Are the Suns a treadmill team?

[DrFunke]

If only building a team was as easy as tank for a year or two, gather a top pick or two, and then collect titles. In my mind, there are so many ways to build a team that wins. If you have a plan, and can carry it out, I think you're ahead of half the NBA.

Leonard was mentioned as a top talent (15th pick I believe).
The only top 5 pick on the Warriors was Bogut (I think).
The Celtics won a title by signing 2 big free agents to pair with Paul Pierce who I believe was a mid first round pick (just going by my admittedly faulty memory).
The Pacers were in the conference finals with Paul George (mid round), David West (mid round), Roy Hibbert (mid round).
The Blazers lost a bunch and got that desired #1 pick with top talent, and drafted Oden. There is just no guarantee you'll even draft the right guy if you tank/lose.

There is no doubt that having a transcendent superstar is hugely helpful, but I don't think you have to sacrifice your team for years and draft in the top 5 to win like the 76ers have planned. And honestly, I'm not sold on Okafor. It will be interesting to see him develop, but his efficiency in iso post ups (the strength we all hear about) during the summer was not good in the 3 or 4 games I watched of his. There was a fair amount of times he looked to be struggling to get decent shots off against non NBA centers. I suppose that makes me crazy, but that's what I saw!

You certainly make good points but you can also look at the other side and say, well SAS drafted Duncan who is the franchise star. Warriors drafted Curry who is the franchise star. Pelicans drafted Davis who is the franchise star. OKC drafted Durant who is the franchise star. Blazers drafted LMA who was their franchise star and now Lillard who is their franchise star. Clippers drafted Griffin who is their franchise star. These are basically all the good WCF teams who got their franchise player in the draft with a top 10 pick.

Sure there are other West teams like HOU and Memphis who developed their team with stars drafted elsewhere (Harden and Gasol) but there are more teams in the west currently who got their franchise guy through the draft with a top 10.

And like I said before, drafting top 10 doesn't equal franchise player. It really doesn't. Its up to the competence of the GM in control and his staff and some luck for the guy you draft to end up being a franchise star like those listed above.

Now like I said in the last post to bw, I don't think we can tank to get a high enough pick due to the talent on the roster. But I just wanted to show the other side of your argument.

The other side of the argument is certainly valid. Who wouldn't love to have those top picks like Durant? I just don't buy the argument that you have to bottom out to get better. It just seems that there are other good ways to build a team that competes, so if you are bad naturally, take the pick and try to build, but to intentionally bottom out for multiple years seems unnecessary and more risk than it's worth.

[batsmasher]

OK, let me elaborate. I was falling to sleep thinking about this and it pissed me off so much that I just had to turn on my laptop and rage.

The whole premise of the question is a bogus, you're essentially undermining the work McD and co have done by suggesting this team isn't moving forward. That on its own, is a joke. Experienced execs and GMs simply don't let their teams move backwards or sideways, it doesn't happen.

Look at all the major **** ups in the league:

-Divac probably learned about the stretch provision last week. It cost the Kings a great deal moving forward making those absolutely idiotic cap clearing moves. Divac has no experience in the role he's in.

-Isiah Thomas had 0 experience as an exec when he joined the Knicks, and is probably responsible for setting back their team 5 years,

-David Khan worked in the business side of the NBA until he was hired by Minny, and f****d up their franchise's chance to move forward.

I could go on. My point is: if you're good enough to survive as an executive in the NBA, you sure as hell are going to move your franchise forward. If you genuinely think a guy like Danny Ainge, 2008 Executive of the Year, and widely regarded as one of the best GMs in the league, is screwing over Boston, you are crazy. Boston are "treadmilling" just like the Suns. If he thinks it works, it works. And he has a ring to prove it.

McD and Ainge are playing the same game. They live and breath basketball, 24/7. They are PROFESSIONALS specifically hired to get a team a championship. And you're telling me us casual fans, who think about this stuff for maybe an hour every day have a better idea of how to build a team? No f***ing way, even with the benefit of hindsight.

Some things don't work out, sure, that's the way the cookie crumbles. But it's rich to say if things don't work out you're a failure or a "treadmill team".

/rant and g'night (or morning to all you mericans)

[plonden]

The treadmill issue is a complete non-starter. It completely misses the point. The fallacy with the treadmill team issue, in my mind, really boils down to the erroneous notion that bottoming out to rebuild is the only way to win a championship in this league. That notion is objectively false. There are at least three different ways to put together a contender--and these three methods aren't even mutually exclusive. If you look at every championship team you'll see elements of each of these three methods.

Consider this season's Golden State Warriors. The Warriors drafted their key components--Steph Curry, Klay Thompson, Draymond Green. Notice where they drafted these players: Curry was 7th overall, Thompson was 11th overall, and Green was 35th (!) overall. But, they also signed David Lee as a free agent, which although he didn't play much during the regular season, Lee had an impact during the playoffs and the NBA Finals. Lee's signing also signaled the beginning of Golden State becoming a respectable team. The Warriors also traded for a couple of key pieces in Andrew Bogut and Finals MVP Andre Iguodala. It took all three methods to put together a championship caliber team.

The Draft
The narrative today is that you have to bottom out--i.e., tank--to collect the assets needed to put together a contender. Although bottoming out certainly increases the chances of drafting a franchise caliber player, it by no means guarantees it (Anthony Bennett) nor is it necessary (Kawhi Leonard selected 15th overall). Despite statistical advancement and the increasing sophistication of scouting, good players, and sometimes really, really good players fall in the draft. There is no doubt that this is a valid method for assembling a team. Just look at the current Oklahoma City Thunder as proof (Durant, Westbrook). But it is by no means the only method.

Free Agency
Another method of putting together a championship caliber team is through free agency. Unfortunately cap space, alone, is not enough. Nowadays, you have to be a desirable free agency destination to be able to attract top tier talent. Traditionally, this meant the Lakers, Knicks, Heat, etc. This, however, is changing for the better. To be a desirable free agency destination, you have to be a desirable location from top to bottom. This means you must be a desirable city, have good management (owner, GM, coach), have good supporting players, and a reasonable chance at contending. This is why the San Antonio Spurs ended up with LaMarcus Aldridge. For proof that this method can lead to championships, consider the Miami Heat. They signed Lebron James and Chris Bosh to complement Dwyane Wade, and earned two rings in four seasons.

The Blockbuster Trade
The third and final method of building a championship team is through the Blockbuster trade. This involves stockpiling enough trade assets to be in a position to make the "offer that can't be refused" should a disgruntled star become available or should a team decide to tank. To be successful, a team has to use all of its resources wisely. It has to draft extremely well, no matter where the team is in the draft. It has to sign overlooked and underrated players to quality contracts, and then put them in a position to succeed. It has to stockpile draft picks, perhaps by being in a position to absorb salary from other teams. Once a team has acquired a sufficient amount of quality resources, it has to wait for the right opportunity. Perhaps no other GM is better at this than Danny Ainge. The Paul Pierce, Kevin Garnett, and Ray Allen Celtics are a prime example of how this method can be successful.

The Phoenix Suns
So which path are the Phoenix Suns pursuing? Honestly, it appears that the Suns are pursuing all three paths at once. First, they are trying to determine if any of their recent picks--Len, Goodwin, Morris, Booker, Warren--will blossom into a core piece on a championship-caliber team like Golden State's Curry, Thompson, or Green. In addition, they are putting themselves in a position to try and attract top-tier free agency talent. This summer's legitimate pursuit of LaMarcus Aldridge is a great example, and only further legitimizes Phoenix's chances at getting the all-important pitch meeting with the next crop of free agent talent. Finally, the Suns are stockpiling good players on good contracts, and stockpiling draft picks. McDonough is positioning the Suns to be in a position to be able to make a great offer should a star become available.

Are the Suns a Treadmill Team?
Are the Suns a treadmill team? I'll let McConaughey field this one:
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5riIzb8k4s[/youtube]

[rsavaj]

Nice to see a lot of quality posts of late!

[rsavaj]

Is this about whether we are on the treadmill or how to get off? The latter is way above my pay grade. But since you ask, I think getting LMA would have made us fun and relevant (i.e. playoffs, probably top 5-6 seed and chance to get to second round) but without him, I would prefer to tank, get a top three pick and play the crap out of Archie, Warren and Booker this season.

For me personally, my enthusiasm for the bloody battle for the eighth seed has worn very thin. That's not to say I won't cheer us on when we're in the thick of it once again. (I contain multitudes and all that.)

Exactly how I see it as well. And Suns fans aren't alone in this, I know Boston fans who were upset the Celtics didn't tank instead of getting a bad pick and getting their ass kicked in the playoffs in the first round as well.

Boston actually has those real nice Nets picks as well.

I just don't see the fascination of gunning for the 8th seed with this roster. If we had a young rising player with potential like say Davis, or Wiggins or Parker or Cousins etc I would say lets do it because making playoffs is step 2 of the rebuild. Step 1 is finding a rising player with franchise player/star potential and IMO (the IMO needs to clear), we're skipping step 1 to get to step 2.

One thing I will say is that this franchise is in much better hands than it was like say 3-4 years ago under Blanks. True. McD has a clue unlike the idiot Blanks. However, I'm not sure about the direction we're heading in.

Honestly speaking, I wonder if Sarver is the one forcing this "make playoffs NOW" crap on McD based on his "I'm impatient" comments.

Well seriously, what do you want us to do? We have pretty much traded away all of our older players and happened to rebuild faster than expected. Do we have a star? Not yet, but neither do the younger teams. They have guys who are predicted to be stars but that is it. Would you bench half our players in hopes to get Ben Simmons, which at best, even if we were the worst team in the league, would only have a 25% chance of getting him? Complaining about where we are is tough, because we can't tank...we can continue to build our young players.

It's too bad you are not high on Len, Warren and Booker, because, to me, I think they have a chance to be really good. We are much like the Chargers (and I mention them because I know you are a Chargers fan yet it appears you took them off your profile because perhaps you are changing loyalties). I want to pull for our team and hope for the best and not spend time complaining. Signing an additional starting caliber pg when we already had two and Marcus' actions made me unhappy with what transpired last year, but I still hope for the best, and you never know.

That's my biggest question as well. Does successful team building mean hitting the rest button until you find an under 25 core that can win 50 games? If so, we're gonna be bad for a loooooooooooooong time.

[rsavaj]

Is this about whether we are on the treadmill or how to get off? The latter is way above my pay grade. But since you ask, I think getting LMA would have made us fun and relevant (i.e. playoffs, probably top 5-6 seed and chance to get to second round) but without him, I would prefer to tank, get a top three pick and play the crap out of Archie, Warren and Booker this season.

For me personally, my enthusiasm for the bloody battle for the eighth seed has worn very thin. That's not to say I won't cheer us on when we're in the thick of it once again. (I contain multitudes and all that.)

Exactly how I see it as well. And Suns fans aren't alone in this, I know Boston fans who were upset the Celtics didn't tank instead of getting a bad pick and getting their ass kicked in the playoffs in the first round as well.

Boston actually has those real nice Nets picks as well.

I just don't see the fascination of gunning for the 8th seed with this roster. If we had a young rising player with potential like say Davis, or Wiggins or Parker or Cousins etc I would say lets do it because making playoffs is step 2 of the rebuild. Step 1 is finding a rising player with franchise player/star potential and IMO (the IMO needs to clear), we're skipping step 1 to get to step 2.

One thing I will say is that this franchise is in much better hands than it was like say 3-4 years ago under Blanks. True. McD has a clue unlike the idiot Blanks. However, I'm not sure about the direction we're heading in.

Honestly speaking, I wonder if Sarver is the one forcing this "make playoffs NOW" crap on McD based on his "I'm impatient" comments.

I think it's less Sarver being foolish and more Sarver knowing his market.

Historically, this franchise never tanked. Suns fans want to watch a winning team. The one year they tried to tank, the team overachieved and recharged the fanbase in the process.

That's why this "tank" vs "not tank" debate is kind of pointless to me...regardless of what we all think, the Suns are not gonna tank, so we might as well move forward and discuss how to get to the next level without tanking.

[rsavaj]

OK, let me elaborate. I was falling to sleep thinking about this and it pissed me off so much that I just had to turn on my laptop and rage.

The whole premise of the question is a bogus, you're essentially undermining the work McD and co have done by suggesting this team isn't moving forward. That on its own, is a joke. Experienced execs and GMs simply don't let their teams move backwards or sideways, it doesn't happen.

Look at all the major **** ups in the league:

-Divac probably learned about the stretch provision last week. It cost the Kings a great deal moving forward making those absolutely idiotic cap clearing moves. Divac has no experience in the role he's in.

-Isiah Thomas had 0 experience as an exec when he joined the Knicks, and is probably responsible for setting back their team 5 years,

-David Khan worked in the business side of the NBA until he was hired by Minny, and f****d up their franchise's chance to move forward.

I could go on. My point is: if you're good enough to survive as an executive in the NBA, you sure as hell are going to move your franchise forward. If you genuinely think a guy like Danny Ainge, 2008 Executive of the Year, and widely regarded as one of the best GMs in the league, is screwing over Boston, you are crazy. Boston are "treadmilling" just like the Suns. If he thinks it works, it works. And he has a ring to prove it.

McD and Ainge are playing the same game. They live and breath basketball, 24/7. They are PROFESSIONALS specifically hired to get a team a championship. And you're telling me us casual fans, who think about this stuff for maybe an hour every day have a better idea of how to build a team? No f***ing way, even with the benefit of hindsight.

Some things don't work out, sure, that's the way the cookie crumbles. But it's rich to say if things don't work out you're a failure or a "treadmill team".

/rant and g'night (or morning to all you mericans)

McD vs Ainge is an interesting battle. Protege vs Master. Only difference is that Ainge had better chips when he started the asset-acquisition process(Garnett/Pierce/Rondo) than McD had(Scola/Wes Johnson/Gortat/Dragic), but you're absolutely right, they're two sides to the same coin, and they're competing for the same guys.

Ainge's war-chest is better in terms of picks, but I think if you include our actual players, we're better set up than Boston for both putting together a trade package AND attracting free agents.

[rsavaj]

The treadmill issue is a complete non-starter. It completely misses the point. The fallacy with the treadmill team issue, in my mind, really boils down to the erroneous notion that bottoming out to rebuild is the only way to win a championship in this league. That notion is objectively false. There are at least three different ways to put together a contender--and these three methods aren't even mutually exclusive. If you look at every championship team you'll see elements of each of these three methods.

Consider this season's Golden State Warriors. The Warriors drafted their key components--Steph Curry, Klay Thompson, Draymond Green. Notice where they drafted these players: Curry was 7th overall, Thompson was 11th overall, and Green was 35th (!) overall. But, they also signed David Lee as a free agent, which although he didn't play much during the regular season, Lee had an impact during the playoffs and the NBA Finals. Lee's signing also signaled the beginning of Golden State becoming a respectable team. The Warriors also traded for a couple of key pieces in Andrew Bogut and Finals MVP Andre Iguodala. It took all three methods to put together a championship caliber team.

The Draft
The narrative today is that you have to bottom out--i.e., tank--to collect the assets needed to put together a contender. Although bottoming out certainly increases the chances of drafting a franchise caliber player, it by no means guarantees it (Anthony Bennett) nor is it necessary (Kawhi Leonard selected 15th overall). Despite statistical advancement and the increasing sophistication of scouting, good players, and sometimes really, really good players fall in the draft. There is no doubt that this is a valid method for assembling a team. Just look at the current Oklahoma City Thunder as proof (Durant, Westbrook). But it is by no means the only method.

Free Agency
Another method of putting together a championship caliber team is through free agency. Unfortunately cap space, alone, is not enough. Nowadays, you have to be a desirable free agency destination to be able to attract top tier talent. Traditionally, this meant the Lakers, Knicks, Heat, etc. This, however, is changing for the better. To be a desirable free agency destination, you have to be a desirable location from top to bottom. This means you must be a desirable city, have good management (owner, GM, coach), have good supporting players, and a reasonable chance at contending. This is why the San Antonio Spurs ended up with LaMarcus Aldridge. For proof that this method can lead to championships, consider the Miami Heat. They signed Lebron James and Chris Bosh to complement Dwyane Wade, and earned two rings in four seasons.

The Blockbuster Trade
The third and final method of building a championship team is through the Blockbuster trade. This involves stockpiling enough trade assets to be in a position to make the "offer that can't be refused" should a disgruntled star become available or should a team decide to tank. To be successful, a team has to use all of its resources wisely. It has to draft extremely well, no matter where the team is in the draft. It has to sign overlooked and underrated players to quality contracts, and then put them in a position to succeed. It has to stockpile draft picks, perhaps by being in a position to absorb salary from other teams. Once a team has acquired a sufficient amount of quality resources, it has to wait for the right opportunity. Perhaps no other GM is better at this than Danny Ainge. The Paul Pierce, Kevin Garnett, and Ray Allen Celtics are a prime example of how this method can be successful.

The Phoenix Suns
So which path are the Phoenix Suns pursuing? Honestly, it appears that the Suns are pursuing all three paths at once. First, they are trying to determine if any of their recent picks--Len, Goodwin, Morris, Booker, Warren--will blossom into a core piece on a championship-caliber team like Golden State's Curry, Thompson, or Green. In addition, they are putting themselves in a position to try and attract top-tier free agency talent. This summer's legitimate pursuit of LaMarcus Aldridge is a great example, and only further legitimizes Phoenix's chances at getting the all-important pitch meeting with the next crop of free agent talent. Finally, the Suns are stockpiling good players on good contracts, and stockpiling draft picks. McDonough is positioning the Suns to be in a position to be able to make a great offer should a star become available.

Are the Suns a Treadmill Team?
Are the Suns a treadmill team? I'll let McConaughey field this one:
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5riIzb8k4s[/youtube]

You should post this on the general board

[WeekapaugGroove]

The treadmill issue is a complete non-starter. It completely misses the point. The fallacy with the treadmill team issue, in my mind, really boils down to the erroneous notion that bottoming out to rebuild is the only way to win a championship in this league. That notion is objectively false. There are at least three different ways to put together a contender--and these three methods aren't even mutually exclusive. If you look at every championship team you'll see elements of each of these three methods.

Consider this season's Golden State Warriors. The Warriors drafted their key components--Steph Curry, Klay Thompson, Draymond Green. Notice where they drafted these players: Curry was 7th overall, Thompson was 11th overall, and Green was 35th (!) overall. But, they also signed David Lee as a free agent, which although he didn't play much during the regular season, Lee had an impact during the playoffs and the NBA Finals. Lee's signing also signaled the beginning of Golden State becoming a respectable team. The Warriors also traded for a couple of key pieces in Andrew Bogut and Finals MVP Andre Iguodala. It took all three methods to put together a championship caliber team.

The Draft
The narrative today is that you have to bottom out--i.e., tank--to collect the assets needed to put together a contender. Although bottoming out certainly increases the chances of drafting a franchise caliber player, it by no means guarantees it (Anthony Bennett) nor is it necessary (Kawhi Leonard selected 15th overall). Despite statistical advancement and the increasing sophistication of scouting, good players, and sometimes really, really good players fall in the draft. There is no doubt that this is a valid method for assembling a team. Just look at the current Oklahoma City Thunder as proof (Durant, Westbrook). But it is by no means the only method.

Free Agency
Another method of putting together a championship caliber team is through free agency. Unfortunately cap space, alone, is not enough. Nowadays, you have to be a desirable free agency destination to be able to attract top tier talent. Traditionally, this meant the Lakers, Knicks, Heat, etc. This, however, is changing for the better. To be a desirable free agency destination, you have to be a desirable location from top to bottom. This means you must be a desirable city, have good management (owner, GM, coach), have good supporting players, and a reasonable chance at contending. This is why the San Antonio Spurs ended up with LaMarcus Aldridge. For proof that this method can lead to championships, consider the Miami Heat. They signed Lebron James and Chris Bosh to complement Dwyane Wade, and earned two rings in four seasons.

The Blockbuster Trade
The third and final method of building a championship team is through the Blockbuster trade. This involves stockpiling enough trade assets to be in a position to make the "offer that can't be refused" should a disgruntled star become available or should a team decide to tank. To be successful, a team has to use all of its resources wisely. It has to draft extremely well, no matter where the team is in the draft. It has to sign overlooked and underrated players to quality contracts, and then put them in a position to succeed. It has to stockpile draft picks, perhaps by being in a position to absorb salary from other teams. Once a team has acquired a sufficient amount of quality resources, it has to wait for the right opportunity. Perhaps no other GM is better at this than Danny Ainge. The Paul Pierce, Kevin Garnett, and Ray Allen Celtics are a prime example of how this method can be successful.

The Phoenix Suns
So which path are the Phoenix Suns pursuing? Honestly, it appears that the Suns are pursuing all three paths at once. First, they are trying to determine if any of their recent picks--Len, Goodwin, Morris, Booker, Warren--will blossom into a core piece on a championship-caliber team like Golden State's Curry, Thompson, or Green. In addition, they are putting themselves in a position to try and attract top-tier free agency talent. This summer's legitimate pursuit of LaMarcus Aldridge is a great example, and only further legitimizes Phoenix's chances at getting the all-important pitch meeting with the next crop of free agent talent. Finally, the Suns are stockpiling good players on good contracts, and stockpiling draft picks. McDonough is positioning the Suns to be in a position to be able to make a great offer should a star become available.

Are the Suns a Treadmill Team?
Are the Suns a treadmill team? I'll let McConaughey field this one:
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5riIzb8k4s[/youtube]

awesome post!!!

As you and others have pointed out theres really no sure fire recipe for team building. I know the tank method is all the rage with fans right now but it really hasn't worked much. It's crazy but the last #1 pick to win a championship with the team who drafted him is Duncan. And I believe Dwayne wade is the last top 5 pick to win a championship as a major contibuter on the team who drafted them. Wade was picked in 2003. So we've had 12 drafts since then where 0 teams have picked a guy in the top 5 who's lead them to a chip. Kind of crazy really.

[Two Time]

There are at least three different ways to put together a contender--and these three methods aren't even mutually exclusive.

A lot of people have already praised the post, and with good reason, but I will go ahead and join in with the praise as well.

A lot of these fans think with this narrow mind that there is only one way for the Suns to build themselves into a top tier team(and the one way is the tank to draft). The arguement is ridiculous to me, many others have pointed out, for every "tank"job that landed a team that superstar there is an exponentially greater number of teams that attempted it and didn't get their guy. Just nail the draft in the spot that you are at. Look at where the top 20 players in the league were drafted. You could build a title contending team on paper right now if you just looked at the last 6 years of drafts and selected players from late lottery on down.

[bwgood77]

There are at least three different ways to put together a contender--and these three methods aren't even mutually exclusive.

A lot of people have already praised the post, and with good reason, but I will go ahead and join in with the praise as well.

A lot of these fans think with this narrow mind that there is only one way for the Suns to build themselves into a top tier team(and the one way is the tank to draft). The arguement is ridiculous to me, many others have pointed out, for every "tank"job that landed a team that superstar there is an exponentially greater number of teams that attempted it and didn't get their guy. Just nail the draft in the spot that you are at. Look at where the top 20 players in the league were drafted. You could build a title contending team on paper right now if you just looked at the last 6 years of drafts and selected players from late lottery on down.

Yep, and Minnesota needed a PG in the 2009 draft, had the 4th and 5th picks, and used them to select two point guards, neither being Steph Curry who was on the board.

Memphis took Thabeet over Harden the next year.

Beasley over Westbrook.

Oden over Durant.

Atlanta had a bunch of small forwards already and really needed a PG and took Marvin Williams over Chris Paul (and Deron Williams).

You can be really bad and make BAD picks. Almost all GMs would have taken Oden at #1 and Beasley over Westbrook those years too.

[DrFunke]

OK, let me elaborate. I was falling to sleep thinking about this and it pissed me off so much that I just had to turn on my laptop and rage.

The whole premise of the question is a bogus, you're essentially undermining the work McD and co have done by suggesting this team isn't moving forward. That on its own, is a joke. Experienced execs and GMs simply don't let their teams move backwards or sideways, it doesn't happen.

Look at all the major **** ups in the league:

-Divac probably learned about the stretch provision last week. It cost the Kings a great deal moving forward making those absolutely idiotic cap clearing moves. Divac has no experience in the role he's in.

-Isiah Thomas had 0 experience as an exec when he joined the Knicks, and is probably responsible for setting back their team 5 years,

-David Khan worked in the business side of the NBA until he was hired by Minny, and f****d up their franchise's chance to move forward.

I could go on. My point is: if you're good enough to survive as an executive in the NBA, you sure as hell are going to move your franchise forward. If you genuinely think a guy like Danny Ainge, 2008 Executive of the Year, and widely regarded as one of the best GMs in the league, is screwing over Boston, you are crazy. Boston are "treadmilling" just like the Suns. If he thinks it works, it works. And he has a ring to prove it.

McD and Ainge are playing the same game. They live and breath basketball, 24/7. They are PROFESSIONALS specifically hired to get a team a championship. And you're telling me us casual fans, who think about this stuff for maybe an hour every day have a better idea of how to build a team? No f***ing way, even with the benefit of hindsight.

Some things don't work out, sure, that's the way the cookie crumbles. But it's rich to say if things don't work out you're a failure or a "treadmill team".

/rant and g'night (or morning to all you mericans)

Love it! I was thinking about this question again while watching some summer league and I like this response. No NBA team stays the same for very long, especially if you are an 8-10 seed "treadmill" candidate. You either naturally get worse or naturally get better through age, FA signings, development, trades, etc (meaning you don't have to intentionally get worse)... and you are absolutely right that the sharp GM's in this league obsess over this stuff. It is their full time ultra competitive job (just like the players).

[DrFunke]

The treadmill issue is a complete non-starter. It completely misses the point. The fallacy with the treadmill team issue, in my mind, really boils down to the erroneous notion that bottoming out to rebuild is the only way to win a championship in this league. That notion is objectively false. There are at least three different ways to put together a contender--and these three methods aren't even mutually exclusive. If you look at every championship team you'll see elements of each of these three methods.

Consider this season's Golden State Warriors. The Warriors drafted their key components--Steph Curry, Klay Thompson, Draymond Green. Notice where they drafted these players: Curry was 7th overall, Thompson was 11th overall, and Green was 35th (!) overall. But, they also signed David Lee as a free agent, which although he didn't play much during the regular season, Lee had an impact during the playoffs and the NBA Finals. Lee's signing also signaled the beginning of Golden State becoming a respectable team. The Warriors also traded for a couple of key pieces in Andrew Bogut and Finals MVP Andre Iguodala. It took all three methods to put together a championship caliber team.

The Draft
The narrative today is that you have to bottom out--i.e., tank--to collect the assets needed to put together a contender. Although bottoming out certainly increases the chances of drafting a franchise caliber player, it by no means guarantees it (Anthony Bennett) nor is it necessary (Kawhi Leonard selected 15th overall). Despite statistical advancement and the increasing sophistication of scouting, good players, and sometimes really, really good players fall in the draft. There is no doubt that this is a valid method for assembling a team. Just look at the current Oklahoma City Thunder as proof (Durant, Westbrook). But it is by no means the only method.

Free Agency
Another method of putting together a championship caliber team is through free agency. Unfortunately cap space, alone, is not enough. Nowadays, you have to be a desirable free agency destination to be able to attract top tier talent. Traditionally, this meant the Lakers, Knicks, Heat, etc. This, however, is changing for the better. To be a desirable free agency destination, you have to be a desirable location from top to bottom. This means you must be a desirable city, have good management (owner, GM, coach), have good supporting players, and a reasonable chance at contending. This is why the San Antonio Spurs ended up with LaMarcus Aldridge. For proof that this method can lead to championships, consider the Miami Heat. They signed Lebron James and Chris Bosh to complement Dwyane Wade, and earned two rings in four seasons.

The Blockbuster Trade
The third and final method of building a championship team is through the Blockbuster trade. This involves stockpiling enough trade assets to be in a position to make the "offer that can't be refused" should a disgruntled star become available or should a team decide to tank. To be successful, a team has to use all of its resources wisely. It has to draft extremely well, no matter where the team is in the draft. It has to sign overlooked and underrated players to quality contracts, and then put them in a position to succeed. It has to stockpile draft picks, perhaps by being in a position to absorb salary from other teams. Once a team has acquired a sufficient amount of quality resources, it has to wait for the right opportunity. Perhaps no other GM is better at this than Danny Ainge. The Paul Pierce, Kevin Garnett, and Ray Allen Celtics are a prime example of how this method can be successful.

The Phoenix Suns
So which path are the Phoenix Suns pursuing? Honestly, it appears that the Suns are pursuing all three paths at once. First, they are trying to determine if any of their recent picks--Len, Goodwin, Morris, Booker, Warren--will blossom into a core piece on a championship-caliber team like Golden State's Curry, Thompson, or Green. In addition, they are putting themselves in a position to try and attract top-tier free agency talent. This summer's legitimate pursuit of LaMarcus Aldridge is a great example, and only further legitimizes Phoenix's chances at getting the all-important pitch meeting with the next crop of free agent talent. Finally, the Suns are stockpiling good players on good contracts, and stockpiling draft picks. McDonough is positioning the Suns to be in a position to be able to make a great offer should a star become available.

Are the Suns a Treadmill Team?
Are the Suns a treadmill team? I'll let McConaughey field this one:
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5riIzb8k4s[/youtube]

Exactly right and well written! Your last chunk about the Suns specifically is how I also view the franchise direction. Extremely well said!

[RunDogGun]

There are at least three different ways to put together a contender--and these three methods aren't even mutually exclusive.

A lot of people have already praised the post, and with good reason, but I will go ahead and join in with the praise as well.

A lot of these fans think with this narrow mind that there is only one way for the Suns to build themselves into a top tier team(and the one way is the tank to draft). The arguement is ridiculous to me, many others have pointed out, for every "tank"job that landed a team that superstar there is an exponentially greater number of teams that attempted it and didn't get their guy. Just nail the draft in the spot that you are at. Look at where the top 20 players in the league were drafted. You could build a title contending team on paper right now if you just looked at the last 6 years of drafts and selected players from late lottery on down.

Post was great. The only thing I would change is that David Lee was a sign and trade deal with NY. But I think that Iggy was a FA signing, who really changed things for GS.

So other than that, solid all the way around on that post.

[Revived]

Plonden, excellent post and you hit on lot of stuff. I especially liked what you said about the Suns trying to do all 3 at the same time, it does appear that is what their doing.

I started this thread more so for discussion like this, good stuff!

[JTrain]

I don't recall a single person saying the only way to build a great team is by tanking. That's a straw man. But there certainly are situations where it makes perfect sense for a team that isn't close to being a serious contender to intentionally drop from the 10-15 range.

Two Time says, look at the top 20 players and see where they were drafted. I encourage that. By my estimation, 16 of 20 were in the top 7 and 11 of 20 were top 4. So your chances of drafting a superstar are hugely increased by making the jump from our preferred 13 spot up to the top 7 (or even significantly better in the top 4).

[thamadkant]

High draft picks isn't just to draft (boosted chance) of better rookies... But obtaining valuable assets.if Suns had a top 7 pick along with their fleet of good players would of been enough to trade for a Cousins or another star.

[plonden]

The more I think about the Philadelphia 76ers, the more I realize what a radical experiment it is. And I use the word radical intentionally. The NBA has seen tanking before. The 1983-84 Rockets is probably one of the most blatant examples. In the 1983 draft, the Rockets selected Ralph Sampson with the first pick overall and began the following season with a middling 20-29 record. Looking ahead to the stacked 1984 draft class (Hakeem Olajuwon, Michael Jordan, Sam Bowie, Charles Barkley, Sam Perkins), Houston began to actively tank. Even former Commissioner David Stern acknowledged as much:

The lottery was created to eliminate the perceived incentive to lose games. Obviously the Rockets became the team on which most people focused.

Pre-lottery, the two teams with the worst record in the NBA flipped a coin to see which team would select first. Thus, the two worst teams had a 50-50 shot at selecting first overall, and a guaranteed top two pick. The NBA responded by instituting the draft lottery to try and take away the incentive for tanking. It helped. But, obviously, did not remove the incentive completely.

In the modern draft lottery era, other teams have tanked. But none like the Sixers. The closest example is probably the Seattle Supersonics/Oklahoma City Thunder. After a 31-51 season, the Sonics received the second pick in the 2007 NBA draft. The Sonics knew they would select either Greg Oden or Kevin Durant, depending upon which player Portland selected with the first overall pick. The Sonics would be able to pair that player with Ray Allen and Rashard Lewis. Instead, the Sonics shipped Allen off to Boston and Lewis off to Orlando. The result? Seattle finished with with a 20-62 record, good for worst in the West. This terrible season netted them another high draft pick--fourth overall, which they used on Russell Westbrook. But, the cynical NBA fan knows that the Sonics weren't just tanking to increase their lottery odds. A cynical fan might argue that Seattle was actively trying to alienate its fanbase to help justify a move to Oklahoma City. Without a doubt, the Sonics/Thunder have benefitted from bottoming out for 2 seasons. When healthy, they are a legitimate contender.

The Sixers have taken a much more radical approach than the Thunder. The Sixers have now spent two full years in the sewer, trotting out an atrocious product. At this point, the Thunder had begun to try and compete. Philadelphia looks to spend at least one or two more seasons tanking and deliberately losing. No team has committed so fully to such a strategy. Will it work? It's unclear. But there are so many other variables at play. How will this affect the fans? How will it affect the players? Is Okafor the next Hakeem Olajuwon or the next Al Jefferson? What is Noel's ceiling? Is Embiid the next Greg Oden? Will fans continue to pay for an intentionally inferior product? And, most importantly, will it be worth it in the end? One thing is for sure. We are in uncharted territory.

[lilfishi22]

The more I think about the Philadelphia 76ers, the more I realize what a radical experiment it is. And I use the word radical intentionally. The NBA has seen tanking before. The 1983-84 Rockets is probably one of the most blatant examples. In the 1983 draft, the Rockets selected Ralph Sampson with the first pick overall and began the following season with a middling 20-29 record. Looking ahead to the stacked 1984 draft class (Hakeem Olajuwon, Michael Jordan, Sam Bowie, Charles Barkley, Sam Perkins), Houston began to actively tank. Even former Commissioner David Stern acknowledged as much:

The lottery was created to eliminate the perceived incentive to lose games. Obviously the Rockets became the team on which most people focused.

Pre-lottery, the two teams with the worst record in the NBA flipped a coin to see which team would select first. Thus, the two worst teams had a 50-50 shot at selecting first overall, and a guaranteed top two pick. The NBA responded by instituting the draft lottery to try and take away the incentive for tanking. It helped. But, obviously, did not remove the incentive completely.

In the modern draft lottery era, other teams have tanked. But none like the Sixers. The closest example is probably the Seattle Supersonics/Oklahoma City Thunder. After a 31-51 season, the Sonics received the second pick in the 2007 NBA draft. The Sonics knew they would select either Greg Oden or Kevin Durant, depending upon which player Portland selected with the first overall pick. The Sonics would be able to pair that player with Ray Allen and Rashard Lewis. Instead, the Sonics shipped Allen off to Boston and Lewis off to Orlando. The result? Seattle finished with with a 20-62 record, good for worst in the West. This terrible season netted them another high draft pick--fourth overall, which they used on Russell Westbrook. But, the cynical NBA fan knows that the Sonics weren't just tanking to increase their lottery odds. A cynical fan might argue that Seattle was actively trying to alienate its fanbase to help justify a move to Oklahoma City. Without a doubt, the Sonics/Thunder have benefitted from bottoming out for 2 seasons. When healthy, they are a legitimate contender.

The Sixers have taken a much more radical approach than the Thunder. The Sixers have now spent two full years in the sewer, trotting out an atrocious product. At this point, the Thunder had begun to try and compete. Philadelphia looks to spend at least one or two more seasons tanking and deliberately losing. No team has committed so fully to such a strategy. Will it work? It's unclear. But there are so many other variables at play. How will this affect the fans? How will it affect the players? Is Okafor the next Hakeem Olajuwon or the next Al Jefferson? What is Noel's ceiling? Is Embiid the next Greg Oden? Will fans continue to pay for an intentionally inferior product? And, most importantly, will it be worth it in the end? One thing is for sure. We are in uncharted territory.

Great points plonden. Sixers strategy seems to be tank until you have a bonafide star and then build from there. They took a chance on Embiid knowing he has potential to be that guy but also knew he was an injury risk so they could tank for another top pick this year.

Also in case you haven't noticed, we've got you up as a top poster for the month in recognition of your solid posting

[TASTIC]

OK, let me elaborate. I was falling to sleep thinking about this and it pissed me off so much that I just had to turn on my laptop and rage.

The whole premise of the question is a bogus, you're essentially undermining the work McD and co have done by suggesting this team isn't moving forward. That on its own, is a joke. Experienced execs and GMs simply don't let their teams move backwards or sideways, it doesn't happen.

Look at all the major **** ups in the league:

-Divac probably learned about the stretch provision last week. It cost the Kings a great deal moving forward making those absolutely idiotic cap clearing moves. Divac has no experience in the role he's in.

-Isiah Thomas had 0 experience as an exec when he joined the Knicks, and is probably responsible for setting back their team 5 years,

-David Khan worked in the business side of the NBA until he was hired by Minny, and f****d up their franchise's chance to move forward.

I could go on. My point is: if you're good enough to survive as an executive in the NBA, you sure as hell are going to move your franchise forward. If you genuinely think a guy like Danny Ainge, 2008 Executive of the Year, and widely regarded as one of the best GMs in the league, is screwing over Boston, you are crazy. Boston are "treadmilling" just like the Suns. If he thinks it works, it works. And he has a ring to prove it.

McD and Ainge are playing the same game. They live and breath basketball, 24/7. They are PROFESSIONALS specifically hired to get a team a championship. And you're telling me us casual fans, who think about this stuff for maybe an hour every day have a better idea of how to build a team? No f***ing way, even with the benefit of hindsight.

Some things don't work out, sure, that's the way the cookie crumbles. But it's rich to say if things don't work out you're a failure or a "treadmill team".

/rant and g'night (or morning to all you mericans)