always in agreement with you so there is no axe to grind from any of us.

I really think if you go back to the original post that you found problematic, you will find it was simply a matter of misinterpretation. Everything can be said better but I'm generally pretty clear.

I can't imagine this been going on for several weeks. If so, I don't have any idea what the problem might be.

 

[Hoop Head]

What's important is everyone seems to be on the same page now. No need to argue over how things were said or interpreted a couple days or weeks ago.

All should be well on this western front.