Signing mid tier player slightly better than cheaper player

[bwgood77]

We've had quite a bit of discussion about signing a guy that is quite a bit more expensive and isn't considerably better than a guy we currently have who can provide 80% at a much lesser cost.

So I thought I'd post a very interesting column that talks about this.

http://grantland.com/features/nba-playo ... rtney-lee/

[Miklo]

Good read with excellent examples from all over the spectrum...

Most notable to me have been Ariza and Courtney Lee (especially in the Playoffs for Lee), and also this perspective on the Mavs taking advantage of other teams' fear is very eye opening.

I think a point that is alluded to a few times throughout the article that runs parallel to whether someone is "pretty good" or not and is just as important, is fit. I'd argue that bringing in a player who works with an existing system, or a new system tailored to the new players, is every bit as critical as the talent breakdown across the roster. If we look at a big picture, we can find plenty of examples over time of a team who followed the same strategy one season as others had before, with completely different results. The Mavs have been successful not only because they took advantage of other teams' roster choices and the talent left behind as a result, but also because they coordinated coaching and playing style appropriately. We see, and in some cases (GGreen, Plumlee, etc) the Suns benefit from, plenty of examples of teams who have the right ideas to build a roster, but pick the wrong guys or use them incorrectly.

[bwgood77]

It would have been interesting, had we made the playoffs, to see if teams could really marginalize some of our players and render them useless. Would have been good info to know as we build the team this summer and beyond.

[Miklo]

It would have been interesting, had we made the playoffs, to see if teams could really marginalize some of our players and render them useless. Would have been good info to know as we build the team this summer and beyond.

Yes, I was thinking the same thing as I read. We have decidedly gone with the "dirt cheap" option for a few key roster spots, and this article does a good job at touching on the reasons why the regular season is not a fully sufficient test of how well our choices might work out.

[MathiasPW]

Also upgrading from "dirt cheap" to "pretty good" close to the deadline may be a path to follow, depending on your chances to reach playoffs. But that would increase the risk of fit that Miklo mentioned, given the amount of (less) time the " pretty good" player would have to adapt to his teammates and the system. Shows how important that might actually be as a factor, indeed.

[Cash]

It would have been interesting, had we made the playoffs, to see if teams could really marginalize some of our players and render them useless. Would have been good info to know as we build the team this summer and beyond.

You make a very good point (as does pretty much every post in this thread). From this perspective, the ideal scenario would've been a first-round matchup against the Spurs, because no one does a better strategic/tactical job of taking away your strengths and attacking your weaknesses.