What happened to Phoenix Suns Basketball?

[bwgood77]

I hear variations of this all the time: "Run-&-Gun might work in the regular season, but not in the playoffs. In the playoffs, you gotta be able to slow it down...grind it out...pound the paint." People on this board say it, pundits say it, smart guys like...Charles Barkley say it.

Let's take a look at some top-tier teams that play traditional frontcourts: Memphis with Zach Randolph & Marc Gasol, LAC with Blake Griffin & DeAndre Jordan, and Chicago under Thibs with Joakim Noah (+Pau, Boozer, Taj).

Those combos have been together for 16 seasons altogether.
2 total conference finals appearances. (0 finals appearances.)

Nash + undersized/spaced frontcourt? 4 seasons together. (2004-2007, again 2009-2010)
3 conference finals appearances.

Of course then some would bring up "well I'm talking about championships" and the lakers in 2010 were traditional for the most part, but the Spurs in 2005 had Horry who was a stretch and obviously Dallas who beat us had Dirk, but I guess Miami won it, though I'm not sure they should have.

There is obviously a reason most all the teams want or have a stretch 4. I mean the Spurs couldn't play Splitter last year because they stopped guarding him. If you have two bigs in the middle, they can double team much easier and get back to the other guy if need be. You have Boris hanging out at the 3 pt line, you can't double team Duncan or you have a big risk.

[Wannabe MEP]

Of course then some would bring up "well I'm talking about championships"

Mostly traditional (i.e., more than 2/3 traditional)
Mostly non-traditional (i.e., less than 1/3 traditional)
Significant use of both (i.e., between 1/3 and 2/3 traditional)

Past 5 seasons

2015 -- Warriors or Cavs: Majority non-traditional for both teams, particularly Warriors
2014 -- Spurs: Majority non-traditional with Diaw/Bonner/Kawhi at the 4, especially in the finals
2013 -- Heat: 100% non-traditional; tons of five-out with Bosh at the 5
2012 -- Heat: Vast majority non-traditional (similar to 2013, but not quite as aggressive)
2011 -- Mavs: 100% non-traditional; mostly Dirk at the 4

Prior to 2011

2010 -- Lakers: Odom-Gasol was best & most-used frontcourt
2009 -- Lakers: Odom-Gasol was best & most-used frontcourt
2008 -- Celtics: Mostly traditional, but used Posey-Garnett frontcourt for critical stretches
2007 -- Spurs: Significant minutes with Horry/Finley at the 4
2006 -- Heat: Significant minutes with Walker/Posey at the 4
2005 -- Spurs: Significant minutes with Horry at the 4

Clear trend toward more spacing/small-ball, a la SSOL. But even championship teams from a few years ago known for their traditional frontcourts used stretch-4s/small-ball in significant doses -- at least as an important curveball.

[Sunsdeuce]

Of course then some would bring up "well I'm talking about championships"

Mostly traditional (i.e., more than 2/3 traditional)
Mostly non-traditional (i.e., less than 1/3 traditional)
Significant use of both (i.e., between 1/3 and 2/3 traditional)

Past 5 seasons

2015 -- Warriors or Cavs: Majority non-traditional for both teams, particularly Warriors
2014 -- Spurs: Majority non-traditional with Diaw/Bonner/Kawhi at the 4, especially in the finals
2013 -- Heat: 100% non-traditional; tons of five-out with Bosh at the 5
2012 -- Heat: Vast majority non-traditional (similar to 2013, but not quite as aggressive)
2011 -- Mavs: 100% non-traditional; mostly Dirk at the 4

Prior to 2011

2010 -- Lakers: Odom-Gasol was best & most-used frontcourt
2009 -- Lakers: Odom-Gasol was best & most-used frontcourt
2008 -- Celtics: Mostly traditional, but used Posey-Garnett frontcourt for critical stretches
2007 -- Spurs: Significant minutes with Horry/Finley at the 4
2006 -- Heat: Significant minutes with Walker/Posey at the 4
2005 -- Spurs: Significant minutes with Horry at the 4

Clear trend toward more spacing/small-ball, a la SSOL. But even championship teams from a few years ago known for their traditional frontcourts used stretch-4s/small-ball in significant doses -- at least as an important curveball.

2015 -- Warriors or Cavs: Majority non-traditional for both teams, particularly Warriors.....Warriors do play tradional players at each position...mayb less at center. Cavs are very traditonal but are flexible because of Lebron.
2014 -- Spurs: Majority non-traditional with Diaw/Bonner/Kawhi at the 4, especially in the finals .....wrong(Duncan is a center...period, the spurs play 100% traditional while occasionally playing small)
2013 -- Heat: 100% non-traditional; tons of five-out with Bosh at the 5....They basically had no center so yes they played non-traditional...although they used birdman as much as possible at the 5.
2012 -- Heat: Vast majority non-traditional (similar to 2013, but not quite as aggressive)
2011 -- Mavs: 100% non-traditional; mostly Dirk at the 4......wrong.....Umm Dirk is a 4 and Chandler is a 5. how is that not traditional?

Im not even going to bring up your "Prior to 2011" list because you conviently left out players to support your argument. You also left out players on the other list. Ever heard of a guy named Shaq? How about a guy named Duncan? Or Bogut, or Splitter, or Mozgov, Love.

I would take a Shaq(in his prime) led team or Duncan (in his prime) or a Hakeem (in his prime) over Curry led team any day.

[saintEscaton]

Nothing is happening. That may be the problem: Stagnation

[bwgood77]

Of course then some would bring up "well I'm talking about championships"

Mostly traditional (i.e., more than 2/3 traditional)
Mostly non-traditional (i.e., less than 1/3 traditional)
Significant use of both (i.e., between 1/3 and 2/3 traditional)

Past 5 seasons

2015 -- Warriors or Cavs: Majority non-traditional for both teams, particularly Warriors
2014 -- Spurs: Majority non-traditional with Diaw/Bonner/Kawhi at the 4, especially in the finals
2013 -- Heat: 100% non-traditional; tons of five-out with Bosh at the 5
2012 -- Heat: Vast majority non-traditional (similar to 2013, but not quite as aggressive)
2011 -- Mavs: 100% non-traditional; mostly Dirk at the 4

Prior to 2011

2010 -- Lakers: Odom-Gasol was best & most-used frontcourt
2009 -- Lakers: Odom-Gasol was best & most-used frontcourt
2008 -- Celtics: Mostly traditional, but used Posey-Garnett frontcourt for critical stretches
2007 -- Spurs: Significant minutes with Horry/Finley at the 4
2006 -- Heat: Significant minutes with Walker/Posey at the 4
2005 -- Spurs: Significant minutes with Horry at the 4

Clear trend toward more spacing/small-ball, a la SSOL. But even championship teams from a few years ago known for their traditional frontcourts used stretch-4s/small-ball in significant doses -- at least as an important curveball.

2015 -- Warriors or Cavs: Majority non-traditional for both teams, particularly Warriors.....Warriors do play tradional players at each position...mayb less at center. Cavs are very traditonal but are flexible because of Lebron.
2014 -- Spurs: Majority non-traditional with Diaw/Bonner/Kawhi at the 4, especially in the finals .....wrong(Duncan is a center...period, the spurs play 100% traditional while occasionally playing small)
2013 -- Heat: 100% non-traditional; tons of five-out with Bosh at the 5....They basically had no center so yes they played non-traditional...although they used birdman as much as possible at the 5.
2012 -- Heat: Vast majority non-traditional (similar to 2013, but not quite as aggressive)
2011 -- Mavs: 100% non-traditional; mostly Dirk at the 4......wrong.....Umm Dirk is a 4 and Chandler is a 5. how is that not traditional?

Im not even going to bring up your "Prior to 2011" list because you conviently left out players to support your argument. You also left out players on the other list. Ever heard of a guy named Shaq? How about a guy named Duncan? Or Bogut, or Splitter, or Mozgov, Love.

I would take a Shaq(in his prime) led team or Duncan (in his prime) or a Hakeem (in his prime) over Curry led team any day.

Well traditional fours are not 3 pt shooters. The following players are not traditional power forwards, at least in this discussion: Kevin Love, LeBron (sometimes they play Tristan and Mozgov but more often they play one with LeBron and three shooters), Dirk, Diaw, Bonner, Kawhi, Draymond Green, etc.

It just means that these guys are more used as floor spreaders (unless, in LeBron's case he basically acts as point forward and they have three shooters)...typically one of Kyrie or LeBron will spread the floor if the other one drives.

Los Soles point is more that the traditional front courts are more like the Grizzlies, with two bigs inside, Utah, Indiana, the Clips, Portland, etc, which is what Lowe's article which I referenced is talking about.

It talks about how more teams have moved to being able to spread the floor with their 4 instead of the older traditional teams like Phil Jackson's teams or Boston in 2008 (though they sometimes used KG at 5 and Pierce at the 4 to spread)....the only one I might argue is the Lakers with Odom at the 4....I can't recall that he had that much range and Phil Jackson has typically had more traditional lineups, though with Horry at the 4 he was certainly a floor stretcher....same with when he was in SA.

[Wannabe MEP]

Well traditional fours are not 3 pt shooters...[and]...It just means that these guys are more used as floor spreaders...[and]...Los Soles point is more that the traditional front courts are more like the Grizzlies, with two bigs inside, Utah, Indiana, the Clips, Portland, etc, which is what Lowe's article which I referenced is talking about.

It's not *just* about shooting; I think about size, mobility, and just perimeter vs paint orientation in general. But shooting is the most obvious, easily quantifiable piece. I don't have access to SportVU data to add more objective layers.

the only one I might argue is the Lakers with Odom at the 4

1) Yeah, there's definitely some gray area in this.
2) Perhaps "traditional" vs "non-traditional" is not the best categorization/wording. I'm not sure what would be better.
3) We all agree that there's a clear difference between a Gasol-Bynum lineup and a Marion-Amare lineup. Now, Odom-Gasol falls somewhere in between. I'm placing it on the "non-traditional" side, for a few reasons:

• Odom attempted 35 and 41 threes during those two playoff runs. Significant.
• I thought Odom had a classic SF skillset: he operated mostly from the perimeter. He seems similar to a lot of modern SF/PF "tweeners" that play primarily PF, but with SF skills, mobility, etc. -- like Josh Smith and Shawn Marion. I'm calling that "non-traditional."
• Part of it is Gasol: he's a classic PF, but playing center next to Odom. So, at least in "traditional" positioning, I view Odom-Gasol as an SF/PF tweener beside a PF. That's a "non-traditional" frontcourt the way I'm using those terms.

At the very least, it's obvious that there's a very clear difference between a Gasol-Bynum lineup and an Odom-Gasol. Many prefer the Gasol-Bynum lineup, arguing, basically, that bigger is better. I'm arguing instead for Odom-Gasol type lineups (however we categorize them).

I still think frontcourt size is valuable, but I'm incredibly wary about sacrificing mobility and/or spacing. Here's a sampling of my perspective:

- I'd prefer Marion-Amare over Amare-Shaq.
- I'd prefer Odom-Gasol over Gasol-Bynum.
- I'd prefer Lou-Frye over Frye-Lopez.
- I'd prefer Draymond-Bogut over David Lee-Bogut.

That last one was an enormous difference between Mark Jackson and Steve Kerr, and I'd argue that it's a major reason for the Warriors' massive improvement from last year. Not a lot of coaches would have played a 6' 5.75" second rounder at PF in the place of David Lee and his $15 million -- and then told him to shoot lots of threes. That's a big shift in NBA mindset. That's a coach looking at Draymond Green through Marion glasses.

[bwgood77]

Well traditional fours are not 3 pt shooters...[and]...It just means that these guys are more used as floor spreaders...[and]...Los Soles point is more that the traditional front courts are more like the Grizzlies, with two bigs inside, Utah, Indiana, the Clips, Portland, etc, which is what Lowe's article which I referenced is talking about.

It's not *just* about shooting; I think about size, mobility, and just perimeter vs paint orientation in general. But shooting is the most obvious, easily quantifiable piece. I don't have access to SportVU data to add more objective layers.

the only one I might argue is the Lakers with Odom at the 4

1) Yeah, there's definitely some gray area in this.
2) Perhaps "traditional" vs "non-traditional" is not the best categorization/wording. I'm not sure what would be better.
3) We all agree that there's a clear difference between a Gasol-Bynum lineup and a Marion-Amare lineup. Now, Odom-Gasol falls somewhere in between. I'm placing it on the "non-traditional" side, for a few reasons:

• Odom attempted 35 and 41 threes during those two playoff runs. Significant.
• I thought Odom had a classic SF skillset: he operated mostly from the perimeter. He seems similar to a lot of modern SF/PF "tweeners" that play primarily PF, but with SF skills, mobility, etc. -- like Josh Smith and Shawn Marion. I'm calling that "non-traditional."
• Part of it is Gasol: he's a classic PF, but playing center next to Odom. So, at least in "traditional" positioning, I view Odom-Gasol as an SF/PF tweener beside a PF. That's a "non-traditional" frontcourt the way I'm using those terms.

At the very least, it's obvious that there's a very clear difference between a Gasol-Bynum lineup and an Odom-Gasol. Many prefer the Gasol-Bynum lineup, arguing, basically, that bigger is better. I'm arguing instead for Odom-Gasol type lineups (however we categorize them).

I still think frontcourt size is valuable, but I'm incredibly wary about sacrificing mobility and/or spacing. Here's a sampling of my perspective:

- I'd prefer Marion-Amare over Amare-Shaq.
- I'd prefer Odom-Gasol over Gasol-Bynum.
- I'd prefer Lou-Frye over Frye-Lopez.
- I'd prefer Draymond-Bogut over David Lee-Bogut.

That last one was an enormous difference between Mark Jackson and Steve Kerr, and I'd argue that it's a major reason for the Warriors' massive improvement from last year. Not a lot of coaches would have played a 6' 5.75" second rounder at PF in the place of David Lee and his $15 million -- and then told him to shoot lots of threes. That's a big shift in NBA mindset. That's a coach looking at Draymond Green through Marion glasses.

I agree. I hand't realized Odom shot that many threes, but I knew Phil said that the Gasol/Odom frontcourt was more effective than having Bynum in there for the majority of time in the playoffs. Odom is certainly a tweener but I hadn't thought of him as a stretch four. I guess kind of like Looney. I hadn't really though of Looney as a stretch four watching him at UCLA, but he can shoot 3s, and he has been compare to Odom.

This is also why D'Antoni had problems with the Gasol/Howard frontcourt because Gasol hated playing away from the basket but D'Antoni knew the lane shouldn't be clogged, thus the conundrum and upset Gasol.

Have you researched the Bulls, and are they more effective with a Gasol/Mirotic frontcourt than playing Gasol/Gibson?

The Suns were effective and Amare was particularly effective because Marion often drew his defender out to the corner, but obviously you know this.

Len is going to be more effective on offensive if he doesn't have to deal to deal with two defenders in the middle and would likely be best playing with that Love/Anderson type guy.

[Wannabe MEP]

Have you researched the Bulls, and are they more effective with a Gasol/Mirotic frontcourt than playing Gasol/Gibson?

Every frontcourt combo that included Mirotic was better than any combo of Noah/Gasol/Gibson during the regular season. But I don't know how much that was influenced by context (e.g., Mirotic playing primarily against bench units).

[Wannabe MEP]

So now, in response to the OP's original question: What happened to Phoenix Suns Basketball?

1) We gave up too soon.

As I've been talking about in this thread, the very best teams are trending toward what the Suns were already doing a decade ago. Most teams have reinvented themselves to become more like SSOL. But while everyone was trying to become more like us, we were trying to become more like them. We we trying to kill what made us unique.

With SSOL, we were the pioneers breaking into new territory that had incredible promise. We gave it up before we had a chance to work out the kinks. We left it to other teams to refine what we invented. Now Golden State has found the perfect formula, one that we came so close to discovering.

We were really, really good, by the way. We only had four seasons with Nash + small-ball frontcourt ('04-'07 and '09-'10). In those four seasons, we were about as good as you can be without getting a title:

• We averaged 57.75 wins in the regular season.
• We made the Western Conference Finals 3 times.
• By team rating metrics like Elo and SRS, those teams were truly elite — i.e. better than many teams that won titles in weaker seasons. For example, according to SRS, a couple of those teams were better than any Miami Heat team ever. And by peak Elo rating, those are the #1, #2, #3, and #5 seasons in Suns history.
• Among playoff scalps we took: Kobe-Lakers twice, Dirk-Mavs, and the Spurs with the big 3 (sweep). All of those teams would go on to win a title within a few years with the same foundational players.
• Our playoff losses were to the eventual NBA champion 3 times.

We had some critical injuries, fluke events, and poor timing (i.e., we were at our best when the Western Conference was loaded). We quite possibly could have won a championship in a different year — weaker field and/or a couple bounces/injuries/calls go our way — with the EXACT SAME TEAM. Let alone if we had made the right tweaks.

2) We undervalued continuity.

The Spurs went 6 seasons in a row without a title, as their core trio got older and older. The pundits wrote them off. They got swept by a Suns team they had owned a few years prior. They couldn’t keep their core together and make any splashy moves…so they didn’t make any splashy moves: they didn’t trade for a star, nab a marquee free agent, or pick up any lottery picks. Most of their roster additions were 2nd rounders, late 1st rounders, and other teams’ castoffs. The biggest pickup they got was a 15th pick, which they got by trading a previous 26th pick.

The Spurs didn’t panic. They kept working on their system, developing role players, and tweaking the roster. And then they made it back to the finals. And then they won a championship.

The Suns? We panicked and blew it up when we hit rough patches.

• Do you realize the Nash-Marion-Amare core played only TWO full seasons together?!?
• The Suns were first in the West when we traded Marion in early 2008.
• In 2010 we had BY FAR the best bench the Suns had had in years. So we promptly shredded it.
• In 2014 we had one of the youngest, cheapest, and best starting lineups in the NBA. (They were the 5th best lineup out of the 73 most-used units from January on for that season.) So then we pissed off four of those players and got rid of three of them. The only one we didn’t manage to piss off was just happy to be in the NBA after his jail time and his years in the D-League/Ukraine/Israel/Italy/Germany/Greece.

3) We failed to recognize our most valuable elements.

Nash-Marion was our original foundation. We miscalculated and thought it was Nash-Amare…even though we had made it to the conference finals with Amare in street clothes. Swap Amare’s contract/value for someone who could defend and function in our run-&-gun style (Garnett?!? ), and we have one of the best cores in NBA history.

2007 RAPM puts the theoretical combo of Nash-Marion-Garnett at +19.8, better than ’07 Parker-Manu-Timmy (+17.7), ’13 Wade-LeBron-Bosh (+16.5), ’08 Ray-Pierce-Garnett (+14.4), ’09 Kobe-Odom-Gasol (+15.9), any ‘90s Bulls combos, etc. The closest challenger I’ve found was from this year’s Golden State team: Curry-Green-Bogut at +19.65.

Also…

• 3 different times after a great season with a young core (2007, 2010, and 2014), we made moves counter to SSOL, making us bigger & slower and/or hurting our spacing. Each time we got significantly worse.
• It was one thing to let Amare go in 2010. That was quite understandable from a price-value standpoint. It was quite another to also gut the incredibly successful bench and force a dramatic reinvention of our style (by getting bigger and slower).
• We let Frye go in 2014 even though the Dragic-Frye combo was killing it, RAPM said Frye was one of the most valuable players in the league, and he had been key to all of our best basketball for years. We immediately got worse.
• Dragic-Frye killed it together in 2009-2010 and then again in 2013-2014. They could have EASILY been playing together for the past SIX SEASONS, and beyond. Nope. They got two seasons together total.

[Miklo]

Of course then some would bring up "well I'm talking about championships"

Mostly traditional (i.e., more than 2/3 traditional)
Mostly non-traditional (i.e., less than 1/3 traditional)
Significant use of both (i.e., between 1/3 and 2/3 traditional)

Past 5 seasons

2015 -- Warriors or Cavs: Majority non-traditional for both teams, particularly Warriors
2014 -- Spurs: Majority non-traditional with Diaw/Bonner/Kawhi at the 4, especially in the finals
2013 -- Heat: 100% non-traditional; tons of five-out with Bosh at the 5
2012 -- Heat: Vast majority non-traditional (similar to 2013, but not quite as aggressive)
2011 -- Mavs: 100% non-traditional; mostly Dirk at the 4

Prior to 2011

2010 -- Lakers: Odom-Gasol was best & most-used frontcourt
2009 -- Lakers: Odom-Gasol was best & most-used frontcourt
2008 -- Celtics: Mostly traditional, but used Posey-Garnett frontcourt for critical stretches
2007 -- Spurs: Significant minutes with Horry/Finley at the 4
2006 -- Heat: Significant minutes with Walker/Posey at the 4
2005 -- Spurs: Significant minutes with Horry at the 4

Clear trend toward more spacing/small-ball, a la SSOL. But even championship teams from a few years ago known for their traditional frontcourts used stretch-4s/small-ball in significant doses -- at least as an important curveball.

I never looked at the championship pattern like this - very interesting.

[bwgood77]

Of course then some would bring up "well I'm talking about championships"

Mostly traditional (i.e., more than 2/3 traditional)
Mostly non-traditional (i.e., less than 1/3 traditional)
Significant use of both (i.e., between 1/3 and 2/3 traditional)

Past 5 seasons

2015 -- Warriors or Cavs: Majority non-traditional for both teams, particularly Warriors
2014 -- Spurs: Majority non-traditional with Diaw/Bonner/Kawhi at the 4, especially in the finals
2013 -- Heat: 100% non-traditional; tons of five-out with Bosh at the 5
2012 -- Heat: Vast majority non-traditional (similar to 2013, but not quite as aggressive)
2011 -- Mavs: 100% non-traditional; mostly Dirk at the 4

Prior to 2011

2010 -- Lakers: Odom-Gasol was best & most-used frontcourt
2009 -- Lakers: Odom-Gasol was best & most-used frontcourt
2008 -- Celtics: Mostly traditional, but used Posey-Garnett frontcourt for critical stretches
2007 -- Spurs: Significant minutes with Horry/Finley at the 4
2006 -- Heat: Significant minutes with Walker/Posey at the 4
2005 -- Spurs: Significant minutes with Horry at the 4

Clear trend toward more spacing/small-ball, a la SSOL. But even championship teams from a few years ago known for their traditional frontcourts used stretch-4s/small-ball in significant doses -- at least as an important curveball.

I never looked at the championship pattern like this - very interesting.

Los Soles always puts out GREAT info.

[bwgood77]

So now, in response to the OP's original question: What happened to Phoenix Suns Basketball?

1) We gave up too soon.

As I've been talking about in this thread, the very best teams are trending toward what the Suns were already doing a decade ago. Most teams have reinvented themselves to become more like SSOL. But while everyone was trying to become more like us, we were trying to become more like them. We we trying to kill what made us unique.

With SSOL, we were the pioneers breaking into new territory that had incredible promise. We gave it up before we had a chance to work out the kinks. We left it to other teams to refine what we invented. Now Golden State has found the perfect formula, one that we came so close to discovering.

We were really, really good, by the way. We only had four seasons with Nash + small-ball frontcourt ('04-'07 and '09-'10). In those four seasons, we were about as good as you can be without getting a title:

• We averaged 57.75 wins in the regular season.
• We made the Western Conference Finals 3 times.
• By team rating metrics like Elo and SRS, those teams were truly elite — i.e. better than many teams that won titles in weaker seasons. For example, according to SRS, a couple of those teams were better than any Miami Heat team ever. And by peak Elo rating, those are the #1, #2, #3, and #5 seasons in Suns history.
• Among playoff scalps we took: Kobe-Lakers twice, Dirk-Mavs, and the Spurs with the big 3 (sweep). All of those teams would go on to win a title within a few years with the same foundational players.
• Our playoff losses were to the eventual NBA champion 3 times.

We had some critical injuries, fluke events, and poor timing (i.e., we were at our best when the Western Conference was loaded). We quite possibly could have won a championship in a different year — weaker field and/or a couple bounces/injuries/calls go our way — with the EXACT SAME TEAM. Let alone if we had made the right tweaks.

2) We undervalued continuity.

The Spurs went 6 seasons in a row without a title, as their core trio got older and older. The pundits wrote them off. They got swept by a Suns team they had owned a few years prior. They couldn’t keep their core together and make any splashy moves…so they didn’t make any splashy moves: they didn’t trade for a star, nab a marquee free agent, or pick up any lottery picks. Most of their roster additions were 2nd rounders, late 1st rounders, and other teams’ castoffs. The biggest pickup they got was a 15th pick, which they got by trading a previous 26th pick.

The Spurs didn’t panic. They kept working on their system, developing role players, and tweaking the roster. And then they made it back to the finals. And then they won a championship.

The Suns? We panicked and blew it up when we hit rough patches.

• Do you realize the Nash-Marion-Amare core played only TWO full seasons together?!?
• The Suns were first in the West when we traded Marion in early 2008.
• In 2010 we had BY FAR the best bench the Suns had had in years. So we promptly shredded it.
• In 2014 we had one of the youngest, cheapest, and best starting lineups in the NBA. (They were the 5th best lineup out of the 73 most-used units from January on for that season.) So then we pissed off four of those players and got rid of three of them. The only one we didn’t manage to piss off was just happy to be in the NBA after his jail time and his years in the D-League/Ukraine/Israel/Italy/Germany/Greece.

3) We failed to recognize our most valuable elements.

Nash-Marion was our original foundation. We miscalculated and thought it was Nash-Amare…even though we had made it to the conference finals with Amare in street clothes. Swap Amare’s contract/value for someone who could defend and function in our run-&-gun style (Garnett?!? ), and we have one of the best cores in NBA history.

2007 RAPM puts the theoretical combo of Nash-Marion-Garnett at +19.8, better than ’07 Parker-Manu-Timmy (+17.7), ’13 Wade-LeBron-Bosh (+16.5), ’08 Ray-Pierce-Garnett (+14.4), ’09 Kobe-Odom-Gasol (+15.9), any ‘90s Bulls combos, etc. The closest challenger I’ve found was from this year’s Golden State team: Curry-Green-Bogut at +19.65.

Also…

• 3 different times after a great season with a young core (2007, 2010, and 2014), we made moves counter to SSOL, making us bigger & slower and/or hurting our spacing. Each time we got significantly worse.
• It was one thing to let Amare go in 2010. That was quite understandable from a price-value standpoint. It was quite another to also gut the incredibly successful bench and force a dramatic reinvention of our style (by getting bigger and slower).
• We let Frye go in 2014 even though the Dragic-Frye combo was killing it, RAPM said Frye was one of the most valuable players in the league, and he had been key to all of our best basketball for years. We immediately got worse.
• Dragic-Frye killed it together in 2009-2010 and then again in 2013-2014. They could have EASILY been playing together for the past SIX SEASONS, and beyond. Nope. They got two seasons together total.

This is frustrating to read, but of course awesome data, and I hated the trade for Shaq because we were still doing great that year...I remember when Shaq went to Miami I couldn't believe he got 5 years and $100 million...I thought (those last two years are going to be painful) and then I watched our team trade for those last two years. The Porter hire was obviously a bad move. It sucks that Kerr learned his mistakes as a first time NBA exec and then took that to make it successful elsewhere. Had he known then what he knows now we would have been successful.

Now we are starting over, and we had the most successful pick and roll in the league to surprise teams and that is gone. I understand knowing we likely were not equipped to win a championship with that, but it gave hope to so many fans that so many people blame Hornacek for the problems of our young roster now which is misguided. Those two MADE us successful last year. Do those players have weaknesses? Yes. But if you know anything about business you focus on maximizing strengths of people to perform well, not continuing to point out their weaknesses....it empowers them to be successful and you surround them with players that compensate for their weaknesses.

I am not completely sure if McD understand this or not. I trust that he is a good talent evaluator and can draft a good player, but you need to look at the big picture and who works well together. It takes a long time to build that, and when you continue to shuffle it, it is almost impossible.

[Revived]

Of course then some would bring up "well I'm talking about championships"

Mostly traditional (i.e., more than 2/3 traditional)
Mostly non-traditional (i.e., less than 1/3 traditional)
Significant use of both (i.e., between 1/3 and 2/3 traditional)

Past 5 seasons

2015 -- Warriors or Cavs: Majority non-traditional for both teams, particularly Warriors
2014 -- Spurs: Majority non-traditional with Diaw/Bonner/Kawhi at the 4, especially in the finals
2013 -- Heat: 100% non-traditional; tons of five-out with Bosh at the 5
2012 -- Heat: Vast majority non-traditional (similar to 2013, but not quite as aggressive)
2011 -- Mavs: 100% non-traditional; mostly Dirk at the 4

Prior to 2011

2010 -- Lakers: Odom-Gasol was best & most-used frontcourt
2009 -- Lakers: Odom-Gasol was best & most-used frontcourt
2008 -- Celtics: Mostly traditional, but used Posey-Garnett frontcourt for critical stretches
2007 -- Spurs: Significant minutes with Horry/Finley at the 4
2006 -- Heat: Significant minutes with Walker/Posey at the 4
2005 -- Spurs: Significant minutes with Horry at the 4

Clear trend toward more spacing/small-ball, a la SSOL. But even championship teams from a few years ago known for their traditional frontcourts used stretch-4s/small-ball in significant doses -- at least as an important curveball.

2015 -- Warriors or Cavs: Majority non-traditional for both teams, particularly Warriors.....Warriors do play tradional players at each position...mayb less at center. Cavs are very traditonal but are flexible because of Lebron.
2014 -- Spurs: Majority non-traditional with Diaw/Bonner/Kawhi at the 4, especially in the finals .....wrong(Duncan is a center...period, the spurs play 100% traditional while occasionally playing small)
2013 -- Heat: 100% non-traditional; tons of five-out with Bosh at the 5....They basically had no center so yes they played non-traditional...although they used birdman as much as possible at the 5.
2012 -- Heat: Vast majority non-traditional (similar to 2013, but not quite as aggressive)
2011 -- Mavs: 100% non-traditional; mostly Dirk at the 4......wrong.....Umm Dirk is a 4 and Chandler is a 5. how is that not traditional?

Im not even going to bring up your "Prior to 2011" list because you conviently left out players to support your argument. You also left out players on the other list. Ever heard of a guy named Shaq? How about a guy named Duncan? Or Bogut, or Splitter, or Mozgov, Love.

I would take a Shaq(in his prime) led team or Duncan (in his prime) or a Hakeem (in his prime) over Curry led team any day.

Despite Curry being my favorite player in the NBA, you'd be a wise man to do that

[tweet]https://twitter.com/NBATV/status/545387324628951040[/tweet]

[bwgood77]

Mostly traditional (i.e., more than 2/3 traditional)
Mostly non-traditional (i.e., less than 1/3 traditional)
Significant use of both (i.e., between 1/3 and 2/3 traditional)

Past 5 seasons

2015 -- Warriors or Cavs: Majority non-traditional for both teams, particularly Warriors
2014 -- Spurs: Majority non-traditional with Diaw/Bonner/Kawhi at the 4, especially in the finals
2013 -- Heat: 100% non-traditional; tons of five-out with Bosh at the 5
2012 -- Heat: Vast majority non-traditional (similar to 2013, but not quite as aggressive)
2011 -- Mavs: 100% non-traditional; mostly Dirk at the 4

Prior to 2011

2010 -- Lakers: Odom-Gasol was best & most-used frontcourt
2009 -- Lakers: Odom-Gasol was best & most-used frontcourt
2008 -- Celtics: Mostly traditional, but used Posey-Garnett frontcourt for critical stretches
2007 -- Spurs: Significant minutes with Horry/Finley at the 4
2006 -- Heat: Significant minutes with Walker/Posey at the 4
2005 -- Spurs: Significant minutes with Horry at the 4

Clear trend toward more spacing/small-ball, a la SSOL. But even championship teams from a few years ago known for their traditional frontcourts used stretch-4s/small-ball in significant doses -- at least as an important curveball.

2015 -- Warriors or Cavs: Majority non-traditional for both teams, particularly Warriors.....Warriors do play tradional players at each position...mayb less at center. Cavs are very traditonal but are flexible because of Lebron.
2014 -- Spurs: Majority non-traditional with Diaw/Bonner/Kawhi at the 4, especially in the finals .....wrong(Duncan is a center...period, the spurs play 100% traditional while occasionally playing small)
2013 -- Heat: 100% non-traditional; tons of five-out with Bosh at the 5....They basically had no center so yes they played non-traditional...although they used birdman as much as possible at the 5.
2012 -- Heat: Vast majority non-traditional (similar to 2013, but not quite as aggressive)
2011 -- Mavs: 100% non-traditional; mostly Dirk at the 4......wrong.....Umm Dirk is a 4 and Chandler is a 5. how is that not traditional?

Im not even going to bring up your "Prior to 2011" list because you conviently left out players to support your argument. You also left out players on the other list. Ever heard of a guy named Shaq? How about a guy named Duncan? Or Bogut, or Splitter, or Mozgov, Love.

I would take a Shaq(in his prime) led team or Duncan (in his prime) or a Hakeem (in his prime) over Curry led team any day.

Despite Curry being my favorite player in the NBA, you'd be a wise man to do that

[tweet]https://twitter.com/NBATV/status/545387324628951040[/tweet]

Well if you're going to compare Curry to 3 top ten players of all time, then yes, I agree. But all of those guys were surrounded by good shooters.

[Revived]

2015 -- Warriors or Cavs: Majority non-traditional for both teams, particularly Warriors.....Warriors do play tradional players at each position...mayb less at center. Cavs are very traditonal but are flexible because of Lebron.
2014 -- Spurs: Majority non-traditional with Diaw/Bonner/Kawhi at the 4, especially in the finals .....wrong(Duncan is a center...period, the spurs play 100% traditional while occasionally playing small)
2013 -- Heat: 100% non-traditional; tons of five-out with Bosh at the 5....They basically had no center so yes they played non-traditional...although they used birdman as much as possible at the 5.
2012 -- Heat: Vast majority non-traditional (similar to 2013, but not quite as aggressive)
2011 -- Mavs: 100% non-traditional; mostly Dirk at the 4......wrong.....Umm Dirk is a 4 and Chandler is a 5. how is that not traditional?

Im not even going to bring up your "Prior to 2011" list because you conviently left out players to support your argument. You also left out players on the other list. Ever heard of a guy named Shaq? How about a guy named Duncan? Or Bogut, or Splitter, or Mozgov, Love.

I would take a Shaq(in his prime) led team or Duncan (in his prime) or a Hakeem (in his prime) over Curry led team any day.

Despite Curry being my favorite player in the NBA, you'd be a wise man to do that

[tweet]https://twitter.com/NBATV/status/545387324628951040[/tweet]

Well if you're going to compare Curry to 3 top ten players of all time, then yes, I agree. But all of those guys were surrounded by good shooters.

Right but those shooters weren't "the guy", they were usually #2 or #3 options or just role players. I think sundeuce's post was more about having your go to guy "the guy" superstar being someone who doesn't rely on outside shots for most of his points.

The tweet I posted was mostly just debunking the thought process that shooters are needed to win titles when its not true. I think Charles Barkley holds the very unpopular viewpoint of "You don't live by the jumpers, you only die by it" but its turning out to be very true so far in these Finals.

[bwgood77]

Right but those shooters weren't "the guy", they were usually #2 or #3 options or just role players. I think sundeuce's post was more about having your go to guy "the guy" superstar being someone who doesn't rely on outside shots for most of his points.

The tweet I posted was mostly just debunking the thought process that shooters are needed to win titles when its not true. I think Charles Barkley holds the very unpopular viewpoint of "You don't live by the jumpers, you only die by it" but its turning out to be very true so far in these Finals.

It doesn't matter, when Hakeem can draw so much attention and Kenny Smith/Vernon Maxwell/Robert Horry/Sam Cassell/Mario Elie can all hit the 3, it is brutal to defend.

You will also note, that Horry, being a stretch four, played on all of those championship teams.

Spurs had some combination of Kerr, Horry, Bowen, Bonner, Diaw, and a bunch the last few years who could hit the 3.

Lakers had Fisher, Horry, Fox who were all decent 3 pt shooters but another guy who demanded a ton of attention in Kobe.

[Wannabe MEP]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/NBATV/status/545387324628951040[/tweet]

That tweet is saying the exact opposite of what you think it's saying. The point is that those numbers are HIGH, not low. The tweet was debunking the "Live by the jumper, die by the jumper?" myth. The Mavs literally led the league in % of points outside the paint in their championship season. The others are at least moderately high as well.

(Just FYI, I'm not advocating for scoring a ton outside the paint, per se. That's not the goal. The goal is to score efficiently. Open 3s are efficient, but they also open the court SO THAT YOU CAN GET GOOD LOOKS IN THE PAINT. Teams that play a spread often score more in the paint than teams that play more traditional lineups. The Warriors scored a higher % of their points in the paint this season than, e.g., the Clippers.)

[Sunsdeuce]

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.

[Wannabe MEP]

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.

[bwgood77]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/NBATV/status/545387324628951040[/tweet]

That tweet is saying the exact opposite of what you think it's saying. The point is that those numbers are HIGH, not low. The tweet was debunking the "Live by the jumper, die by the jumper?" myth. The Mavs literally led the league in % of points outside the paint in their championship season. The others are at least moderately high as well.

(Just FYI, I'm not advocating for scoring a ton outside the paint, per se. That's not the goal. The goal is to score efficiently. Open 3s are efficient, but they also open the court SO THAT YOU CAN GET GOOD LOOKS IN THE PAINT. Teams that play a spread often score more in the paint than teams that play more traditional lineups. The Warriors scored a higher % of their points in the paint this season than, e.g., the Clippers.)

That's funny I wasn't paying attention and thought you had posted that to make the point, but he had posted it and it reinforced your point. Sorry SF88, but that's funny.

And I agree. I don't want a bunch of good shooters and a stretch four because I want us to take a ton of 3s necessarily. I'd love it if no one could double team Len because they had to guard their guy outside and Len went for 45 at the rim. Or Bledsoe or whoever else had room to drive and score 30 in the paint. Neither of those happen with two bigs without range crowding the middle, and people not respecting Warren or Bledsoe from deep....hopefully those two get a little better with their range.