Watching the Twins succeed from afar.....

Phrazbit

ASFN Icon
Joined
Oct 10, 2011
Posts
19,842
Reaction score
10,711
That's way over-generalized and you know that. We limped into the playoffs last year -- we had the best record, but we had all but given up playing at a high level the day after CP3's birthday. Barely got through the Pelicans, and we all know what happened with Dallas.

On PAPER we've been one of the best franchise's in the history of the league. But we haven't won a title. When you do the same thing over and over and nothing comes of it, you have to change it up.

I know what happened, but I am saying I think our odds were better, our talent level compared to the competition was better.

In retrospect they shouldn't have taken the foot off the gas, they eased into the playoffs and lost their mojo.

I get the idea of "you gotta go for it at some point", I just don't think this was it. Maybe if we'd negotiated a better deal, but this feels like something the Knicks would do.
 

Phrazbit

ASFN Icon
Joined
Oct 10, 2011
Posts
19,842
Reaction score
10,711
You actually think CP3 has that kind of value? He's not the offensive threat he once was but he can run a team better than the young guys of today. With Durant and Book, we don't need him to be that.

But there's no denying he's one of the best to EVER play the game and deserves a real chance at a title if we can give it to him. Hell, we owe this renaissance at least partially to him, regardless of his actual skill level today.

I think his option heavy contract has value, but it's going to be hard use it for much of anything now because we don't have anything to pair it with.
 

Covert Rain

Father smelt of elderberries!
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2005
Posts
34,706
Reaction score
12,743
Location
Arizona
I know what happened, but I am saying I think our odds were better, our talent level compared to the competition was better.

In retrospect they shouldn't have taken the foot off the gas, they eased into the playoffs and lost their mojo.

I get the idea of "you gotta go for it at some point", I just don't think this was it. Maybe if we'd negotiated a better deal, but this feels like something the Knicks would do.
In retrospect with all the moves other teams made at the deadline? We were not getting out of the West as built this year. Our best chances were used up the past two seasons and we fell short. We had to try something.
 

Chaplin

Better off silent
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
45,182
Reaction score
14,947
Location
Round Rock, TX
I know what happened, but I am saying I think our odds were better, our talent level compared to the competition was better.

In retrospect they shouldn't have taken the foot off the gas, they eased into the playoffs and lost their mojo.

I get the idea of "you gotta go for it at some point", I just don't think this was it. Maybe if we'd negotiated a better deal, but this feels like something the Knicks would do.
Except the reality is that the Knicks wouldn't have the tools we had, nor the strong team we have now. The Knicks take risks with depreciating assets and are constantly fighting to just make the playoffs, let alone contend for a championship.
 

Phrazbit

ASFN Icon
Joined
Oct 10, 2011
Posts
19,842
Reaction score
10,711
In retrospect with all the moves other teams made at the deadline? We were not getting out of the West as built this year. Our best chances were used up the past two seasons and we fell short. We had to try something.

Yeah, you are right, other teams did add a lot at the deadline and improve their chances. Our chances this year were not what they were the previous 2 years, but when healthy this team still had the best record in the West and a strong outlook going forward.

This trade carried a massive opportunity cost.

As I keep saying, we had a good young core and a ton of flexibility and assets to add to that core. Players move around the league all the time. We are no longer in the mix to add high level talent, not for a long while and our team is now old.
 

Phrazbit

ASFN Icon
Joined
Oct 10, 2011
Posts
19,842
Reaction score
10,711
Except the reality is that the Knicks wouldn't have the tools we had, nor the strong team we have now. The Knicks take risks with depreciating assets and are constantly fighting to just make the playoffs, let alone contend for a championship.

Well... yeah, because they constantly overpay and have no patience to build and sustain success.

That is exactly why I think this is a very Knicks move.
 

Chaplin

Better off silent
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
45,182
Reaction score
14,947
Location
Round Rock, TX
Yeah, you are right, other teams did add a lot at the deadline and improve their chances. Our chances this year were not what they were the previous 2 years, but when healthy this team still had the best record in the West and a strong outlook going forward.

This trade carried a massive opportunity cost.

As I keep saying, we had a good young core and a ton of flexibility and assets to add to that core. Players move around the league all the time. We are no longer in the mix to add high level talent, not for a long while and our team is now old.
You can argue we weren't in the mix before the trade either. Except one of the top 5 players in the league decided he wanted to play with us. Didn't hear that from anyone else.
 

Phrazbit

ASFN Icon
Joined
Oct 10, 2011
Posts
19,842
Reaction score
10,711
Agree to disagree. And historically we don't disagree much! :)

Yeah, I am not saying I think the sky is falling and we're doomed. I do think our chances to win a title in the near future are improved and if we do win, I will be overjoyed. These next 3 seasons should, at the very least, be compelling.

I just hate the price we paid, IMO, we bid against ourselves, and I feel like these trades are typically really really bad for the long term outlook.
 

elindholm

edited for content
Joined
Sep 14, 2002
Posts
26,831
Reaction score
8,078
Location
L.A. area
Probability theory has a concept called "expected value" (EV). The way to figure out the EV for any possible course of action is you determine (as well as you can) the range of outcomes, and assign a probability to each. Then you assess the gain (positive value) or loss (negative value) of each outcome. You multiply each outcome's gain or loss by its probability, and then you add all of those products together to get the overall EV. In simplest terms, +EV move is a good idea and a -EV move is a bad one.

This was a -EV move. The potential reward of a title is huge, and that's a reward that is more likely after the trade. But it's still a small probability, and that's offset by the near certainty that the Suns will be in much worse shape toward the end of the decade.

"Well I had to at least try" is the kind of fatalistic thinking that makes gamblers go bankrupt. There's a saying in poker, "Don't throw good money after bad." What it means is, if you've already played the hand poorly and are likely to take a loss, don't compound the error by doubling down on a longshot. Once in a while you'll hit and justify the risk, but usually you'll just make matters worse, like struggling in quicksand.

If Ishbia plays poker, I'd guess he's quite bad at it, and deludes himself into thinking that his history of poor results is just bad luck. Someone in the habit of making -EV plays will have the numbers come back and bite them, sooner or later.

There's another saying in poker, where you watch someone make a bad mistake and say, "I want that guy at my table." Mat Ishbia, have a seat.
 

Covert Rain

Father smelt of elderberries!
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2005
Posts
34,706
Reaction score
12,743
Location
Arizona
Probability theory has a concept called "expected value" (EV). The way to figure out the EV for any possible course of action is you determine (as well as you can) the range of outcomes, and assign a probability to each. Then you assess the gain (positive value) or loss (negative value) of each outcome. You multiply each outcome's gain or loss by its probability, and then you add all of those products together to get the overall EV. In simplest terms, +EV move is a good idea and a -EV move is a bad one.

This was a -EV move. The potential reward of a title is huge, and that's a reward that is more likely after the trade. But it's still a small probability, and that's offset by the near certainty that the Suns will be in much worse shape toward the end of the decade.

"Well I had to at least try" is the kind of fatalistic thinking that makes gamblers go bankrupt. There's a saying in poker, "Don't throw good money after bad." What it means is, if you've already played the hand poorly and are likely to take a loss, don't compound the error by doubling down on a longshot. Once in a while you'll hit and justify the risk, but usually you'll just make matters worse, like struggling in quicksand.

If Ishbia plays poker, I'd guess he's quite bad at it, and deludes himself into thinking that his history of poor results is just bad luck. Someone in the habit of making -EV plays will have the numbers come back and bite them, sooner or later.

There's another saying in poker, where you watch someone make a bad mistake and say, "I want that guy at my table." Mat Ishbia, have a seat.

First you can't even quantify the odds of getting Durant vs staying put. The closest thing you have is Vegas odds and they got better not worse after this trade for the Suns.

Second, It's also the type of thinking some of the most successful people in the world endorse to some degree. You know. Like our owner?!?!? You can't be successful without taking risks. You are trying to overgeneralize taking risks by drawing a false equivalency to a predetermined outcome in poker?!!? Hell...you can't even overgeneralize in gambling as a rule because different games have vastly different odds. As someone who has worked in risk aversion for financial institutions this over-generalization is extreme.

The entire premise of your post is assuming that the equivalency is based on the worst possible outcome or being the worst possible poker player. At least with Poker you stand a chance if you know strategy. You are basically saying the same guy who put together an empire hedging risk for a living is equivalent to not being good enough to play poker. If you were going to make such a ridiculous comparison you should have at least used slots verses poker. Much worse odds.

I think everybody acknowledges this is definitely a risk but let's not get carried away. LOL.
 
Last edited:

Bufalay

ASFN Lifer
Joined
Jul 21, 2006
Posts
4,675
Reaction score
781
Probability theory has a concept called "expected value" (EV). The way to figure out the EV for any possible course of action is you determine (as well as you can) the range of outcomes, and assign a probability to each. Then you assess the gain (positive value) or loss (negative value) of each outcome. You multiply each outcome's gain or loss by its probability, and then you add all of those products together to get the overall EV. In simplest terms, +EV move is a good idea and a -EV move is a bad one.

This was a -EV move. The potential reward of a title is huge, and that's a reward that is more likely after the trade. But it's still a small probability, and that's offset by the near certainty that the Suns will be in much worse shape toward the end of the decade.

"Well I had to at least try" is the kind of fatalistic thinking that makes gamblers go bankrupt. There's a saying in poker, "Don't throw good money after bad." What it means is, if you've already played the hand poorly and are likely to take a loss, don't compound the error by doubling down on a longshot. Once in a while you'll hit and justify the risk, but usually you'll just make matters worse, like struggling in quicksand.

If Ishbia plays poker, I'd guess he's quite bad at it, and deludes himself into thinking that his history of poor results is just bad luck. Someone in the habit of making -EV plays will have the numbers come back and bite them, sooner or later.

There's another saying in poker, where you watch someone make a bad mistake and say, "I want that guy at my table." Mat Ishbia, have a seat.

EV can be calculate in many different ways. It depends on what you value.

Which timeline has a greater value?

timeline 1: 6 years of 48 wins and 6 first round playoff exits
timeline 2: 1 championship and 5 years of 11 wins.

I think that this trade increased the likelihood that the suns win 1 championship in the next 20 years, with this season and next having the highest odds.
 

Phrazbit

ASFN Icon
Joined
Oct 10, 2011
Posts
19,842
Reaction score
10,711
EV can be calculate in many different ways. It depends on what you value.

Which timeline has a greater value?

timeline 1: 6 years of 48 wins and 6 first round playoff exits
timeline 2: 1 championship and 5 years of 11 wins.

I think that this trade increased the likelihood that the suns win 1 championship in the next 20 years, with this season and next having the highest odds.

The problem is that there is no timeline that guarantees a championship and it's easy to make an argument that our overall odds of winning a title in the long term have been significantly damaged.
 

Mainstreet

Cruisin' Mainstreet
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Posts
113,392
Reaction score
53,061
Probability theory has a concept called "expected value" (EV). The way to figure out the EV for any possible course of action is you determine (as well as you can) the range of outcomes, and assign a probability to each. Then you assess the gain (positive value) or loss (negative value) of each outcome. You multiply each outcome's gain or loss by its probability, and then you add all of those products together to get the overall EV. In simplest terms, +EV move is a good idea and a -EV move is a bad one.

This was a -EV move. The potential reward of a title is huge, and that's a reward that is more likely after the trade. But it's still a small probability, and that's offset by the near certainty that the Suns will be in much worse shape toward the end of the decade.

"Well I had to at least try" is the kind of fatalistic thinking that makes gamblers go bankrupt. There's a saying in poker, "Don't throw good money after bad." What it means is, if you've already played the hand poorly and are likely to take a loss, don't compound the error by doubling down on a longshot. Once in a while you'll hit and justify the risk, but usually you'll just make matters worse, like struggling in quicksand.

If Ishbia plays poker, I'd guess he's quite bad at it, and deludes himself into thinking that his history of poor results is just bad luck. Someone in the habit of making -EV plays will have the numbers come back and bite them, sooner or later.

There's another saying in poker, where you watch someone make a bad mistake and say, "I want that guy at my table." Mat Ishbia, have a seat.

I tend to agree with most of what you present. I wouldn't have made the trade based on how much the Suns had to give up to get Durant.

Personally, I would have preferred the Suns strengthen their core roster in areas of need and run it back. I think they were awfully close to a championship when they went to the Finals and last season with a key move or two. I didn't think they had to add a star to get there.

However, I can't say the latter approach would improve the Suns odds for a championship, say over the next ten years, than the other approach.

I could have been happy with a winning Suns team over the next ten years, with the chance they find the winning formula and have a longer window of opportunity.

With that in mind, I think the Suns owner said this is our best opportunity, let's go for it. Who knows, maybe he is right.
 

Covert Rain

Father smelt of elderberries!
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2005
Posts
34,706
Reaction score
12,743
Location
Arizona
The problem is that there is no timeline that guarantees a championship and it's easy to make an argument that our overall odds of winning a title in the long term have been significantly damaged.
EV by definition is the anticipated value of an investment. It's not a guarantee. That's why he pointed out that EV can be calculated in different ways depending on your anticipated value. It doesn't matter that there is a long term argument for the worst outcome. It doesn't invalidate the argument that in the short term, while he is here, the odds are at the highest. Both scenarios can simultaneously be valid EVs.
 
Last edited:

CardsSunsDbacks

Not So Skeptical
Joined
Aug 26, 2012
Posts
9,966
Reaction score
6,247
Well, hearing that the next best offer was Memphis offering up 4 picks and 3 swaps and made their core untouchable... I'd call it a failure of negotiation. We blew that offer to smithereens.
Getting a player of Durant's caliber with 3 additional years left on his contract while still playing at the level he is playing at is unprecedented and is going to cost a lot.

You point to the next best offer being Memphis, but their tactic didn't get Brooklyn to bite. It took us adding in some talent to make it happen. Brooklyn had way more leverage in this situation than you are making them out to have. They could have simply waited until the offseason and probably had a 5-6 teams bidding against each other.
 

Phrazbit

ASFN Icon
Joined
Oct 10, 2011
Posts
19,842
Reaction score
10,711
Getting a player of Durant's caliber with 3 additional years left on his contract while still playing at the level he is playing at is unprecedented and is going to cost a lot.

You point to the next best offer being Memphis, but their tactic didn't get Brooklyn to bite. It took us adding in some talent to make it happen. Brooklyn had way more leverage in this situation than you are making them out to have. They could have simply waited until the offseason and probably had a 5-6 teams bidding against each other.

I disagree, sitting on him would have been a huge risk. Durant's value, had he decided to shut it down for the rest of the year (which I think would have been likely) would have absolutely tanked. He also made it clear he wanted to be in Phoenix, generally, teams don't mortgage their future for players who don't want to join them.

And if Durant plays like an MVP and gets and stays healthy for the majority of the next 3 years, that would be great, but those odds seem dubious.
 

Covert Rain

Father smelt of elderberries!
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2005
Posts
34,706
Reaction score
12,743
Location
Arizona
I disagree, sitting on him would have been a huge risk. Durant's value, had he decided to shut it down for the rest of the year (which I think would have been likely) would have absolutely tanked. He also made it clear he wanted to be in Phoenix, generally, teams don't mortgage their future for players who don't want to join them.

And if Durant plays like an MVP and gets and stays healthy for the majority of the next 3 years, that would be great, but those odds seem dubious.
The value of a player like Durant would not have tanked.
 

Phrazbit

ASFN Icon
Joined
Oct 10, 2011
Posts
19,842
Reaction score
10,711
The value of a player like Durant would not have tanked.

He isn't made of gold.

If he sat out the remainder of the year for his knee and continued to make it know he only wanted to be in Phoenix... yes, his trade value would have absolutely plummeted. Even you said that they had to move him.
 

Covert Rain

Father smelt of elderberries!
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2005
Posts
34,706
Reaction score
12,743
Location
Arizona
He isn't made of gold.

If he sat out the remainder of the year for his knee and continued to make it know he only wanted to be in Phoenix... yes, his trade value would have absolutely plummeted. Even you said that they had to move him.
Oh you’re saying sitting out for medical reasons. Gotcha.
Still depends on the medical reports. If they said he would recover 100%? His value is still there. If there was uncertainty? The Nets would wait until he hit the court again to maximize his value.
 

Phrazbit

ASFN Icon
Joined
Oct 10, 2011
Posts
19,842
Reaction score
10,711
Oh you’re saying sitting out for medical reasons. Gotcha.
Still depends on the medical reports. If they said he would recover 100%? His value is still there. If there was uncertainty? The Nets would wait until he hit the court again to maximize his value.

I'm more saying I think he would use his knee as an excuse to sit out.

He had made a trade request, his 2nd one in under a year, I don't think he was ever going to play for them again. They had to move him.
 

BirdGangThing

Casual Fan
Joined
Dec 27, 2019
Posts
12,779
Reaction score
16,472
Location
Arcadia
Always been a big fan of both Mikal and Cam - I think Cam has actually been undervalued or underhated or whatever you wanna call it in all this as I see him being no where near his ceiling yet

Mikal is a stud on both sides of the court who has more of a chance to become an All Star on both sides of the court now that he's in Brooklyn

I think the duo will end up averaging over 40 points per game next year. I think they both could be around 40% from 3. Brooklyn got good return value

That being said, I would have traded 2 Mikal's and 2 Cam Johnsons for 1 Kevin Durant. There would obviously be less draft picks involved in this purely hypothetical but the point I'm making is Kevin Durant is still that good and we have a team he can win a ring with

That's it. Love me some twins. Hate to see them go, wish them the best, but even Mikal understands why the Suns had to make this trade. Draft picks schmaft pricks. We got Daddy big bucks now and, where there's a willing billionaire there's always a way.

This is it. Soak it in. It's happening.
 
Last edited:

elindholm

edited for content
Joined
Sep 14, 2002
Posts
26,831
Reaction score
8,078
Location
L.A. area
EV can be calculate in many different ways. It depends on what you value.

Which timeline has a greater value?

timeline 1: 6 years of 48 wins and 6 first round playoff exits
timeline 2: 1 championship and 5 years of 11 wins.

Timeline 2 has more value to me.

I think that this trade increased the likelihood that the suns win 1 championship in the next 20 years, with this season and next having the highest odds.

Within the next three years, yes. Within the next 10 years, I doubt it. Within the next 20 years, too hard to say.
 

Joe Mama

Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
9,451
Reaction score
784
Location
Gilbert, AZ
Always been a big fan of both Mikal and Cam - I think Cam has actually been undervalued or underhated or whatever you wanna call it in all this as I see him being no where near his ceiling yet

Mikal is a stud on both sides of the court who has more of a chance to become an All Star on both sides of the court now that he's in Brooklyn

I think the duo will end up averaging over 40 points per game next year. I think they both could be around 40% from 3. Brooklyn got good return value

That being said, I would have traded 2 Mikal's and 2 Cam Johnsons for 1 Kevin Durant. There would obviously be less draft picks involved in this purely hypothetical but the point I'm making is Kevin Durant is still that good and we have a team he can win a ring with

That's it. Love me some twins. Hate to see them go, wish them the best, but even Mikal understands why the Suns had to make this trade. Draft picks schmaft pricks. We got Daddy big bucks now and, where there's a willing billionaire there's always a way.

This is it. Soak it in. It's happening.
This. They were my two favorite players on the team before the trade. CJ and then Bridges a close second. I would have been OK if we rolled it back for this year's playoffs and hoped for good health. Like you I always felt well healthy CJ was underrated and I think bridges was slightly overrated, especially defensively. I'm going to miss watching these guys but I think it was the right move to make now.

I know it's impossible to know the for sure, but I really doubt any of these draft picks are better than late lottery. God I hope that's right and even if we see more injuries they are not at the wrong time of year.

I think the Mavericks really exposed the Phoenix Suns last year with the strategy of doubling the ball out of Booker 's hands and putting a big physical defender on Paul to beat the hell out of him.

Back to work.

Joe
 

BirdGangThing

Casual Fan
Joined
Dec 27, 2019
Posts
12,779
Reaction score
16,472
Location
Arcadia
This. They were my two favorite players on the team before the trade. CJ and then Bridges a close second. I would have been OK if we rolled it back for this year's playoffs and hoped for good health. Like you I always felt well healthy CJ was underrated and I think bridges was slightly overrated, especially defensively. I'm going to miss watching these guys but I think it was the right move to make now.

I know it's impossible to know the for sure, but I really doubt any of these draft picks are better than late lottery. God I hope that's right and even if we see more injuries they are not at the wrong time of year.

I think the Mavericks really exposed the Phoenix Suns last year with the strategy of doubling the ball out of Booker 's hands and putting a big physical defender on Paul to beat the hell out of him.

Back to work.

Joe
And that's the thing. Not only did the Mavs wipe the court with us, they first got deeper in the off-season and then again with Kyrie Irving. Luka was loaded, much more so than Devin Booker was - and Kevin Durant just obliterated all that.
 
Top