This seems like a pretty square trade, though all things considered, I wouldn't be surprised if the Suns ultimately come out looking better than Houston. Ideally, KD would solve the scoring issues within the Rockets' roster, which the world witnessed this past postseason. Meanwhile, the Suns put themselves in a position to move forward post-Durant without being stuck in limbo or under pressure to win immediately. They may be garbage next season, but they're not going to trash(?). But if you were to force me, I would say in the grand scheme of things Phoenix got the best of the deal - even if not by a wide margin - for two main reasons:
KD IN PHOENIX HAS BEEN A DISASTER SINCE DAY ONE
This is the fault of the Suns' braintrust more so than Durant. You have to remember that they had a really good team before bringing KD in, a good team in the OKC Thunder sense - well-rounded, balanced, with size and depth, not overstacked at a particular position and complete with an MVP candidate (that being CP3). Remember that squad, pre-KD, actually made it to the Finals.
That compatibility was in large part due to the presence of CP3, perhaps the last true PG allowed to operate in the NBA. When Phoenix acquired KD, Paul instantly became redundant. Why? Because even with all-time great PGs by his side, like Kyrie for instance, Kevin still insists on running point, at least based on what I've seen.
KD is kinda like an Allen Iverson. If you have someone like him at the center of your offense, the other four guys should more or less be supporting players. You know, it's kinda hard to get mad at KD for hogging the ball. That's something Phoenix should have understood before not only putting him next to Booker but going even further to acquire Beal - all three of whom are used to being primary, allstar-level scorers and furthermore wings.
KD wasn't so much of a detrimental chuck when he won those championships with the Dubs, but they had already established themselves as champs beforehand, besides having Draymond "the Equalizer" Green. Like why was Draymond compelled to bark on him like that to begin with?
ANOTHER FAN FAVORITE BETRAYED
The Rockets, going back decades, have always had what may be considered an above-average braintrust. But remember that up until like last season, they spent some years in the garbage zone. They had these promising players like Green, Porter Jr., Smith Jr. and even Sengun but couldn't make it work. Then, came Dillon Brooks.
Players like Brooks and Draymond are, imo, the most valuable in the NBA in terms of their uniqueness. There's a number of guys out there that can put up triple-doubles. Lebron rarely plays defense, to the detriment of his team even, but because he can score, rebound and assist, you know, put up stats, you have pundits declaring him one of the players in the NBA. But off the top of my head, I can only think of three players in the entire league who have displayed the ability to regularly galvanize an entire team with their defensive tenacity, with none of the triple-double guys being amongst them.
I'll admit that, against the Warriors this past postseason, Brooks looked like a nonfactor. After watching the highlights, I even had to resort to box scores to make sure he played. I thought dude was injured or some shit. And it also seemed that Draymond took his heart and in doing so, definitively changed the tide of the series in the Dubs' favor. You know, I talk shit, you talk shit, but at the end of the day only the one who wins is going to be justified. Brooks is like a Draymond without a Steph.
I probably would have been more inclined to trade Fred VanVleet for KD, maybe. Fred carried the team offensively during Round 1, and you would think Houston would reward him by letting him shoulder more of that responsibility throughout. It's almost like acquiring Durant is a roundabout way of saying they don't believe in VanVleet, because it's difficult to see their styles meshing. I'm expecting that now, maybe Fred will play more off the ball, like a 2.
As for Jalen Green, yeah, he more or less had to go. Up until recently, he was arguably the star of the team, yet dude deadass got benched during crunchtime vs. the Dubs. There's really no need keeping him around under those circumstances, you know, if he isn't developing, and I don't quite see how he's going to fit next to Booker either (presumably, he'll be coming off the bench).
Hopefully Jalen will wind up in Milwaukee, like Kevin. That roster, with those old dogs upfront (i.e. if they keep Brooks), is better suited to accommodate young, erratic shooters. With Dame hurt they need that kinda energy, though in a more constructive way.
Maybe the Bucks will end up with Booker instead? But I can imagine both Porter Jr. and Green running wild next to Giannis, who more-fundamental style would be able to mitigate some of their shortcomings. If Milwaukee is going to retain Giannis, all things considered (i.e. an injured Dame being on the books), they need to start thinking a little outside of the box.
SHOUTOUT TO JABARI SMITH JR.(?)
Reportedly, the one player Houston was most keen on trading for Durant was Jabari Smith. You often hear pundits pointing out how beneficial it is for bigs to develop jumpers. But what I've been pointing out, for years now, is that in doing so many of them neglect their main advantage, which is their size.
There are some exceptional shooting Cs, but generally speaking Gs remain better at the job. If you allow dudes to take the easy way out, you know, hoisting up threes instead of posting up or driving, most of them will do it, even the biggest man on the court.
So what I'm envisioning is something like KD chuckin' as usual, and Jabari, instead of waiting under the basket for a rebound, rather opting to linger somewhere behind the three-point line, hoping for a pass. Indeed, he's the one player on the roster who truly becomes expendable with the presence of Durant, because they have similar builds and to some extent playing styles, tho KD being like 1000x more effective.
It's rare that three-pointers get blocked anyway. So you don't need to always have your tallest dude at the three-point line. But I have to imagine that Smith, once again given his height (and agility), must also have some perimeter D value.
WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? (PHOENIX SUNS)
Speaking of above-average braintrusts, as noted the Suns have made their mistakes in recent years, but they're also known for perennially fielding competitive rosters, if nothing else at least on paper. To be totally honest, I thought Beal + Booker + Durant + Nurkic, especially once they added Jones to the mix, was going to be akin to a contender. Things didn't work out like, I would speculate, off the top of my head, the reason being that if you have three high-scoring wings, then you'd have to have a respectable pass-first PG to complement them, you know, distribute the ball, make sure everyone gets their shots, etc.
The thing tho is that in today's NBA, there really isn't anything like "a respectably pass-first PG" since every Tom, Dick and Harry wants to run point or chuck up threes at will. And the coaches may sit around like 'yeah, our team prefer freestyle basketball', but at the end of the day, the players probably don't give two fucks what they have to say anyway. It's like everyone is an Iverson these days.
Speaking of which, I'm now starting to feel sorry for Thibs. I criticized him a lot in the past, but at least he, unless most of his peers, had a palpable coaching presence. And it's also now blatantly obvious that whoever NYK replaces Thibs with isn't going to be nearly as good as he is. You know what I mean? AI coach.
Going back to the Suns, their current roster isn't half bad. They'd definitely be a playoff team in the East. Btu what I'm foreseeing is at some point, you know what I'm saying?
Booker is like their Kobe, the star they drafted who, even after a decade, is still with the team that picked him. That kinda shit is a lot more common these days then some people realize. But ultimately, they should have never disbanded the aforementioned squad from a couple of seasons ago. Sometimes, you only get one chance type shit.
Alongside the likes of Ayton, CP3 and Bridges, Booker had a clearly-defined role that like didn't overlap any of his teammates. He was unanimously the 2-guard, the go-to scorer. Now, you have guys like Beal and Green alongside him. I'm not saying any of them are higher in the pecking order than Devin. But once again looking at OKC for instance, you see the value of having players who complement each other, rather than their skillsets overlapping.
That said, like Memphis and Houston before them, I do expect Phoenix to find value in Dillon Brooks. He's the type of player that virtually any squad can use. When you're in a field where dudes make million of dollars whether they win or lose, some extra fire is a good thing. I'm even hoping to one day see Dillon next to Draymond, as a mentee, eventually becoming his Warriors' replacement once Green retires. Draymond needs to stop scaring away potential teammates. The Suns gave up a player who's cancerous in the locker room sense and replaced him with someone who's known to like uplift entire squads though, like Draymond, Dillon could also benefit sometimes from less aggressiveness.
CONCLUSION
The Rockets needed additional scoring this past offseason, the key word in that sentence being past, because you can't take for granted say, for instance, that if they make the Playoffs next season (which they probably will), they'd once again face the Dubs. Fukaround and they find themselves against a team like the Thunder or Nuggets, and you find yourself asking would Brooks more beneficial in that scenario than KD?
As for the Suns, I would argue they got the better of this trade because, you know, they really-really needed to break up that Big 3, even if Durant hadn't request a trade. Houston needed more scoring power, but did they really need that much more? They probably could have packaged Green and Smith and got he type of scorer they needed, alongside VanVleet and Sengun, instead of, you know, going after one of the best in history. But I can understand, to some extent, why they wanted to get rid of Brooks, once again considering this past postseason. But how instrumental was he (and Green) to them finishing in 2nd place to begin with?
No comments:
Post a Comment