Season Speculation, Trade Ideas & Discussion Pt. 4

[WeekapaugGroove]

So whats the debate here? Do some believe the build through the draft strategy has been the wrong route and the suns shouldn't do that anymore? If so you better hope it's not McD doing that work because in the draft he's at least aquired 2 guys who look like sure fire longterm pieces. While using FA and trades there are litterally 0 guys on the roster aquired that way who will be here past their current contracts. Which is pretty wild considering its been 5 years.

Hell he's really only aquired 1 guy in bledsoe through trades and FA that was a legit core piece and even that only lead to one decent year and three bad ones then a messy divorce and a future 1st.

The overall acquisition of talent through all avenues the past 5 years has been less than ideal.

Sent from my SM-G930V using RealGM mobile app

The debate for me is simple ... some folks are claiming Chriss and Bender will be star players if we give them time. Doesn't look good to me based on their performance in the first two years. I'd be happy to package them in a trade for a quality player.

Sure I'd be fine trading damn near anyone on this team. The problem I see with this strategy with Chriss and Bender specifically is I don't think they have much current trade value. So if the choice is to trade them for pennies on the dollar relative to their draft position then I would just rather keep them and hope like hell they hit some of their potential. At least give it until this summer because swapping one or both of those guys for a vet now is kind of pointless since this season is a wash. Now neither has played well enough that if there was a better PF option in this draft (Bagley) or a young vet available by trade or FA that I wouldn't move on and upgrade.

[Qwigglez]

I do not think we are developing bad or well...it is more about the player. It is his responsability.

Did we developed Booker? Did we developed Warren? The truth IMO is that they are good because they want to be great and they work hard because both love the game.

Booker and Warren are gamers. They love to train and play basketball all the time. They do not need a coach on them saying "you need to train harder".

Chriss and Bender need to work as hard as they can to improve their games, their bodies, their skillset......but they seem to think that they are "good enough" just being in the league. With them I do not get the feel that they love the game.

That is not a good sign for their future...hopefully both improve their work ethic and improve on our team, but they need to begin NOW.

Exactly this. The new trend is the one and done in college. It gives the younger players the best chance of going top 10 based off raw talent/athleticism, and even if they bust they still cash in over the course of 4 years 8 figures. I mentioned this before but a college ball player told me if he was able to get drafted, he doesn't care where he goes to, he'd play in Alaska, he just wants that money. I'd say most players don't care about being the best player they just do this as a job. Josh Jackson said some good things, mentioning he wants the teams that didn't draft him to regret their decision, so it sounds like he wants to be the best player possible.

[bwgood77]

So let's put some real number out there for people to chew on

If an active NBA player averages 9 points or more per game in their first two seasons, then during their career

10.6% were ROY
4.3% were NBA MVP
29.8% were all-stars
29.1% were on all-NBA or all-defensive teams
3.5% were sixth man of the year
2.1% were defensive player of the year
2.8% were most improved player

If they average less than 9 points per game

0% were ROY
0% were NBA MVP
3.9% were all-stars
5.7% were on all-NBA or all-defensive teams
0.8% were sixth man of the year
0.8% were defensive player of the year
1.6% were most Improved player

So these are based off of 141 active players who have average 9+ points in their first two seasons and 383 active players who have averaged less than 9 points. The raw numbers are

15/0 ROY
6/0 MVP
42/15 All-Star
41/22 All-NBA or all-defensive team
5/3 Sixth man
3/3 DYOP
4/6 MIP

Now I'll even try to make it look better for players scoring less than 9 by eliminating players who didn't play in at least 71 games (Bender's current number). That reduces the number of players from 383 to 243. In that case the numbers for more than 9 points averaged per game are

10.9% were ROY
4.4% were NBA MVP
30.7% were an all-star
29.9% were on all-NBA or all-defensive team
3.7% were sixth man of the year
2.2% were defensive player of the year
2.9% were most improved player

If they average less than 9 points per game

0% were ROY
0% were NBA MVP
6.2% were an all-star
9.1% were all-NBA or all-defensive team
1.2% were sixth man of the year
1.2% were defensive player of the year
2.4% were most Improved player

Again ... completely supports the desire of any young player to put up decent scoring numbers in their first two seasons regardless of age.

Of course it's better to score more, IF it's efficient. The criteria (each of those categories you list) are fairly lofty accomplishments. Plus, using only active players, you are leaving out any players who exceeded 9ppg and didn't stick around in the league.

Okay ... it simple. Is there are correlation between points scored in the first two seasons and "lofty" accomplishments? It should be obvious that a player scoring 5 per game over their first two seasons is never going to be an all-star. However someone like Booker averaging 18 per game really has a chance of being an all-star. Not sure what you don't understand about that. Bender and Chriss are unlikely to be a star player ... ever. We will be lucky if they are decent role players.

Also, players who score more than 9 pts per game seems to stick ... only two have averaged more than 9 in their first two seasons and have been cut ... http://bkref.com/tiny/q6PmY

On the other hand, 479 players have been cut since 1998 who didn't average more than 9 points per game in their first two seasons. If I included those players the percentage would be skewed badly for those averaging less than 9 per game.

There is nothing I don't understand. You're stating common sense. It's too bad you've compiled so much research to prove that players that score less usually don't fare as well in the long run as people who score more. Players who score fewer than 5 ppg, probably even do worse.

One more time....my statements were that I wasn't expecting them to become stars, and scoring under a certain number of points doesn't make it certain they will be busts. There are plenty of examples, as your charts you posted earlier show that. Of course there are plenty of players who score more or less than a threshold that do bust or do not become stars. Yes, it's obvious that scoring more bodes better. No one is arguing otherwise. Does it make anything a certainty? Of course not.

It's the exact same thing as the odds of the higher the pick, the greater chance of being an all star. There have been plenty of charts showing that as well. Higher pick = higher chance of success. As you have pointed out, lower picks often do well also, so just because you get a lower pick, just like just because you score lower than a certain number of points, doesn't ensure there is no chance for success.

[bigfoot]

I do not think we are developing bad or well...it is more about the player. It is his responsability.

Did we developed Booker? Did we developed Warren? The truth IMO is that they are good because they want to be great and they work hard because both love the game.

Booker and Warren are gamers. They love to train and play basketball all the time. They do not need a coach on them saying "you need to train harder".

Chriss and Bender need to work as hard as they can to improve their games, their bodies, their skillset......but they seem to think that they are "good enough" just being in the league. With them I do not get the feel that they love the game.

That is not a good sign for their future...hopefully both improve their work ethic and improve on our team, but they need to begin NOW.

Exactly this. The new trend is the one and done in college. It gives the younger players the best chance of going top 10 based off raw talent/athleticism, and even if they bust they still cash in over the course of 4 years 8 figures. I mentioned this before but a college ball player told me if he was able to get drafted, he doesn't care where he goes to, he'd play in Alaska, he just wants that money. I'd say most players don't care about being the best player they just do this as a job. Josh Jackson said some good things, mentioning he wants the teams that didn't draft him to regret their decision, so it sounds like he wants to be the best player possible.

Of course Josh Jackson gets paid a cool $9M in his fourth year so it's easy to talk it up. Bender was basically given a $22M over four year contract. Booker got chump change at $10M for four years. Shows you how screwed up the rookie pay scale is when Booker can put up ridiculous numbers but get less money than high pick busts. I agree this one and done needs to be eliminated or rookie contracts need to be performance based. The quality of play in the league suffers when better veterans are pushed out by worthless rookies. Most of these players get contracts because they are athletic and can dunk over college scrubs. Sadly most can't shoot a lick. Time to start drafting players who can shoot a high percentage outside the key and to the 3 pt line as well as from the free throw line.

[bwgood77]

Wait. We're cool with waiting 3 years to be competitive? When did we become the Cleveland Browns?

Wasn't that the whole plan coming in? 2020?

More than just making the playoffs by 2020. What's everyone's definition of compeitive?

Competing in games. Having a chance to win in each game is competitive. Contender to make playoffs in 2020. My expectations were right with the projections....maybe 27 wins....or one win in 3 games. We've won about 1 in 3. I wasn't expecting us to lose Bledsoe or our coach after 3 games either or for us to be so ill prepared to start the season.

And we still are winning about 1 in 3 despite that horrid start. Triano took over and immediately coached them to win 4 of the next 5. He' had us pretty competitive in many games and the coaching has gotten better overall. Chriss is looking much better. Bender looked much better prior to the broken nose and mask. Is shooting much better than last year from 3. Looked solid defensively moving around early. Much better than last year prior to the nose/mask. Ulis and Chriss have regressed but both have improved as of late. Booker is out. A bunch of other injuries.

I'm not going to whine about every little thing that goes wrong, even though more things than I could have ever imagined have.

[ImNotMcDiSwear]

Of course it's better to score more, IF it's efficient. The criteria (each of those categories you list) are fairly lofty accomplishments. Plus, using only active players, you are leaving out any players who exceeded 9ppg and didn't stick around in the league.

Okay ... it simple. Is there are correlation between points scored in the first two seasons and "lofty" accomplishments? It should be obvious that a player scoring 5 per game over their first two seasons is never going to be an all-star. However someone like Booker averaging 18 per game really has a chance of being an all-star. Not sure what you don't understand about that. Bender and Chriss are unlikely to be a star player ... ever. We will be lucky if they are decent role players.

Also, players who score more than 9 pts per game seems to stick ... only two have averaged more than 9 in their first two seasons and have been cut ... http://bkref.com/tiny/q6PmY

On the other hand, 479 players have been cut since 1998 who didn't average more than 9 points per game in their first two seasons. If I included those players the percentage would be skewed badly for those averaging less than 9 per game.

There is nothing I don't understand. You're stating common sense. It's too bad you've compiled so much research to prove that players that score less usually don't fare as well in the long run as people who score more. Players who score fewer than 5 ppg, probably even do worse.

One more time....my statements were that I wasn't expecting them to become stars, and scoring under a certain number of points doesn't make it certain they will be busts. There are plenty of examples, as your charts you posted earlier show that. Of course there are plenty of players who score more or less than a threshold that do bust or do not become stars. Yes, it's obvious that scoring more bodes better. No one is arguing otherwise. Does it make anything a certainty? Of course not.

It's the exact same thing as the odds of the higher the pick, the greater chance of being an all star. There have been plenty of charts showing that as well. Higher pick = higher chance of success. As you have pointed out, lower picks often do well also, so just because you get a lower pick, just like just because you score lower than a certain number of points, doesn't ensure there is no chance for success.

What's weird here is seeing so much attention to statistics paired with so little attention to reason. You can narrow and widen these fields. Certain indicators become less or more predictive depending on circumstances, league trends, etc. These stats simply are not helpful.

The things that should make one optimistic or pessimistic about our two power forwards have nothing to do with these stats and everything to do with the eye test and the age and physical and mental profiles of the players. At the moment, I'm most concerned about Bender's mental make up. His comment about "just wanting to win" struck a nerve with me. Where's the hunger? Where's the drive? Great players want to play. It's unclear that Dragan cares very much.

Anyone who thinks it is time to render a decision one way or another about these kids are just plucking the feathers of the crow they're bound to eat. It's just way too early. Period.

[bwgood77]

Triano said there’s a simple solution to Bender getting more minutes: earn them.

“I don’t think competition is bad especially when you’re a young player and you’re not guaranteed minutes,” he said. “He has to play better. You guys have seen it. I’ve had Marquese in the doghouse. I’ve had Josh (Jackson) in the doghouse. If you want to say Dragan is not playing well enough to be on the court right now that’s fine. I want it to be competition. That’s part of our growth.”

And the mask?

“I know the mask does bother him. It bothers him shooting and it bothers him rebounding,” Triano said. “So he’s gotta figure it out.”

https://www.azcentral.com/story/sports/nba/suns/2017/12/11/phoenix-suns-dragan-bender-jay-triano-devin-booker/942531001/

Some fans might not agree with this since for some reason they think just because they were top 10 picks they are suddenly deserving of undeserved playing time and while others would disagree with Triano's methods, this is how a real coach instill discipline. I don't care if we picked #1, if that player is not playing up to standards then they should come off the bench and at times sit in the doghouse.

I agree. Warren didn't get much time as a rookie either...everyone was complaining that Tucker was playing in front of him, but Warren hadn't earned it. With two years of college, his rookie year he was likely the same age as Chriss/Bender are now. Warren didn't even play too much early in his second year. He finally started playing a bit two months into the season only to break his leg. It sometimes takes a little time.

[jcsunsfan]

https://www.azcentral.com/story/sports/nba/suns/2017/12/11/phoenix-suns-dragan-bender-jay-triano-devin-booker/942531001/

Some fans might not agree with this since for some reason they think just because they were top 10 picks they are suddenly deserving of undeserved playing time and while others would disagree with Triano's methods, this is how a real coach instill discipline. I don't care if we picked #1, if that player is not playing up to standards then they should come off the bench and at times sit in the doghouse.

I agree. Warren didn't get much time as a rookie either...everyone was complaining that Tucker was playing in front of him, but Warren hadn't earned it. With two years of college, his rookie year he was likely the same age as Chriss/Bender are now. Warren didn't even play too much early in his second year. He finally started playing a bit two months into the season only to break his leg. It sometimes takes a little time.

Listen, we all want the players to get along with one another and for there to be a good spirit in the locker room. AND we want all the young players to get playing time. Some times you cannot have both. Bruce Arians said the fastest way for any coach to lose the locker room is to give playing time to players who have not earned it or do not deserve it. It is not easy to balance out this process.

[bwgood77]

Some fans might not agree with this since for some reason they think just because they were top 10 picks they are suddenly deserving of undeserved playing time and while others would disagree with Triano's methods, this is how a real coach instill discipline. I don't care if we picked #1, if that player is not playing up to standards then they should come off the bench and at times sit in the doghouse.

I agree. Warren didn't get much time as a rookie either...everyone was complaining that Tucker was playing in front of him, but Warren hadn't earned it. With two years of college, his rookie year he was likely the same age as Chriss/Bender are now. Warren didn't even play too much early in his second year. He finally started playing a bit two months into the season only to break his leg. It sometimes takes a little time.

Listen, we all want the players to get along with one another and for there to be a good spirit in the locker room. AND we want all the young players to get playing time. Some times you cannot have both. Bruce Arians said the fastest way for any coach to lose the locker room is to give playing time to players who have not earned it or do not deserve it. It is not easy to balance out this process.

I agree they need to earn it. Not only is it good for the locker room as a whole but it's good for their development. If they don't have to earn it, where is the incentive to work hard?

[Qwigglez]

Well with Bender and Chriss they don't have much competition besides each other. Actually hoping Alan Williams maybe able to get a fire lit under Chriss/Bender if he steals their playing time.

[Kerrsed]

I'm fine with the "earn it" mentality. The big problem is that Chriss didn't earn his opportunity. Watson just liked him more. So he's had a bit of an advantage in minutes since they were drafted. That's not to discount that he's been playing better than Bender by a good margin the last 3 weeks, but maybe there's a reason for that. Anyhow, all I ask for is consistency (and a new GM.)

Unless you were with the team during the offseason and at practices you cant say that Chriss didnt earn it.

Look, we had a hole in the PF spot and drafted 2. Im sure that Watson put in some kind of "Due Diligence" into who was the right person to start instead of just because he "likes someone more".

[bigfoot]

I'm fine with the "earn it" mentality. The big problem is that Chriss didn't earn his opportunity. Watson just liked him more. So he's had a bit of an advantage in minutes since they were drafted. That's not to discount that he's been playing better than Bender by a good margin the last 3 weeks, but maybe there's a reason for that. Anyhow, all I ask for is consistency (and a new GM.)

Unless you were with the team during the offseason and at practices you cant say that Chriss didnt earn it.

Look, we had a hole in the PF spot and drafted 2. Im sure that Watson put in some kind of "Due Diligence" into who was the right person to start instead of just because he "likes someone more".

It was pretty obvious that Chriss came into camp and the season fat and out of shape. Dudley was hurt. Bender and Peters not ready either. Chriss wasn't even deserving. Watson didn't put Chriss into the starting lineup. It was

Booker
Bledsoe
Jackson
Warren
Chandler

Chriss got his opportunity in the fourth game when Triano took over. Coach T did it to simplify rotations and have players at one spot only. Neither of the two deserves to start. Honestly, Dudley should be starting over them until they "earn" the spot. I would really love to see them sent to the G league and bring up Peters to light a fire under them.

[NTB]

Read on Twitter

[Fo-Real]

Well with Bender and Chriss they don't have much competition besides each other. Actually hoping Alan Williams maybe able to get a fire lit under Chriss/Bender if he steals their playing time.

With how very little each contribute (chriss and bender), I honestly think if we were to promote Anthony Bennett from the G league squad, he could not do any worse. He would probably give us more right now than either of the young guys.

[LukasBMW]

Read on Twitter

Not a surprise. He's a fringe player.

[lilfishi22]

They probably have very limited value in trade any time soon until they produce and are more effective and if that happens, then it might not be the best idea to trade him. Sure, theoretically, if we could get a great player in exchange for a few of our under performing pieces, if the player wasn't on the downside of his prime, I might not be opposed to such a trade.

There is a very good chance Sarver feels the way some of the people who want some sort of trade and immediate success to happen, and pressure McD into making any move, and it could end up being another Brandon Knight fiasco. I don't see any big difference makers likely on the trade market. If they are put on the trade block, I'm guessing they will be guys past (and probably well past) their prime.

That's not necessarily true. A team looking to rebuild may look at an expiring/young player(s)/picks. We have all 3.

[Mulhollanddrive]

The franchise and fans have to get over the mentality that players on a terrible team are too good to be traded.

I remember reading people say Len would be a deal breaker for Cousins, Goodwin would be a deal breaker for George, Chriss would be a deal breaker for Porzingis, Warren would be a deal breaker for Irving etc...

[SideSwipe]

Read on Twitter

Not a surprise. He's a fringe player.

He is only a body away from not being it though. If I were a rebuilding team like Atlanta or Orlando, I would have taken an interest. Just as likely I think is that Jones and his agent steered teams away so that Jones stays close to PHX so they can call him back up after a trade. I wonder if they will drop Danuel House, then grab Jones as a 2WP

[lilfishi22]

The franchise and fans have to get over the mentality that players on a terrible team are too good to be traded.

I remember reading people say Len would be a deal breaker for Cousins, Goodwin would be a deal breaker for George, Chriss would be a deal breaker for Porzingis, Warren would be a deal breaker for Irving etc...

+1

[lilfishi22]

Read on Twitter

Not a surprise. He's a fringe player.

He is only a body away from not being it though. If I were a rebuilding team like Atlanta or Orlando, I would have taken an interest. Just as likely I think is that Jones and his agent steered teams away so that Jones stays close to PHX so they can call him back up after a trade. I wonder if they will drop Danuel House, then grab Jones as a 2WP

I don't get this fascination with Jones...he's just another super young, ultra athletic player who hasn't figured out how to play the game yet. If he ever figures it out, I'll be happy to have him back on the team but I'm not wasting a 2 way contract on a guy who still haven't found a way to contribute. And it's not like the guy as a body of work from the D/G league that's begging for a call up.

If I want a G-League level player on this team, I'd want a guy who's lighting up the G-League