Suns Release 2014-15 TV Schedule

[Chaz]

I don't watch the WNBA, but you can't for a second believe that a team like Gonzaga would "mop the floor" with the Mercury. The Mercury would hold their own with the bottom half of today's NBA, no problem.

Not even close. I like watching the Mercury but it is ridiculous to think that they could hang with a professional mens team in any league.

Diana Taurasi herself said once that there is no way she could play against professional male basketball players. She would have a hard time even getting a shot and she is one of the best (if not the best) female player in the world.

The Mercury center is 6'8" and is dominant in her league.

 

[Phrazbit]

I don't watch the WNBA, but you can't for a second believe that a team like Gonzaga would "mop the floor" with the Mercury. The Mercury would hold their own with the bottom half of today's NBA, no problem.

I could not disagree more. If you put the worst team in the NBA against the WNBA all-stars and you actually convinced the men to try... I think the outcome would be something like 180-12, the length and speed of the men would be suffocating, if the men put a press on the woman would have serious issues even getting the ball past half court. I believe a team like Gonzaga would absolutely massacre a WNBA team. Every player on Gonzaga would have an enormous advantage in strength, speed and size compared to their counterpart. And I dont know if you've seen WNBA shooting motions but the majority of their players have a form that one might call "Marion-esque".

I would imagine even the WNBA players would admit they would be hard pressed to compete with even a sub-par D-1 mens team, and that any team of NBA quality talent would annihilate them.

 

[BC867]

I always find it interesting that you separate the Suns from the equation when the Mercury are owned by Sarver as well. Do you really think the Suns would not embrace a dominant center as well?

Same ownership. Different goals... I don't think so.

I do! The Mercury's first two Championships were achieved with Ann Meyers Drysdale as General Manager. After laying down the foundation, she has moved up to V.P.,Suns/Mercury.

The foundation for the Suns, on the other hand, was laid down by a young, inexperienced Jerry Colangelo 4 1/2 decades ago. It was basically . . . put on a good show at home; don't embarrass yourself on the road; and make an appearance in the playoffs.

The Mercury is favored to win its third Championship.

The Suns in 46 years achieved no Championships and two trips to the Finals -- the first being a Cinderella year with the gimmick of a 212 lb. Center, who never surpassed the level of his surprise rookie season.

Same ownership (part of the time), different goals. Absolutely!!! You can't compare what the Mercury have achieved in a few years vs. the Suns in over 46 years.

Ann Meyers Drysdale, a basketball pro before joining the organization, has achieved infinitely more in her short span as GM than Jerry Colangelo or Robert Sarver's GM's have in 4 1/2 decades.

 

[elindholm]

Same ownership (part of the time), different goals. Absolutely!!! You can't compare what the Mercury have achieved in a few years vs. the Suns in over 46 years.

How fortunate you are to have lived your life without needing to learn the difference between goal and achievement. I can only assume that, in your experience, they are entirely coincident, which is to your great credit.

Most of the world, on the other hand, has to deal with the unhappy truth that sometimes our goals will not be achieved.

 

[Phrazbit]

The Mercury have won by virtue of stumbling into the right years to be very very bad. It also helps that has been a mere 8-12 teams in the WNBA, dramatically increasing the odds of winning a title. It was not savvy front office moves that allowed them to get Griner and Turasi, they were horrible the seasons before those extremely obvious top picks came out.

You're basically saying the Suns lost the coin flip for Lew Alcindor because they had their priorities wrong... rather than dumb luck.

 

[BC867]

Most of the world, on the other hand, has to deal with the unhappy truth that sometimes our goals will not be achieved.

You're right. Sometimes our goals will not be achieved.

Which means sometimes they will be.

The Mercury has achieved it sometimes.

The Suns have achieved it never.

Therein lies the difference.

You're the kind of fan the WNBA was made for. (Well, the kind of male fan, anyway.) Women's basketball now is probably at around the same level of athleticism as men's basketball of a century ago, and the skill level is probably higher, so if you long for the traditions of the early 20th-century version of the sport, the WNBA is the best place to get it.

The Suns play in their league. The Mercury plays in their league. They each face appropriate competition. Men vs. men. Women vs. women.

It still comes down to winning and losing. Offense and defense.

The Mercury has mastered coming out on top. The Suns have not.

Right here in the 21st Century. And it is fulfilling for this fan to watch.

 

[Superbone]

The Mercury have won by virtue of stumbling into the right years to be very very bad. It also helps that has been a mere 8-12 teams in the WNBA, dramatically increasing the odds of winning a title. It was not savvy front office moves that allowed them to get Griner and Turasi, they were horrible the seasons before those extremely obvious top picks came out.

You're basically saying the Suns lost the coin flip for Lew Alcindor because they had their priorities wrong... rather than dumb luck.

Yep, crazy to think that if a simple coin flip had gone the other way, it would have drastically changed the history of our Phoenix Suns. I'd love to see that movie!

 

[Phrazbit]

You're right. Sometimes our goals will not be achieved.

Which means sometimes they will be.

The Mercury has achieved it sometimes.

The Suns have achieved it never.

Therein lies the difference.


The Suns play in their league. The Mercury plays in their league. They each face appropriate competition. Men vs. men. Women vs. women.

It still comes down to winning and losing. Offense and defense.

The Mercury has mastered coming out on top. The Suns have not.

Right here in the 21st Century. And it is fulfilling for this fan to watch.

Ugggghhhh... they've mastered coming out on top? Thats like claiming Cleveland "mastered" it if they win a couple titles the next few years. There is a big difference between dumb luck and mastery. The Mercury have benefited far more from the former.

 

[elindholm]

There is a big difference between dumb luck and mastery. The Mercury have benefited far more from the former.

I think more to the point is that the Suns' luck has been terrible.

 

[Phrazbit]

I think more to the point is that the Suns' luck has been terrible.

Also true.

 

[Chaplin]

I think more to the point is that the Suns' luck has been terrible.

Blaming it on bad luck is a cop-out. Yes, the coin flip didn't go our way. Bad luck? Maybe. But you can't really attribute not getting the job done on the court to "bad luck". Even if you think that the Amare/Boris suspensions were bad luck, if that hadn't happened there was no guarantee we would win the title. (The chances would be pretty good that year though)

You make your own luck. The Spurs have been doing it for years.

 

[elindholm]

Blaming it on bad luck is a cop-out. Yes, the coin flip didn't go our way. Bad luck? Maybe. But you can't really attribute not getting the job done on the court to "bad luck".

I completely disagree. Not just with the Suns, but so many important playoff games have come down to a final fluke shot or bounce off of the rim. It's part of our romanticization of sports superiority to forget about anything "lucky" that benefited the victor, but there's still a huge luck component. Just think for a moment of all of the crazy caroms we've seen the ball take in the final seconds of close games. How can you claim superior skill if it happens to bounce your way?

If you have two teams that are tied at the end of 48 minutes in Game 7, guess what -- they're pretty darned evenly matched. In overtime, one team will make the plays and one won't, but run it again and you're just as likely to get the opposite result. The problem with this rather obvious analysis is that it doesn't correspond to the mythology that "the best team always wins," which is the kind of thing that sports fans say to one another in order to appear knowledgable.

If you had two teams that were precisely evenly matched, each one would win 50% of the time. So now give one team a tiny, barely perceptible advantage. Do you really think that the "better" team is now going to win 100% of the time? Really?

 

[Chaplin]

I completely disagree. Not just with the Suns, but so many important playoff games have come down to a final fluke shot or bounce off of the rim. It's part of our romanticization of sports superiority to forget about anything "lucky" that benefited the victor, but there's still a huge luck component. Just think for a moment of all of the crazy caroms we've seen the ball take in the final seconds of close games. How can you claim superior skill if it happens to bounce your way?

If you have two teams that are tied at the end of 48 minutes in Game 7, guess what -- they're pretty darned evenly matched. In overtime, one team will make the plays and one won't, but run it again and you're just as likely to get the opposite result. The problem with this rather obvious analysis is that it doesn't correspond to the mythology that "the best team always wins," which is the kind of thing that sports fans say to one another in order to appear knowledgable.

If you had two teams that were precisely evenly matched, each one would win 50% of the time. So now give one team a tiny, barely perceptible advantage. Do you really think that the "better" team is now going to win 100% of the time? Really?

But if one player makes a small, minute mistake that costs the game, is that luck? Or a simple mistake?

 

[elindholm]

But if one player makes a small, minute mistake that costs the game, is that luck? Or a simple mistake?

Depends on the circumstances. Turnover through a lapse in concentration, mistake. Missed free throw, mistake. Missed free throw that gets batted around in chaos and eventually finds its way to a player who chucks it over his shoulder in desperation and it goes in, luck.

 

[Phrazbit]

Blaming it on bad luck is a cop-out. Yes, the coin flip didn't go our way. Bad luck? Maybe. But you can't really attribute not getting the job done on the court to "bad luck". Even if you think that the Amare/Boris suspensions were bad luck, if that hadn't happened there was no guarantee we would win the title. (The chances would be pretty good that year though)

You make your own luck. The Spurs have been doing it for years.

The Suns have ridden teams build on mid-tier picks and savvy trades to the brink of a title several times. The Spurs have won their titles largely because they defied LOTTO odds in the right years and landed generational talents.

It can easily be argued that the Suns have created far more of their own luck than San Antonio has... and yet it was not enough to overcome the Spurs random-chance of being bad in the right years... and on top of that, leaping teams in the lotto order.

Had the Spurs landed in the draft position that was most likely for their slot in 1997 they would have ended up with Antonio Daniels or Tony Battie... instead they got arguably the greatest power forward of all time.

 

[elindholm]

I think it's also important to make a distinction between the success of the franchise and the success of any one individual team that represents that franchise for a year. Individual Suns teams have had their share of bad luck (Manning hurting his ACL, Person missing at the buzzer, Diaw getting a questionable suspension), but they've had some good luck too.

The franchise's luck, on the other hand, has been predominantly bad, from losing the coin flip for Alcindor, to not getting the pick that probably would have become Noah, to the Warriors reneging on the deal for Curry. Flip any one of those outcomes and you're looking at the ability to put a stronger team on the floor than the Suns have instead had to go to battle with.

 

[Chaplin]

What does the Warriors reneging have to do with luck?

Luck is a convenient excuse to cover up what's really wrong.

I won't deny it had a hand in coin flips, but other than that. I just can't accept that a player missing at the buzzer is "bad luck". More like a bad shot. Ron Artest making a layup at the buzzer--that's not luck, that's bad defense.

 

[BC867]

I completely disagree. Not just with the Suns, but so many important playoff games have come down to a final fluke shot or bounce off of the rim.

That would apply to a playoff game. Or 2. Or 3.

But not a 4 1/2-decade history. That is a trend.

Two NBA championship series in all those years. One deserved and one a fluke.

The Suns consistent history of not being a Championship contender is not a fluke. It is a trend.

It is THE CURSE OF ALVAN ADAMS. One surprise season with the skinniest Center in history setting the direction of the team for almost a half century.

And it has become worse than ever, evolving into SSOL-no D, and now a 3-Point Guard lineup.

 

[elindholm]

That would apply to a playoff game. Or 2. Or 3.

But not a 4 1/2-decade history. That is a trend.

Two NBA championship series in all those years. One deserved and one a fluke.

The Suns consistent history of not being a Championship contender is not a fluke. It is a trend.

It is THE CURSE OF ALVAN ADAMS. One surprise season with the skinniest Center in history setting the direction of the team for almost a half century.

And it has become worse than ever, evolving into SSOL-no D, and now a 3-Point Guard lineup.

Since you obviously didn't read my follow-up post, there's really no point in responding.

 

[BC867]

Since you obviously didn't read my follow-up post, there's really no point in responding.

Not obviously.

My point was that the Suns legacy is based on Front Office mindset rather than (no matter how many) strokes of bad luck occur.

Once the early days of Neal Walk and Connie Hawkins (Walk and the Hawk) passed, and the introduction of John MacLeod and his college stringbean Center took over, in retrospect, our destiny was set.

And history has confirmed it. A true Championship contender once in almost a half century of seasons. In that long period, luck should have evened out. Except it was taken over by obsession with small ball that has persisted to this day.

 

[elindholm]

My point was that the Suns legacy is based on Front Office mindset rather than (no matter how many) strokes of bad luck occur.

Yes, that is always your point. We know that by now.

Once the early days of Neal Walk and Connie Hawkins (Walk and the Hawk) passed, and the introduction of John MacLeod and his college stringbean Center took over, in retrospect, our destiny was set.

"Destiny"? Really? So how long will "destiny" have this effect?

Why did they acquire Shaquille O'Neal? Or lesser names like Luc Longley before him? Or prospects like Alex Len now?

Do you have an answer for that?

 

[Mainstreet]

That would apply to a playoff game. Or 2. Or 3.

But not a 4 1/2-decade history. That is a trend.

Two NBA championship series in all those years. One deserved and one a fluke.

The Suns consistent history of not being a Championship contender is not a fluke. It is a trend.

It is THE CURSE OF ALVAN ADAMS. One surprise season with the skinniest Center in history setting the direction of the team for almost a half century.

And it has become worse than ever, evolving into SSOL-no D, and now a 3-Point Guard lineup.

I can't believe you really believe this. The Suns run of bad luck is more likely to have started when they lost the coin flip for Kareem.

 

[Superbone]

Two NBA championship series in all those years. One deserved and one a fluke.

I'm sorry but I find this laughable. The Suns that year went through the Western Conference playoffs and won every series including beating the DEFENDING NBA CHAMPIONS. They then took the vaunted Boston Celtics to 6 games. There was NOTHING fluke-like about it. Absolutely NOTHING.

 

[BC867]

I'm sorry but I find this laughable. The Suns that year went through the Western Conference playoffs and won every series including beating the DEFENDING NBA CHAMPIONS. They then took the vaunted Boston Celtics to 6 games. There was NOTHING fluke-like about it. Absolutely NOTHING.

C'mon. The gimmick of a skinny rookie Center playing offense like a Shooting Guard was a novelty that the league caught up with by the next season.

Opponents' Power Forwards or Small Forwards then defended Adams and our Power Forwards (defacto Centers) were overpowered by Centers. Only the opponents were laughing.

Adams should have been moved to a Wing position the next season, but John MacLeod stubbornly stuck with it for a decade. And we never saw a Finals again. Until one time with the Chuckster.

 

[BC867]

Why did they acquire Shaquille O'Neal? Or lesser names like Luc Longley before him? Or prospects like Alex Len now?

Do you have an answer for that?

Yes, sporadic shots here and there vs. growing a philosophy of strength in the playoffs.

Shaq retired two years after he played for us. Longley retired one year after. Do you seriously consider them to be examples of building to a championship? I know you know better than that.

As far as Len, if he is not damaged goods, he might be a step toward moving in a strong direction. Time will tell.