Timberwolves @ Suns 3-14-16

Catlover

Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 12, 2010
Posts
1,887
Reaction score
1
Location
California
i love comments like these, projecting words into other people's mouths. It does wonders for the conversation.

This ain't about the players. This is about a FO that refuses to tank. But hey, if you've really enjoyed the last SIX YEARS of sucking, well, good for you. We're well on our way to making sure that'll be 7, 8 and 9 years of sucking when we pick 5th in a two man draft this year.

They haven't done it in the past but what more could you expect from them this season? This is a horrible roster, we've just managed to do what bad teams occasionally do by winning a few games. We won on December 7th, since than we've won a grand total of 9 games. The Lakers have 11 wins during that stretch and Brooklyn, Philadelphia and Minnesota all have 13 wins. We are losing and we're doing it very well.
 

JCSunsfan

ASFN Icon
Joined
Oct 24, 2002
Posts
22,108
Reaction score
6,537
Oh I didn't want to look at this game thread. I knew the sky would be falling-especially since Tucker was the leading scorer tonight.

Just remember something. There is no one that wants that #1 pick more than McD. He has already suffered the humiliation of this season. There is nothing that he will gain by an extra win here or there.

Players just sometimes go out and win in spite of what you tell them to do.

It's ok. I have a hunch that Labissiere might end up being the best player in this draft anyway.
 
Last edited:

sunsfan88

ASFN Icon
BANNED BY MODERATORS
Joined
Feb 1, 2010
Posts
11,660
Reaction score
844
When Rubio hit the FTs to go up, then next play call should have been for Len to shoot a 3 at the buzzer. Or Chandler if he hadn't fouled out by then.

Iiirc, Hornacek even did that where the play was designed for Len to shoot a 3 at the buzzer against the Hawks when Goodwin shot it instead and made it.
 

Catlover

Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 12, 2010
Posts
1,887
Reaction score
1
Location
California
Oh I didn't want to look at this game thread. I knew the sky would be falling-especially since Tucker was the leading scorer tonight.

I wish I knew what was going on with PJ. When we first brought him in he was my favorite player. Hustled every night and always attacked, not always with great results, but he was always aggressive. Then he added that corner 3 pointer and became an even better player but the last year and a half he's been so inconsistent. He'll work hard for a quarter or a half and then take off several games. Every now and then he'll work hard for a whole game and when that happens, we almost always win. Even with his inconsistent effort, it doesn't say much for this team that he'll probably once again win the Majerle Hustle Award.
 

Catlover

Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 12, 2010
Posts
1,887
Reaction score
1
Location
California
When Rubio hit the FTs to go up, then next play call should have been for Len to shoot a 3 at the buzzer. Or Chandler if he hadn't fouled out by then.

Iiirc, Hornacek even did that where the play was designed for Len to shoot a 3 at the buzzer against the Hawks when Goodwin shot it instead and made it.

Not. Just NOT. Calling a play designed to lose? I hope I don't live to see the day the Suns do something like that. I could see putting nothing but the young guys out there and drawing up a play for Booker or even Len as a growth opportunity but that's it. But the Tyson suggestion is over the line. No one in the league would do something like that.
 

JCSunsfan

ASFN Icon
Joined
Oct 24, 2002
Posts
22,108
Reaction score
6,537
i love comments like these, projecting words into other people's mouths. It does wonders for the conversation.

This ain't about the players. This is about a FO that refuses to tank. But hey, if you've really enjoyed the last SIX YEARS of sucking, well, good for you. We're well on our way to making sure that'll be 7, 8 and 9 years of sucking when we pick 5th in a two man draft this year.


What in the world has this front office done to NOT tank this year? They fired the coach and went with a guy who would feature Markieff. Tank move. They kept vet players out for long periods of time. Tank move. They sent down the edict to go through Len and Booker. Building move and likely a tank move.

Some time s the coaches and players say "to heck with it, we are going to win this." Nothing more you can do.

Sometimes there is no one to blame. Really.
 

AZCrazy

ASFN Lifer
Joined
May 18, 2014
Posts
3,984
Reaction score
2,562
At this point they should be shooting at the wrong basket, spitting in the ref's eye, showing up at the wrong arena - doing whatever it takes to lose without question. WHAT will it take for this team to get it right just one time?? Just one great player can remake a team.
You guys remember when the Cavaliers were the worst team in the NBA for multiple consecutive years, then got LeBron and went to the finals the next year --

not once --

but twice, several years apart.


Get the great player at any cost.
 
Last edited:

sunsfan88

ASFN Icon
BANNED BY MODERATORS
Joined
Feb 1, 2010
Posts
11,660
Reaction score
844
Not. Just NOT. Calling a play designed to lose? I hope I don't live to see the day the Suns do something like that. I could see putting nothing but the young guys out there and drawing up a play for Booker or even Len as a growth opportunity but that's it. But the Tyson suggestion is over the line. No one in the league would do something like that.

Ok maybe not Tyson (who was fouled out at the time anyway I think) but doing it for Len shouldn't be an issue at all. You didn't have a problem with it when Jeff Hornacek designed that play for Len to shoot the 3 at the buzzer. Why can't we do that same thing now when a loss is more crucial?

I told myself right before Booker's shot that if Booker was the one shooting it, it would go in and we would screw ourselves big time.

If not Len, then it should have been Knight who was having an awful night shooting the ball and has been known to choke in clutch moments like that before. Would have been perfect, he would have probably even turned it over before getting a shot off or probably air balled it or something.

I hope I live to see the day the Suns win that Larry O'Brien trophy even if it means losing purposely for a year or two prior to it.
 

Catlover

Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 12, 2010
Posts
1,887
Reaction score
1
Location
California
Ok maybe not Tyson (who was fouled out at the time anyway I think) but doing it for Len shouldn't be an issue at all. You didn't have a problem with it when Jeff Hornacek designed that play for Len to shoot the 3 at the buzzer. Why can't we do that same thing now when a loss is more crucial?

I told myself right before Booker's shot that if Booker was the one shooting it, it would go in and we would screw ourselves big time.

If not Len, then it should have been Knight who was having an awful night shooting the ball and has been known to choke in clutch moments like that before. Would have been perfect, he would have probably even turned it over before getting a shot off or probably air balled it or something.

I hope I live to see the day the Suns win that Larry O'Brien trophy even if it means losing purposely for a year or two prior to it.

It's the part about a coach putting in a play he wants to see fail that I have an issue with. As I said, I'd have been fine running a play for Booker or Len. I'd have used a lineup such as Knight, Booker, Goodwin, Len and Williams or Jenkins (if they were active?) and you could sell that to the world as an experience builder. But you can't run a play for a 3 point shot by a center that is 0 for 14 years from the arc.

Purposely losing can't be done by the players or the coaches, the consequences just aren't worth it. The front office can say "put the young guys in pressure situations so they can prepare for their future" but they can't tell Watson to "sit whoever is hot if the game gets close at the end". That's just begging for trouble and there is a line you can't cross without getting the league involved.
 

fatosber

Veteran
Joined
Nov 28, 2004
Posts
378
Reaction score
36
Historically speaking, it does not matter if you're 4th or 5th worst when it comes to the lottery. Out of the 31 years of lottery these are the swinner stats:
Worst team - 16%
2nd worst - 9%
3rd worst - 23%
4th worst - 3%
5th worst - 16%
6th worst - 9%
7th worst - 6%
8th and worse - 13%.

Because luck plays such a major part in the lottery, it's not worth sacrificing developing young talent (Booker, Len) to get a better shot at number 1. Imagine the Suns lose out and end up with the third worst record and then the Celtics grab the first pick via the fourth worst record. I bet a lot of you would want more wins then.

There's no way to predict with scientific accuracy where you will land, and if we trust history and statistics, it is obviously better to be in the range of 4th worst and after then in the first three.

For tanking arguments I have to say that none of these players went to the worst record:
David Robinson 4th
Shaquille O'Neill 2nd
Chris Weber 11th
Allen Iverson 2nd
Tim Duncan 3rd
Derrick Rose 9th
Blake Griffin 2nd
John Wall 5th
Kyrie Erving 8th
Anthony Davis 3rd
Andrew Wiggins 9th




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

slinslin

Welcome to Amareca
Joined
Jun 28, 2002
Posts
16,855
Reaction score
562
Location
Hannover - Germany
It means nothing, higher is still always better.

If you roll a dice 10 times, and you roll "6" five times it still does not make 6 a more likely bet than 1.
 

sunsfan88

ASFN Icon
BANNED BY MODERATORS
Joined
Feb 1, 2010
Posts
11,660
Reaction score
844
It's the part about a coach putting in a play he wants to see fail that I have an issue with. As I said, I'd have been fine running a play for Booker or Len. I'd have used a lineup such as Knight, Booker, Goodwin, Len and Williams or Jenkins (if they were active?) and you could sell that to the world as an experience builder. But you can't run a play for a 3 point shot by a center that is 0 for 14 years from the arc.

Purposely losing can't be done by the players or the coaches, the consequences just aren't worth it. The front office can say "put the young guys in pressure situations so they can prepare for their future" but they can't tell Watson to "sit whoever is hot if the game gets close at the end". That's just begging for trouble and there is a line you can't cross without getting the league involved.

The front office could privately tell Watson that they like what they see from him and that he will be brought back next season but to may be not so much pressure on winning as just developing the young guys and trying to get someone good in the draft.

One thing I've noticed from many or all of our wins is that we always have some useless veteran playing 40+ mins. FOURTY. That's ridiculous. Usually its Ronnie Price and today it's Tucker. I don't care if Price or Tucker are about the break Wilt's 110 pt record, they shouldn't be playing more than 30 mins a night. Give the remainder of the mins to Jenkins, Goodwin or Budinger.

Actually forget useless veterans, no player should be playing 40+ mins. Booker played 43 and Knight played 41 mins tonight. That's insane. I don't even want to look at the minutes that Booker has averaged in his last 6 or 7 games, its probably close to 40. Are we trying to run Booker into the ground or develop him?

No player on this team should be playing more than 35 mins max. We're not competing for a title here to somehow play and claw out wins. We have a roster of over 10 players, if Watson doesn't know how to distribute minutes so that nobody is playing over 40 mins a night then he needs to give me a call, I can help him with that.
 
Last edited:

Phrazbit

ASFN Icon
Joined
Oct 10, 2011
Posts
20,272
Reaction score
11,342
The front office could privately tell Watson that they like what they see from him and that he will be brought back next season but to may be not so much pressure on winning as just developing the young guys and trying to get someone good in the draft.

One thing I've noticed from many or all of our wins is that we always have some useless veteran playing 40+ mins. FOURTY. That's ridiculous. Usually its Ronnie Price and today it's Tucker. I don't care if Price or Tucker are about the break Wilt's 110 pt record, they shouldn't be playing more than 30 mins a night. Give the remainder of the mins to Jenkins, Goodwin or Budinger.

Actually forget useless veterans, no player should be playing 40+ mins. Booker played 43 and Knight played 41 mins tonight. That's insane. I don't even want to look at the minutes that Booker has averaged in his last 6 or 7 games, its probably close to 40. Are we trying to run Booker into the ground or develop him?

No player on this team should be playing more than 35 mins max. We're not competing for a title here to somehow play and claw out wins. We have a roster of over 10 players, if Watson doesn't know how to distribute minutes so that nobody is playing over 40 mins a night then he needs to give me a call, I can help him with that.

Again, YOU called for Booker to get 40 minutes a night earlier this year, now it is happening and its apparently insane and irresponsible.

I'm all for the tank but if your efforts at hindsight leave you looking up your own ass.
 

Sunburn

ASFN Lifer
Joined
Oct 8, 2008
Posts
4,408
Reaction score
1,637
Location
Scottsdale
Even the Spurs tanked for the sake of a draft pick. Not smart to play veterans huge minutes and scratch out wins at this point.
 

Sunburn

ASFN Lifer
Joined
Oct 8, 2008
Posts
4,408
Reaction score
1,637
Location
Scottsdale
Historically speaking, it does not matter if you're 4th or 5th worst when it comes to the lottery. Out of the 31 years of lottery these are the swinner stats:
Worst team - 16%
2nd worst - 9%
3rd worst - 23%
4th worst - 3%
5th worst - 16%
6th worst - 9%
7th worst - 6%
8th and worse - 13%.

Because luck plays such a major part in the lottery, it's not worth sacrificing developing young talent (Booker, Len) to get a better shot at number 1. Imagine the Suns lose out and end up with the third worst record and then the Celtics grab the first pick via the fourth worst record. I bet a lot of you would want more wins then.

There's no way to predict with scientific accuracy where you will land, and if we trust history and statistics, it is obviously better to be in the range of 4th worst and after then in the first three.






Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


I dont agree with your math. Using your statistics, picks 1-3 win on average 16% of the time while picks 4 - last win on average 11.4% of the time. Besides, it's always better to have more chances to win than less, no matter how many times the long shot has won previously.
 
Last edited:

Catlover

Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 12, 2010
Posts
1,887
Reaction score
1
Location
California
Even the Spurs tanked for the sake of a draft pick. Not smart to play veterans huge minutes and scratch out wins at this point.

And if we'd subbed in another player and he hit the shot I'm pretty sure we'd have heard something about how it's "stupid to go with fresh legs instead of a tired old veteran".

I mentioned it earlier, we've won a league worst 9 games since December 9th. We're tanking just fine. Granted, we probably can't afford to win another game now if we want to hold on to 3rd but that's still doable. Other than the Philadelphia game I don't know if Brooklyn has another likely win on their schedule so we don't have much breathing room.
 

JS22

Say Vandelay!
Joined
Oct 21, 2002
Posts
5,791
Reaction score
211
When Rubio hit the FTs to go up, then next play call should have been for Len to shoot a 3 at the buzzer. Or Chandler if he hadn't fouled out by then.

Iiirc, Hornacek even did that where the play was designed for Len to shoot a 3 at the buzzer against the Hawks when Goodwin shot it instead and made it.

Yes, I'm sure Earl Watson (who is coaching for a shot at a full-time job) is going to purposely design a play intended to lose.

I'm glad I don't read the game threads all that much anymore. I'm not thrilled that they won. But the amount of complaining around here about the coaches and players not purposely trying to lose is absurd. It just doesn't happen. And I believe they've lost more games than the Lakers, Nets, etc in the same time-frame. So they're doing more than enough to lose without Watson purposely trying to sabotage his team and his job by designing a play for CHANDLER to take a 3 at the end of the game.
 
Last edited:

Catlover

Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 12, 2010
Posts
1,887
Reaction score
1
Location
California
Yep another freaking bad win, this team won't get out of its own way!

A little perspective please. Broken record time, we've had a grand total of 9 wins since December 7th. Only one other team has more losses and that's Philly. We even have more losses during that time than LA, Minnesota and Brooklyn. The only way for us to lose more is to violate every precept of competition and the league frowns on a team for out and out throwing a game.
 
Last edited:

slinslin

Welcome to Amareca
Joined
Jun 28, 2002
Posts
16,855
Reaction score
562
Location
Hannover - Germany
A little perspective please. Broken record time, we've had a grand total of 9 wins since December 7th. No other team can match our level of futility during that span: not Philly, not LA and not Minnesota. The only way to lose more is to violate every precept of competition and the league frowns on a team for out and out throwing a game.

Philly has only 9 wins on the season my friend so you are wrong.
 

nashman

ASFN Icon
Joined
May 3, 2007
Posts
10,799
Reaction score
7,771
Location
Queen Creek, AZ
I'm not big on moral victories even the vets on the team should know winning at this point does nothing but hurt the team! The fans have had to suffer thru a miserable season at least don't F up the only good thing it could produce!
 

Catlover

Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 12, 2010
Posts
1,887
Reaction score
1
Location
California
Philly has only 9 wins on the season my friend so you are wrong.

You're right, Philly only has 8 wins since December 7th which is the worst in the league. I'm not sure how I got the wrong year for them but did it right for the 3 other teams but I double checked them and I think I'm good now. Thanks for the correction.
 

Catlover

Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 12, 2010
Posts
1,887
Reaction score
1
Location
California
I'm not big on moral victories even the vets on the team should know winning at this point does nothing but hurt the team! The fans have had to suffer thru a miserable season at least don't F up the only good thing it could produce!

The veterans don't get paid to lose, they're supposed to play their hardest. Doing otherwise is a poor career choice.
 

Latest posts

Staff online

Forum statistics

Threads
552,019
Posts
5,393,932
Members
6,313
Latest member
50 year card fan
Top