2024-2025 Around the NBA Thread

[Raindog]

Trading Mikal and Cam was a dealbreaker for me. 1 young talent? Ok, 2 and every pick we could legally deal? Why not throw in Crowder, whose value was low at that point because of JJ's idiocy. Brooklyn immediately turned him into 5 2nd round picks, IIRC. There wasn't a single concession made by Brooklyn. The final deal was worse than the rumored deals during the off-season. Brooklyn had much less leverage than the Suns as well. JJ was taken to school but I really don't think he learned from it.

The picks were what bugged me. And I attribute that to James Jones being nonchalant (and even contemptuous) of drafting... and arrogantly believing he's smarter than everyone else in front offices around the league who knows that the best way to improve your team without overwhelming your payroll is to build diligently with good drafts.

It's the same bad philosophy (and arrogance) that has haunted the franchise all throughout Sarver's (and D'Antoni and assorted other's) days of running the front office.

 

[Mainstreet]

Of his caliber? Who else was clamoring to come here? What other Superstar was there for us to trade for where the other ownership side was willing as well? Plugging Superstars into trade machines doesn't make it feasible.

Three superstars look to be a thing of the past. Having two star players and upper echelon depth, going at least 8 deep, may be the way to go.

 

[Covert Rain]

Three superstars look to be a thing of the past. Having two star players and upper echelon depth, going at least 8 deep, may be the way to go.

I hope so but I will believe it when I see parity actually work.

 

[Mainstreet]

I hope so but I will believe it when I see parity actually work.

The key may be the quality of the rotation players and depth.

 

[GatorAZ]

However, the Suns had all their draft picks and assets to trade if they hadn't locked onto a one-sided trade.

Kevin Durant wasn't the only fish in the sea.

I didn’t care about giving up picks in the KD trade but you have to leave yourself enough players to win now in a win now trade. It should have been Bridges/Crowder/non-Cam filler and picks or just call their bluff and wait until the next offseason.

 

[Mainstreet]

I didn’t care about giving up picks in the KD trade but you have to leave yourself enough players to win now in a win now trade. It should have been Bridges/Crowder/non-Cam filler and picks or just call their bluff and wait until the next offseason.

Bridges was always off the table for me in the Durant trade, but I understand your thinking.

 

[GatorAZ]

Bridges was always off the table for me in the Durant trade, but I understand your thinking.

I know but just being realistic he was always the centerpiece.

 

[Mainstreet]

I know but just being realistic he was always the centerpiece.

Then the Suns should have walked away.

 

[Phrazbit]

I didn’t care about giving up picks in the KD trade but you have to leave yourself enough players to win now in a win now trade. It should have been Bridges/Crowder/non-Cam filler and picks or just call their bluff and wait until the next offseason.

Exactly.

We were left with a roster that was well short of contention with almost no avenues to significantly improve it.

 

[Phrazbit]

He said he was a cancer. I'm not making that up.

Without talking about Brooklyn or OKC, tell me one instance where he's been on the Suns where he was a cancer.

If his past is that big of a problem for you and others, don't forget to throw Grayson Allen into that same bucket as well.

Huh? Where did I say you made something up?

As for here, he’s already had no shortage of his strange passive aggressive behavior and comments, and a few games where he seemingly just flat out quit. The Christmas game in particular was disgraceful.

 

[Chaplin]

Huh? Where did I say you made something up?

As for here, he’s already had no shortage of his strange passive aggressive behavior and comments, and a few games where he seemingly just flat out quit. The Christmas game in particular was disgraceful.

Passive aggressive = cancer. Got it. Christmas game was disgraceful across the board, but since you like singling people out in the hopes of supporting your flimsy insults, then more power to you.

 

[Phrazbit]

Passive aggressive = cancer. Got it. Christmas game was disgraceful across the board, but since you like singling people out in the hopes of supporting your flimsy insults, then more power to you.

huh...

 

[JCSunsfan]

Yes, the Suns trade for Kevin Durant was a high-stakes gamble. I could have better lived with the trade if the Suns hadn't included Mikal Bridges in the deal. The biggest mistake the Suns made is overpaying for Durant.

The trade gives the appearance of being impulsive where new ownership wanted to make a splash and perhaps the GM wanting the same thing as well. I do think James Jones had been exploring such a trade all season. The question in my mind, would James Jones have stopped short of trading Mikal Bridges without a nudge from the owner.

IMO, the Suns need to be as careful trading Durant as they were imprudent in trading for him at the asking price. The Suns can't afford to compound mistakes. Now, if the Suns received an attractive trade offer for Durant, that's another matter. If the Suns received the right trade offer for him, I would probably do it.

I wish Bradley Beal didn't have a no trade clause because that's where I would look as well. If I were the Suns, I would still discreetly explore such options, especially if he is unwilling to come off the bench. This might be the better alternative and satisfy both parties. Still, it takes another team to show interest.

Even if they had kept Cam.

 

[Mainstreet]

Even if they had kept Cam.

Keeping Cam would have helped, but Bridges was the piece the Suns couldn't give up.

 

[GatorAZ]

Passive aggressive = cancer. Got it. Christmas game was disgraceful across the board, but since you like singling people out in the hopes of supporting your flimsy insults, then more power to you.

Not speaking to your coach is definitely cancerous behavior whether Vogel was a bad fit or not.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Three superstars look to be a thing of the past. Having two star players and upper echelon depth, going at least 8 deep, may be the way to go.

Sure… but of those two star players, one of them almost always has to be a year in year out All-NBA first teamer who can be a factor on both sides of the ball and the other has to be someone who’s top 10-20 player.

Building around a Booker/Bridges combo doesn’t provide that.

Booker isn’t close to being a title level #1 type player. He’s more of the 10-20 type players. And Bridges isn’t even close to the top 10-20 type player so building around those two guys as your core “stars” with depth would have been an exercise in futility.

That said, we got fleeced in that deal. Bridges was always going to be the centerpiece of any deal to try and put a number 1 next to Booker. So we shoulda held firm to Bridges/Filler/some picks instead of selling the farm.

Also, we traded for a guy that looked like a #1 but just wasn’t at this stage of his career.

 

[elindholm]

Booker isn’t close to being a title level #1 type player. He’s more of the 10-20 type players. And Bridges isn’t even close to the top 10-20 type player so building around those two guys as your core “stars” with depth would have been an exercise in futility.

But again, you never know what opportunities to improve the roster might present themselves. Durant happened to be the star that was available when the Suns were desperate to make a move, but it could be a different star in a year or two.

It's not true that the only options were the Durant trade or standing pat. The options were the Durant trade, standing pat, or treading water for a couple of years to see what other moves might be possible.

 

[Cheesebeef]

But again, you never know what opportunities to improve the roster might present themselves. Durant happened to be the star that was available when the Suns were desperate to make a move, but it could be a different star in a year or two.

It's not true that the only options were the Durant trade or standing pat. The options were the Durant trade, standing pat, or treading water for a couple of years to see what other moves might be possible.

I never said those were the only options. I just said trying to build around Booker/Bridges wasn’t going to equal a title team no matter how much great depth they had. Bridges was always going to have to be the piece to get them the other star to match with an ultimately usurp Book.

But the trade we made with him as centerpiece was a bad one. I’m not even saying we had to do it. Point blank… we made too big of a bet on the wrong horse.

 

[Hoop Head]

I hope so but I will believe it when I see parity actually work.

You want to see that work? Denver, Milwaukee, Boston. The last 3 champs.

Now tell me when emptying a teams cupboard for a star at the end of their career has produced a title? The Suns were on the other side of that with Chuck going to Houston, didn't work for Houston or the Suns. It didn't work for Brooklyn back when they brought in KG and Paul Pierce. It actually made Boston a contender down the road.

It's such a ridiculous notion that what the Suns had tried for years didn't produce a title so they should mortgage a decade of the teams future for a malcontent who was going to break the cycle. In league history there are teams that did that and it didn't work. The path to a championship is generally surrounding home grown stars with exceptional role players that accentuate their abilities. That's been seen in virtually all title winning teams outside of Los Angeles and the Heatles. Dallas, Milwaukee, Boston, San Antonio, Houston, and Denver all followed a similar path. We're not the Lakers, which you have said, so why would a Lakers like path work for us? It doesn't make sense.