What happened to Phoenix Suns Basketball?

[bwgood77]

My opinion is the SSOL era was actually not that ground breaking and it wasnt pioneering. Cotton was the guy how made this team run. And the 92-93 team was a better offensive team at that. They even averaged more per game. What happened to Suns basketball was age, poor Front Office Management, egos, and poor drafting after 2005.

My point on wanting those bigs I mentioned before I would take Curry is that, I am a firm believer that championships are won from the inside. Not outside in like we tried in SSOL and what Golden state is trying to do now. Granted, Golden state might win this whole thing but it would be more due to Cavs injuries. And everyone has to admit Mozgov is causing problems for the golden state warriors.

Cotton was awesome and KJ was awesome and I loved that team, but it did evolve quite a bit with SSOL and floor spreading. KJ rarely shot 3s early in his career. Even Hornacek rarely shot 3s. The only nba rarely shot 3s. It was all more of an inside or mid range game. The game is simply different now.

[bwgood77]

Through 2006-2007, there were three teams that made at least 750 threes in a season: the 04-05 Suns, the 05-06 Suns, and the 06-07 Suns. Now there are 26 such teams...including all 4 conference finalists from this season.

Are you a college fan or draft guy at all? Who do you like in the draft for the Suns?

[Wannabe MEP]

Are you a college fan or draft guy at all? Who do you like in the draft for the Suns?

Yes for college, but not as much. I rarely get super deep into analyzing the draft.

I'd love a complete stretch big for the Suns. Definitely interested in Kaminsky. Don’t know a ton about the other options if he doesn’t fall to us.

[Wannabe MEP]

Just in case y'all missed it:

• The Dubs started a guy who's not quite 6'6" in thick socks. At center.
• The three guys on their roster who are 6'8" or taller (w/o shoes) played a combined 5 (totally meaningless) minutes.
• They dominated game 4 of the NBA Finals.

Damn. Too bad they couldn't convince Shaq to come out of retirement. Then they'd have the size to, ya know, actually be good. Instead of this bologna SSOL thing that can't win titles.

[Sunsdeuce]

My opinion is...Cotton was the guy how made this team run. And the 92-93 team was a better offensive team at that.

Wow. Thanks for your wrong opinions. We have numbers for this:

• Top 2 Suns teams in OffRtg were SSOL
• Top 3 in relative OffRtg were SSOL
• Top 2 in relative pace were SSOL
• '06-'07 was better than '92-'93 at OffRtg, DefRtg, relative OffRtg, relative DefRtg, SRS, and every type of Elo rating

My opinion is the SSOL era was actually not that ground breaking and it wasnt pioneering.

Through 2006-2007, there were three teams that made at least 750 threes in a season: the 04-05 Suns, the 05-06 Suns, and the 06-07 Suns. Now there are 26 such teams...including all 4 conference finalists from this season.

Wow
Thanks for your wrong opinion as well.

Who averaged more points 92-93 or 03-04?
You average more points per game your a better offensive team.....period. Bring up 3pt shots made all day, all that matters is how much you score per game! There is more to basketball than just 3pt shooting!

The 92-93 team attempted less threes and scored more points....hmm...how is that possible? Lol, because the 92-93 team was a better offensive team.

Oh I forgot the most important piece to the whole argument....the NBA was much harder to score during the 90s than its is now. All rule changes since than favor the scorer. Fact the NBA was way more of a defensive league whereas now it's just an offensive league. But keep leaving key facts out of your argument.

All people want is 3pt shooting and dunking nowadays. It's annoying.

[Wannabe MEP]

Sunsdeuce, try to take a step back and reserve any tendency to belligerently dense for a moment here. And a little bit of life advice here: next time you have no idea what the hell someone is talking about, just admit that instead of making a fool out of yourself.

Who averaged more points 92-93 or 03-04?

Well, gee. I don't know. I wasn't looking at 03-04 numbers...because that wasn't SSOL.

You average more points per game you're a better offensive team.....period.

No, actually. No one who knows anything about basketball stats thinks that. Because points per game is inferior to points per possession (which is equivalent to Offensive Rating = points per possession multiplied by 100 to produce an easier to conceptualize version of points per possession). This exists because in one game you might have 100 possessions, and in another, you might have 80. If we score 100 points on 100 possessions, that's not the same thing as scoring 100 points on 80 possessions. Different teams, different eras, etc. have different amounts of possessions. Which makes points per game a really, really poor measure of the quality of an offense. If we score 80 points on 80 possessions, that's equivalent to 100 points on 100 possessions = 1.00 ppp = 100 OffRtg.

This is universally agreed upon in the basketball world. You're just flat-out wrong.

And 3/4 SSOL teams scored more PPP/had a better OffRtg than the 92-93 team (the exception was the 05-06 team that had all those injuries):

• 09-10 -- 115.3 (1st for the Suns franchise)
• 04-05 -- 114.5 (2nd for the Suns franchise)
• 06-07 -- 113.9 (4th for the Suns franchise)
• 92-93 -- 113.3
• 05-06 -- 111.5

Oh I forgot the most important piece to the whole argument....the NBA was much harder to score during the 90s than its is now. All rule changes since than favor the scorer. Fact the NBA was way more of a defensive league whereas now it's just an offensive league. But keep leaving key facts out of your argument.

Actually, I DIRECTLY addressed that. I mentioned Relative Offensive Rating, oh intelligent one. Relative offensive rating compares a team's OffRtg relative to the rest of the league, i.e., it factors in how difficult it is to score during that era, whether that has to do with rule changes, schemes teams are adopting, etc. And by that measure, again, 3/4 SSOL teams had a superior relative offensive rating to the 92-93 team (and it was a tie with the 4th):

• 04-05 -- +8.4 (1st for the Suns franchise)
• 09-10 -- +7.7 (2nd for the Suns franchise)
• 06-07 -- +7.4 (3rd for the Suns franchise)
• 92-93 & 05-06 -- +5.3

[Sunsdeuce]

Sunsdeuce, try to take a step back and reserve any tendency to belligerently dense for a moment here. And a little bit of life advice here: next time you have no idea what the hell someone is talking about, just admit that instead of making a fool out of yourself.

Who averaged more points 92-93 or 03-04?

Well, gee. I don't know. I wasn't looking at 03-04 numbers...because that wasn't SSOL.

You average more points per game you're a better offensive team.....period.

No, actually. No one who knows anything about basketball stats thinks that. Because points per game is inferior to points per possession (which is equivalent to Offensive Rating = points per possession multiplied by 100 to produce an easier to conceptualize version of points per possession). This exists because in one game you might have 100 possessions, and in another, you might have 80. If we score 100 points on 100 possessions, that's not the same thing as scoring 100 points on 80 possessions. Different teams, different eras, etc. have different amounts of possessions. Which makes points per game a really, really poor measure of the quality of an offense. If we score 80 points on 80 possessions, that's equivalent to 100 points on 100 possessions = 1.00 ppp = 100 OffRtg.

This is universally agreed upon in the basketball world. You're just flat-out wrong.

And 3/4 SSOL teams scored more PPP/had a better OffRtg than the 92-93 team (the exception was the 05-06 team that had all those injuries):

• 09-10 -- 115.3 (1st for the Suns franchise)
• 04-05 -- 114.5 (2nd for the Suns franchise)
• 06-07 -- 113.9 (4th for the Suns franchise)
• 92-93 -- 113.3
• 05-06 -- 111.5

Oh I forgot the most important piece to the whole argument....the NBA was much harder to score during the 90s than its is now. All rule changes since than favor the scorer. Fact the NBA was way more of a defensive league whereas now it's just an offensive league. But keep leaving key facts out of your argument.

Actually, I DIRECTLY addressed that. I mentioned Relative Offensive Rating, oh intelligent one. Relative offensive rating compares a team's OffRtg relative to the rest of the league, i.e., it factors in how difficult it is to score during that era, whether that has to do with rule changes, schemes teams are adopting, etc. And by that measure, again, 3/4 SSOL teams had a superior relative offensive rating to the 92-93 team (and it was a tie with the 4th):

• 04-05 -- +8.4 (1st for the Suns franchise)
• 09-10 -- +7.7 (2nd for the Suns franchise)
• 06-07 -- +7.4 (3rd for the Suns franchise)
• 92-93 & 05-06 -- +5.3

You can bang your head all day. You know I meant the 04-05 season, I accidently put 03-04. But hey whatever. Anyway, just about everyone will say the 92-93 team was better (unless you werent alive back than, too young, or didnt watch basketball). You can use your analytics all day, won't change the fact the 92-93 was better, played against better competition, and most importantly made it to the finals.

Please explain how OffRtg factors in rule changes, schemes? Analytics is strictly a numbers game. You continue to just make up stuff as you go.

Even all the local radio stations agree the 92-93 suns were the best suns team built.

[letsgosuns]

There is no way in hell the 2004-05 team was better than the 1992-93 team. Not even close. The entire 92-93 team was like an all-star team. And like Sunsdeuce said, the league was dramatically better and it was so much more physical. Steph Curry could get punched in the face on a three point attempt in the finals in 1993 and they MIGHT call a foul. That is how much tougher the game was. The league is catered to offense now and you cannot touch the dribbler.

The reason the SSOL Suns teams did not even make the finals is because they were terrible defensive teams. Just awful. Half the time they would give up open layups just so they could run to the other end and shoot a three. It had nothing to do with offense. That kind of offense can win a title but you still have to be a good defensive team. The 1980's Lakers were a fast breaking team and they won five titles. I have said this a bunch of times on here already. Golden State was the best defensive team in the league this year, hence why they are one win away from a title. Even Gentry, Griffin, and Bell just commented on it and I posted their quotes in a different thread. And Cleveland is in the finals because whatever team Lebron is on is usually always a top defensive team, in addition to him being the best player in the world.

Suns made the finals in 1993 when they were the 9th best defense in the league. During the SSOL era, the Suns were never better than 13th, which was in 2007. See why they were never in the finals?

[Sunsdeuce]

There is no way in hell the 2004-05 team was better than the 1992-93 team. Not even close. The entire 92-93 team was like an all-star team. And like Sunsdeuce said, the league was dramatically better and it was so much more physical. Steph Curry could get punched in the face on a three point attempt in the finals in 1993 and they MIGHT call a foul. That is how much tougher the game was. The league is catered to offense now and you cannot touch the dribbler.

The reason the SSOL Suns teams did not even make the finals is because they were terrible defensive teams. Just awful. Half the time they would give up open layups just so they could run to the other end and shoot a three. It had nothing to do with offense. That kind of offense can win a title but you still have to be a good defensive team. The 1980's Lakers were a fast breaking team and they won five titles. I have said this a bunch of times on here already. Golden State was the best defensive team in the league this year, hence why they are one win away from a title. Even Gentry, Griffin, and Bell just commented on it and I posted their quotes in a different thread. And Cleveland is in the finals because whatever team Lebron is on is usually always a top defensive team, in addition to him being the best player in the world.

Suns made the finals in 1993 when they were the 9th best defense in the league. During the SSOL era, the Suns were never better than 13th, which was in 2007. See why they were never in the finals?

That's exactly what I was trying to say. People can quote all these stats but it doesn't reflect reality. Reality says 92-93 team was stacked and easily the best team PHX has ever had.

[Scutt]

The reason the SSOL Suns teams did not even make the finals is because they were terrible defensive teams. Just awful. Half the time they would give up open layups just so they could run to the other end and shoot a three. It had nothing to do with offense.

Rebounding and defense do not necessarily go hand and hand. Those Suns teams were not that terrible at defense, they just needed better rebounding. Not to mention the fact, those teams always had health and depth issues too.

[Sunsdeuce]

The reason the SSOL Suns teams did not even make the finals is because they were terrible defensive teams. Just awful. Half the time they would give up open layups just so they could run to the other end and shoot a three. It had nothing to do with offense.

Rebounding and defense do not necessarily go hand and hand. Those Suns teams were not that terrible at defense, they just needed better rebounding. Not to mention the fact, those teams always had health and depth issues too.

Well to be fair, the 90s teams had health issues too. Cedric breaks his leg before the finals, manning blows out his knee, and KJ had his fair share of injuries. Off the top of my head, I think KJ only played something like 60 games in 92-93.

[Wannabe MEP]

That's exactly what I was trying to say. People can quote all these stats but it doesn't reflect [my version of] reality.

Well sh*t. Let's all go sing Kumbaya and talk about how these young whippersnappers and their 'rithmetic's a buncha hogwash. We don't need no goddam facts messin' with our hoopinions. We know how in the good ol' days players were invincible demi-gods like Hercules, and they would crush today's players between their toes. And back then, they would punch each other in the face & the refs would just let 'em have at it. [And we'd walk 20 miles, uphill both ways...]

Reality says 92-93 team was stacked and easily the best team PHX has ever had.

Ok, you know what, it doesn't matter. The 92-93 was very good. The SSOL teams were very good. None of them was good enough to win a championship. It doesn't matter which of those non-championship teams was the best according to me, you, pundits, or the numbers. That was never the point of this discussion. In fact, 92-93 was always irrelevant, because this thread was discussing recent history.

So let's start again with some things (I think???) we can all agree on:

• The SSOL teams were really, really good offensively. (It's irrelevant how good they were relative to other eras: they were excellent relative to the teams at the time.)
• The SSOL teams were incredibly unique at the time they played.
• The SSOL teams were not all that far from winning a championship. The West was loaded those years, so had they gotten through the West, they had a very good shot in the championship. And they were very close to winning the West more than once (injuries...Horry hip-check & suspensions...Kobe airball leads to Artest putback...Duncan knocking down 3s...).
• The fact that they DIDN'T win a championship has nothing to do with the offense: they weren't quite good enough in terms of defense, rebounding, or both.

Sunsdeuce, do you agree with all of those points? If not, let me know which ones. I'm happy to hash through them in more depth.
____________________________________________________________________________________________

So here's my extension of those ideas:

• If we're close to a championship
• with a unique offensive style
• and the offense is not the problem
• can we maintain that fundamental offensive structure AND upgrade the defense/rebounding to the point where we could win a title???

I believe the answer is, "Absolutely!!!" I've believed that for several years now. And I've argued for that on this board for years.

The difference now, though, is that it's being proven. Really, the last five championships (including this one) have incorporated a lot of SSOL principles. But GS in particular is the direct descendent, or evolution, of SSOL. Golden State is what people like myself have been saying was possible with SSOL principles...if you just got the right personnel and made the right adjustments to improve on defense/rebounding.

[letsgosuns]

There is not one team I have seen that truly incorporates the SSOL offense the way the Suns did it. Their offense was so incredible yet their defense was equally terrible. It really was. If you watch full games of those Suns teams, not just highlights, you will say to yourself, "what the hell is this team doing on defense?" Besides Marion, Bell, and Kurt Thomas, the rest of the team was asleep at the wheel. It is why the Suns would consistently race out to huge leads and then lose the leads. I remember being at the Suns versus Mavericks game in 2005-06 at the very beginning of the season. The Suns had the game won so many times and kept on blowing it over and over again. They just left Dirk and Terry wide open and could not get any stops when it mattered. You will never win in a million years if all you do is play offense and cannot play defense.

That is why no team plays like the SSOL Suns. That team was 100% offense and no defense. Good individual defenders but the team defense was not there. That is why Duncan, Ginobili, Parker, Bryant, and Nowitzki had several of the greatest games of their careers against the SSOL Suns. No defense whatsoever.

The Warriors are showing the world what happens when you play fast but also PLAY DEFENSE. One win from winning the championship. Regardless of if they win it or not, they already have gone further than the SSOL Suns ever did.

[Wannabe MEP]

There is not one team I have seen that truly incorporates the SSOL offense the way the Suns did it.

Ya know what's crazy? No two teams will ever be exactly alike. Mind-blowing, right? So...you're right.

But GS uses a ton of the same principles, principles that were far from in vogue before SSOL.

Their offense was so incredible yet their defense was equally terrible. It really was.

Their defense was not terrible. It was mediocre. It fact, it was quite literally about as average as possible. Over the course of the three Marion years, the average DRtg for the Suns was 106.2. The median for the league during that span was 106.6, and the mean was 106.23. So the Suns defense was just slightly better than both the median and the mean: completely average.

But I'm in complete agreement that those teams needed to change/tweak things to improve defensively in order to win championships. Especially to have a *sustainable* championship-caliber team, you really need a top-10 defense, which the SSOL teams never had.

[letsgosuns]

There is not one team I have seen that truly incorporates the SSOL offense the way the Suns did it.

Ya know what's crazy? No two teams will ever be exactly alike. Mind-blowing, right? So...you're right.

But GS uses a ton of the same principles, principles that were far from in vogue before SSOL.

Their offense was so incredible yet their defense was equally terrible. It really was.

Their defense was not terrible. It was mediocre. It fact, it was quite literally about as average as possible. Over the course of the three Marion years, the average DRtg for the Suns was 106.2. The median for the league during that span was 106.6, and the mean was 106.23. So the Suns defense was just slightly better than both the median and the mean: completely average.

But I'm in complete agreement that those teams needed to change/tweak things to improve defensively in order to win championships. Especially to have a *sustainable* championship-caliber team, you really need a top-10 defense, which the SSOL teams never had.

Stats aside, just by watching those teams and being at so many of the games in person, I thought the defense sucked.