Worldwide Sports News

In the Bucks’ third preseason game, not only did Giannis make his preseason debut, but so did the starting lineup of Kevin Porter Jr., AJ Green, Gary Trent Jr., and Myles Turner around the two-time MVP. Playing these three guards together is curious, and a bit unconventional: Trent and Green have (or at least had, last year) overlapping skillsets, and neither was big enough to be a true three. But a similar small-ball “death lineup” with the three guards was so effective late last year that it became the talk of the offseason: Marques Johnson called the guard trio “the triumverate” in his appearance on our podcast Deer Diaries, as well as on his own, Hear District.

After Damian Lillard went down with deep vein thrombosis late in the year and missed the last fourteen games, the lineup of Porter, Green, Trent, Giannis, and Bobby Portis in Brook Lopez’s stead became an increasingly key part of victories, particularly during their season-ending eight-game win streak. It never started a game, but was the closing lineup for several important wins, notably against Minnesota and Detroit. We didn’t actually see that much of those five—after all, Porter didn’t join the team until February—but by the numbers, it was perhaps their most successful group, according to two sources:

• NBA.com Lineups Tool: 42 minutes, 144.6 offensive rating, 93.4 defensive rating, +51.2 net rating
• Cleaning The Glass: 88 possessions, 151.1 offensive rating, 96.6 defensive rating, +54.6 net rating

NBA.com ranked KPJ/Green/Trent/Giannis/Portis eighth in the entire league among lineups that played at least 30 minutes. CTG ranks it 100th percentile in net rating and offensive rating, and 95th in defensive rating. Compare these numbers with every lineup that played more minutes than them:

Lineup	Poss.	Net	%tile	ORtg	%tile	DRtg	%tile
Lillard/Jackson/Prince/Giannis/Lopez	653	-2.2	34th	110.9	27th	113.0	52nd
Lillard/Prince/Kuzma/Giannis/Lopez	428	+6.7	57th	116.4	45th	109.6	64th
Lillard/Trent/Prince/Giannis/Lopez	388	+1.3	44th	122.4	68th	121.1	22nd
Rollins/Prince/Kuzma/Giannis/Lopez	294	+13.0	73rd	130.3	89th	117.2	34th
Lillard/Green/Trent/Portis/Lopez	250	+20.4	86th	122.8	70th	102.4	87th
Lillard/Green/Prince/Giannis/Lopez	225	+16.9	80th	115.0	40th	89.2	93rd
Lillard/Trent/Prince/Portis/Lopez	167	+3.7	51st	120.4	63rd	116.7	37th
Lillard/Trent/Middleton/Giannis/Portis	112	+34.1	98th	141.1	99th	107.0	74th
Lillard/Green/Trent/Giannis/Lopez	108	+17.7	82nd	125.9	78th	108.3	70th
Lillard/Jackson/Middleton/Giannis/Lopez	96	-4.5	30th	107.3	18th	111.8	56th
Porter/Green/Trent/Kuzma/Sims	96	+4.2	51st	106.3	17th	102.0	88th
Lillard/Green/Trent/Kuzma/Sims	92	-27.2	3rd	101.1	8th	128.3	8th

If Doc had given them more run, they’d still probably be elite, even with some regression. Among groups with at least 100 possessions, the league’s best was the Clippers’ James Harden, Kris Dunn, Norm Powell, Amir Coffey (lol), and Ivica Zubac at +47.7 in 121 possessions. Hell, with the minimum set to 88 possessions, the Portis group was still tops—the only higher net belonged to one also broken up last offseason: Fred VanVleet, Amen Thompson, Dillon Brooks, Tari Eason, and Alperen Sengun in Houston. No other lineup came very close to these Bucks and Rockets “death lineups,” unless you lowered the threshold even further to find ones like Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, Isaiah Joe, Lu Dort, Aaron Wiggins, and Jalen Williams in OKC at +63.0 in 73 possessions.

Of course, Lopez left this offseason, and Turner assumed his mantle. The logic went that slotting Turner alongside Giannis and the guards, rather than Portis or Lopez, would work. Ergo, if you ask most Bucks fans online last offseason which five players they wanted Doc Rivers to play from the jump this year, their answer was Porter/Green/Trent/Giannis/Turner. That’s indeed what they got, as we saw in the season opener against Washington. But we haven’t seen it at a tipoff since, thanks in part to KPJ’s and Giannis’ injuries, plus Ryan Rollins’ emergence. In fact, since Porter sprained his ankle on opening night, that fivesome has played just 10 more minutes in only two games.

It’s been exceptional in the little time we’ve seen it: Cleaning The Glass, which filters out heaves and garbage time, has their net rating at +43.2 in 37 possessions, with a 154.1 offensive rating (both rank in the 100th percentile leaguewide) and a 110.8 defensive rating (85th). NBA.com has them at +48.9 in 17 total minutes this year, with an offensive rating of 156.8 and a defensive rating of 107.9. When asked how Porter, Green, and Trent were gelling so far in the preseason, here was Doc from his comments on October 12th, when we first saw them start with Giannis and Turner:

“They like it… They gotta keep moving to ball… there’ll be nights where we can’t go with three guards. When we go with [Kyle Kuzma] or [Amir Coffey] or [Taurean Prince]. But for the most part, we think we can do it. Our guards got a lot of toughness about them, so we think we can do it.”

Well, it turns out there were a lot of those nights, but Doc isn’t necessarily wrong. In all lineups where the three guards have played together, CTG gives them a +3.8 net in 129 possessions, though that’s based on defense: their defensive rating is 105.5, in the 97th percentile. Perhaps because of Trent’s decline, their offensive rating is a putrid, way down in 11th. That’s still a good lineup, but of course, these stats are buoyed by the opening-night starting five that includes Giannis. Remove that lineup from the equation, and you have eight with even stinkier offense—a 91.3 offensive rating (oth)—and elite defense—a 103.3 defensive rating (99th). That results in a -12.0 net over 92 possessions (8th). None of those eight other lineups include Giannis, meaning he’s barely played alongside these three guards this year.

Milwaukee has used last year’s +54.6 net “death lineup” (featuring Portis only once this year), not even for a full minute. That’s not too surprising because of injuries to two of its key members, so what about its effectiveness with Turner? Given his similar scoring ability and vastly superior defense to those of Portis, it’s easy to infer that swapping Turner in would work swimmingly. Similar formula: three guards with three-and-D capability, a big who also has an outside shot, and two ballhandlers, one of whom is freaking Giannis Antetokounmpo.

Nevertheless, I’m probably not the only one who both wanted the KPJ/Green/Trent/Giannis/Turner quintet on opening night, but also wondered if the success with Portis—and by extension, starting three guards—was a mirage. So I decided to do a little exercise comparing lineups from one year to the next around the league and see how they fared. But I had some parameters to set, given how relatively little the Portis group actually played. Even though they use minutes instead of possessions and don’t filter out garbage time, here I used NBA.com’s stats because I could set my minimum to 30 minutes.

Given the amount of annual roster turnover in the NBA, it’s not easy to find lineups that succeeded significant action in their first year and kept it up with a similar or larger minute load the following season. Trickier yet was to find a killer group that went from much more limited exposure—like our Portis example—to a modestly featured group. Or from under 100 minutes to a starting lineup that played most of the season. It would be even more cumbersome to go back years and years using these parameters. For now, let’s stick to 2023–24 and 2024–25, so we have full-season data. How did groups translate their success in limited playing time to the next league year? Here’s what I found:

Lineup	Team	MP	23–24 Net	MP	24–25 Net	Diff.
Mitchell/Allen/Strus/Garland/Wade	CLE	55	19.8	48	8.3	-11.5
LeVert/Niang/Mitchell/Struss/Mobley	CLE	42	10.4	72	-18.5	-28.9
SGA/Dort/Joe/Holmgren/J. Williams	OKC	101	16.0	53	4.7	-11.3
SGA/Dort/Wiggins/Holmgren/J. Williams	OKC	34	20.2	31	8.6	-11.6
SGA/Dort/Joe/Wallace/J. Williams	OKC	32	31.1	58	33.2	+2.1
Horford/White/Pritchard/Hauser/Tatum	BOS	31	50.8	38	-9.6	-60.4
Horford/White/Porzingis/Brown/Tatum	BOS	118	16.2	36	-9.4	-25.6
Horford/Holiday/Porzingis/Brown/Tatum	BOS	55	13.6	36	10.1	-3.5
Horford/Holiday/Porzingis/Brown/White	BOS	56	17.2	77	11.4	-5.8
Horford/Holiday/Porzingis/Tatum/White	BOS	87	13.0	56	8.0	-5.0
Horford/Holiday/Pritchard/Tatum/Hauser	BOS	105	16.8	31	10.2	-6.6
Holiday/Tatum/Kornet/Pritchard/Hauser	BOS	96	33.7	38	38.8	+5.1
Brown/White/Kornet/Pritchard/Hauser	BOS	34	20.9	39	7.8	-13.1
Holiday/Porzingis/Brown/Tatum/White	BOS	623	11.0	357	0.0	-11.0
Turner/Nembhard/Toppin/Haliburton/Nesmith	IND	36	19.3	47	26.7	+7.4
Turner/Siakam/Nembhard/Haliburton/Mathurin	IND	104	0.2	435	11.9	+11.7
Gordon/Jokic/Murray/Porter/Braun	DEN	28	8.6	426	10.6	+2.0
VanVleet/Brooks/Green/Sengun/Thompson	HOU	27	17.9	323	-7.6	-25.5

I threw in a weaker example from 2023–24—the +0.2 net Pacers group with Siakam—because of all the lineups I found that stayed together over both seasons, that one improved the most, from net-neutral to solidly above average. Granted, a few of these were only moderately successful in the first place, though it comes as little surprise that the best teams are generally keeping these groups together—it’s why those teams are good, after all. On the surface, the stats aren’t very encouraging; only five of the 18 lineups improved. And on average, their net dropped by 10.6 points per 100 possessions.

The good news is that 12 of these 18 lineups were at least productive (for reference, CTG says any lineup with a net of +10 or better was at least in the 64th percentile last year). And all these teams had at least one in 2023–24 that was really good, at +15.1 or better in at least 100 possessions, the top 20% of the league. Only three of those lineups improved in 2024–25, but the really elite groups—+31 or better, 95th percentile on up—stayed elite, except for the Boston example with Pritchard.

It’s worth pointing out that several more of the best 2023–24 lineups were broken up by player movement, most notably with Julius Randle and Isaiah Hartenstein leaving the Knicks, plus Josh Giddey leaving the Thunder. But much like the Bucks did with Turner, those teams replaced those guys with serious talent, so let’s see if any of the best 2023–24 lineups benefited from a personnel upgrade the following season. This will be a bit inexact (New York was especially tricky because of the Mikal Bridges acquisition), but I sought out successful 2023–24 lineups from teams that incorporated a high-profile offseason acquisition into similar 2024–25 lineups, or at least lineups that featured prominent returning players. I considered some other moves, like Paul George to Philadelphia, but there was too much turnover on these teams’ rosters between seasons to find similar-enough lineups. Anyway, onto the numbers, with offseason additions in bold (for the Knicks’ purposes, we’ll treat Quentin Grimes for Cam Payne as a wash):

Lineup	Team	MP	23–24 Net	MP	24–25 Net	Diff.
Anunoby/Hart/McBride/Grimes/Achiuwa	NYK	41	20.9
Anunoby/Hart/McBride/Payne/Towns	NYK			39	10.6	-10.3
Anunoby/Hart/Brunson/Grimes/Achiuwa	NYK	41	45.5
Anunoby/Hart/Brunson/McBride/Towns	NYK			84	34.4	-11.1
Randle/Grimes/Robinson/Hart/Brunson	NYK	109	-12.2
Towns/Anunoby/Payne/Hart/Brunson	NYK			98	25.7	+37.9
Randle/Anunoby/Hartenstein/Hart/Brunson	NYK	41	60.2
Towns/Anunoby/Payne/Hart/Brunson	NYK			98	25.7	-34.5
SGA/Wallace/Joe/J. Williams/K. Williams	OKC	55	35.6
SGA/Wallace/Joe/J. Williams/Hartenstein	OKC			38	-24.1	-59.7
SGA/Dort/Joe/Wallace/J. Williams	OKC	32	31.1
SGA/Dort/Hartenstein/Wallace/J. Williams	OKC			316	15.9	-15.2
SGA/Dort/Giddey/Wallace/J. Williams	OKC	35	-3.4
SGA/Dort/Hartenstein/Wallace/J. Williams	OKC			316	15.9	+19.3
SGA/Dort/Joe/J. Williams/Holmgren	OKC	101	16.0
SGA/Dort/Hartenstein/J. Williams/Holmgren	OKC			167	15.0	-1.0
SGA/Dort/Giddey/J. Williams/Holmgren	OKC	799	10.2
SGA/Dort/Hartenstein/J. Williams/Holmgren	OKC			167	15.0	+4.8
SGA/Wallace/Joe/Wiggins/J. Williams	OKC	42	5.8
SGA/Wallace/Hartenstein/Wiggins/J. Williams	OKC			30	-1.9	-7.7
Conley/Gobert/Towns/Edwards/McDaniels	MIN	641	7.9
Conley/Gobert/Randle/Edwards/McDaniels	MIN			714	3.2	-4.7
Conley/Gobert/Towns/Edwards/Alexander-Walker	MIN	124	7.6
Conley/Gobert/Randle/Edwards/Alexander-Walker	MIN			45	31.2	+23.6
Alexander-Walker/Gobert/Towns/Edwards/McDaniels	MIN	106	6.4
Alexander-Walker/Gobert/Randle/Edwards/McDaniels	MIN			146	8.0	+1.6
Alexander-Walker/Reid/Towns/Edwards/McDaniels	MIN	44	44.5
Alexander-Walker/Reid/Randle/Edwards/McDaniels	MIN			78	-3.5	-48.0

Coincidentally, these examples are all teams that added a new big man. These lineups’ net dropped by an average of 7.5 points per 100—better, but still not good. Again, most of the new lineups were great overall, though: eight of the 14 were at least +15.0. And ones that were excellent in small sample sizes were generally still great with more playing time. As before, these are some of the league’s teams, adding to groupings that already proved effective.

You might think I’ve strayed from the premise of this article a bit, but there were plenty of three-guard lineups above in OKC and New York. In part two, we’ll figure out whether three guards is still a look Milwaukee should use, with or without Turner. Spoiler alert: Gary Trent Jr. is exactly not part of the answer. And we’ll see if these patterns still hold when other teams add a prominent big man to their lineups, much like the Bucks did this offseason.

Second round draft picks move around a lot and are usually not valued very highly. But, as things currently stand, it looks like the Washington Wizards will be selecting two or three players in the second round of the 2026 NBA Draft. 

Players drafted in the second round rarely end up factoring into a team’s long term plans. Nikola Jokic (No. 41, 2014), Manu Ginobili (No. 57, 1999), Draymond Green (No. 35, 2012) and Jalen Brunson (No. 33, 2018) are the exceptions, not the rule, and more often than not second round picks end up fizzling out after a few seasons of toiling between the G-League and the NBA.

Despite the relatively low chances of success, there is still legitimate talent after the first 30 picks. From this year’s Rising Stars Game, Memphis Grizzlies guards Cam Spencer (No. 53, 2024) and Jaylen Wells (No. 39, 2024) were both taken in the second round.

For second round prospects, I generally look at guys who I think have a specific skillset that would allow them to play a small role in a rotation rather than more “boom or bust” players. 

Here are a few sleepers the Wizards could target in this year’s second round that could make a real impact on their NBA roster:

Motiejus Krivas, 7’2” Junior Center from Arizona

Motiejus Krivas has flown a bit under the radar this season for No. 4 Arizona, who were undefeated before two recent back-to-back losses to Kansas and Texas Tech. The freshman duo of forward Koa Peat and guard Brayden Burries have gotten most of the headlines, but Krivas has arguably been the Wildcats’ most important player, anchoring their defense as one of the country’s best rim protectors. 

The Lithuanian native, who played in the Lithuanian second division before making his way to the United States college basketball and has lots of experience at the international level, is averaging 11.1 points, 8.7 rebounds and 1.9 blocks per game while shooting 59.4% from the field and 79.2% from the free throw line. Krivas is the exact type of high floor, low ceiling type of player teams should be targeting in the second round. A player with that combination of size, shot-blocking and touch around the rim should be able to stick around as a backup center for almost any NBA team.

Arizona's Motiejus Krivas is quickly becoming the poster boy for an incredibly valuable intersection of length and offensive rebounding

over his first 9 games of the season Krivas has logged an 18.1% offensive rebounding rate, good for 6th among all high major players

Krivas'… pic.twitter.com/4XLvoH0oxx

— Sheed on the Hawks (@SheedinATL) December 15, 2025

Blue Cain, 6’5” junior guard from Georgia

Georgia basketball often takes a back seat to the football team down in Athens, but the Bulldogs have put together a solid season and are currently projected to be a 10 seed in ESPN’s Joe Lunardi’s latest bracketology. Blue Cain is one of the biggest reasons why. Cain has elite athleticism, can pour in points and is truly elite at finishing around the rim, averaging 13.6 points, 5.3 rebounds, 2.4 assists and 1.4 steals per game. 

The biggest knock on Cain is his three point shooting. This season, Cain is shooting 27.9% from three but is making up for it with an impressive 62.1% two-point field goal percentage. There is hope that Cain could develop a three though. He shot 34.1% and 35.0% from three the past two seasons and is an 89.4% shooter from the free throw line. If Cain bulks up a bit and his shot becomes more consistent, it is easy to envision his role as a microwave scorer off the bench, similar to a Donte DiVincenzo or an early-career Immanuel Quickley. 

Blue Cain is such a fun offensive operator.

An aggressive bucket-getter who’s really stepped up his offensive production in recent games. Plays with great pace and control, putting pressure on defenses downhill — just needs to steady that three-point consistency to take another… pic.twitter.com/qKDL9j5Ig6

— Matt (@HoopHound5) February 16, 2026

Kashie Natt, 6’3” senior guard from Sam Houston State

I am not going to lie, this is a bit of an outside-the-box prospect. Low-major college players like Kashie Natt who spent three seasons at a junior college are rarely, if ever considered potential NBA players. Natt’s highlights recently came across my Twitter timeline, and I have not been able to stop thinking about his defensive potential. Despite his non-traditional background, Natt has one of the most fascinating skillsets in all of college basketball and could carve himself out a role in the NBA if he is given the chance. 

At 6’3”, 190 pounds, Natt is averaging 2.1 steals, 0.6 blocks and 7.4 rebounds in just 24.9 minutes per game.  He has a ridiculous 4.7% steal rate and 2.9% block rate. Natt can also hold his own on the offensive side of the ball, averaging 10.7 points per game while shooting 41.8% from three. Natt’s defensive instincts and on-ball prowess are tantalizing, and even if he is not able to be a league-average shooter, should be enough to earn him a spot on most NBA rosters. Natt is certainly a risk, but it may be worth taking a shot for someone with his defensive potential in the second round.

Sam Houston State's 6'3 Kashie Natt has been an absurd defensive catalyst at the MM level this season.

He's averaging 10.3 PPG, 7.3 RPG (which ranks second in D1 for anyone shorter than 6'5) 2.3 APG, 2.9 stocks per game on 45/44/77 splits

Natt's combination of tier a… pic.twitter.com/MZPmDLcIDj

— Arman Jovic (@PDTScouting) February 8, 2026

Paul McNeil, 6’5’ sophomore guard from N.C. State

I have had my eye on Paul McNeil ever since I was on the broadcast of the 2024 Capital Classic high school All-Star game and saw him hit a buzzer-beater three to give his team the victory. After a disappointing freshman season at N.C. State that saw him struggle to carve out his spot in the rotation, McNeil has thrived this year under new head coach Will Wade. The best part of McNeil’s game is his shooting, and that usually translates well to the next level. He can create his own shot off of the dribble and uses a high release to be able to get his shot off through traffic and above taller defenders.

McNeil is averaging 13.6 points per game while shooting an ACC-best 43.5% from three on 7.2 attempts per game. He can be a bit of a streaky scorer though. McNeil’s best game of the season came in December when he scored 47 points on 11-17 shooting from three and was a perfect 12-12 from the free throw line against Texas Southern. On the flip side, he has also had multiple zero point performances this season. His perimeter shotmaking should be enough to get him looks during the second round this year despite some of those consistency issues and concerns about his slight frame and defensive deficiencies. 

paul mcneil jr. has a strong case as the 2026 draft's best 3pt shooting prospect; he's authoring one of the best wing shooting seasons in recent history, currently making 42.9% of his 15.2 3pa/100 and 80.2% at the line (32.4 FTr)

shotmaking tape full of ludicrous moments pic.twitter.com/KXfD1LFP4H

— Ben Pfeifer (@bjpf_) February 4, 2026

Jeff Teague believes Ron Harper was out of line for throwing shade at LeBron James during NBA All-Star Weekend.

Teague, 10-year NBA vet, went after the Bulls legend on the “Club 520 Podcast” this week, after Harper insinuated during a chat with reporters that James forced his two sons, Bronny and Bryce, to follow in his basketball footsteps.

Jeff Teague talking about Ron Harper comments about LeBron

“I swear to God I can’t wait for the moment LeBron have a moment like me. Bro be act like Bronny and them didn’t want to hoop. I’m protecting LeBron today. Fu*k that. I know everybody always be I done fouled him and did… https://t.co/4xYi00ghXbpic.twitter.com/9VYeYkyAie

— NBA Courtside (@NBA__Courtside) February 16, 2026

“The last people who needed to hoop was Bronny and Bryce,” Teague, a former NBA champion, said. “They could be just chillin’, bro, if they wanted to, bro. They probably just like basketball.

“Respect to Ron Harper, because he’s a legend. But, come on, bro. Leave ‘Bron out of there, bro. Leave ‘Bron out of that.”

Harper threw his barb James’ way following a question about if he had a “vision” of seeing his sons, NBA players Dylan and Ron Jr., play in All-Star festivities.

Ron Harper on if he expected his sons to follow his footsteps & play in the NBA:

“I’m not LeBron James I’m not going to tell my kids what they have do.”

Ron Harper Jr. and Dylan Harper: “Yooo”



h/t @CelticsCLNSpic.twitter.com/k5Ds5wydtw

— NBA Retweet (@RTNBA) February 15, 2026

“I’m not LeBron James,” Harper said. “I’m not going to tell my kids what they have do.”

Teague went on for over a minute about why he felt the remarks were petty.

“He act like Bronny and them didn’t want to hoop,” Teague said. “I’m protecting LeBron today. F—k that. 

“He’s the last n—a whose kids got to do anything.”

Both Bronny and Bryce began their basketball careers as toddlers. Bronny, of course, went on to play at USC before joining his dad on the Lakers in 2024. Bryce, meanwhile, is in the middle of his redshirting his freshman season at Arizona.

None of the Jameses have addressed Harper’s jab, though Harper’s kids certainly seemed displeased with the comments, as they both gave stunned reactions after the words left their famous father’s lips.

Oh? Is that a soapbox over there? Well, it would be rude of me not to step upon it for a few moments, so step I shall…

I have some news that I’m not sure everybody knows to be true. This may come as a shock. This may come as a surprise. Or you may have already navigated to this level of philosophical understanding as it pertains to NBA roster construction. We’ll see shortly. That news? The perfect roster in the NBA sounds great in theory, but it does not actually exist.

Did you drop your tea? Is that blood boiling, making your face red, or were you out in the sun too long at the Goldfield Mine Ghost Town this past Saturday? Sunblock. You should use it.

It’s true. The perfect roster? Not a thing. One team wins the championship every year, and even that fan base can rattle off a list of things they wish were better. A little more shooting here, a little more size there, another defender they trust when things get tight. That is the reality of the league, and quite honestly, sport in general. There is always room to improve. Perfection is the pursuit, but it is not attainable. The goal is to be as perfect as possible, knowing perfection cannot be reached.

Even if you somehow checked every box on paper, size, speed, rim pressure, shooting, defense, and versatility, there is still a hard truth waiting for you. A basketball game only has 48 minutes. There are only so many possessions, only so many lineups, only so many moments where the right five can be on the floor together. You can build the cleanest roster imaginable, but if the wrong guys are playing at the wrong time against the wrong opponent, you can still walk off the floor with a loss.

That is the part that never shows up in roster diagrams or trade deadline grades. Talent matters, construction matters, but timing, trust, and deployment matter just as much. The league is littered with great rosters that never quite figured that part out.

This is the time of year when a few predictable things happen, and for whatever reason, a lot of people still struggle to grasp how the machinery actually works. One of them is the tension between chasing short term improvement and protecting long term viability as a franchise. Every team has needs. That part is obvious. And every time a player hits the buyout market after the trade deadline, the cycle begins all over again.

We have entered the “Every Guy Who Gets Waived Should Be a Sun” part of the season 🤦‍♂️

— John Voita, III (@DarthVoita) February 11, 2026

Fans rush to their phones, hit the message boards, and start building the case. This is the guy! This is the piece! This is the move that fixes everything that has been bothering us since November! Positional need solved! Fate altered! Season saved!

Rotations, chemistry, and fit are treated like minor details that will sort themselves out later, because the idea of the player is doing a lot more work than the reality ever could.

I never knew so many people thought, nay, BELIEVED that Jeremy Sochan was the answer to every Suns question. Ultimately, he signed with the Knicks. And just you wait for the monstrous impact he’ll have with New York this season. And wait. And wait…

What gets lost in all of the noise is the basic math of where this Suns’ season actually is. This team is already two-thirds of the way through the year. Roles have been defined. Minutes have been carved out. Trust has been built, or not built, over months of reps. There are only so many minutes to go around, and dropping a new player into the middle of that ecosystem, even one who checks a positional or archetypal box, does not automatically translate to success.

Basketball is not a plug-and-play sport at this stage of the calendar. Fit matters. Timing matters. Chemistry matters. And the idea that a buyout addition is going to swoop in and change the trajectory of a team without disrupting the balance that already exists is more wishcasting than strategy. It feels productive, it feels proactive, but more often than not, it ignores the reality of how late in the process we actually are.

The other piece that tends to get forgotten during buyout season is the simplest one, and it gets ignored every single year. The player who is available is available for a reason. He was bought out. Teams do not walk away from impact players for fun.

There are plenty of reasons why a buyout happens. Maybe the player does not match the team’s timeline. Maybe there was a quiet agreement to let him go so the organization could prioritize youth or pivot in a different direction. Maybe the situation simply ran its course. All of that can be true at the same time.

But the reality still holds. If that player was truly moving the needle, he would still be on a roster. What you are most often talking about with buyout additions is the fourteenth or fifteenth man, someone filling depth, insurance, or situational minutes. Year after year, we go through this cycle, and year after year, the results look the same. Buyout players rarely decide a game. They rarely swing a playoff series. They almost never change a championship path.

It is not impossible, but it is incredibly uncommon. The buyout market is not where seasons are saved or transformed. It is where margins are adjusted, bodies are added, and options are created. Expecting anything more than that is setting yourself up to be disappointed by something that was never designed to carry that kind of weight in the first place.

I do get a kick out of it, honestly. The Suns move some size in Nick Richards, even if it is at a different position, and suddenly everyone is begging for size like there is a mythical power forward wandering the buyout market who can step in, play 25 minutes a night, and magically solve every structural issue on the roster.

Suns fans: Oso can’t shoot, Royce O’Neal is too small to play the 4, Ryan Dunn can’t shoot, Play Rasheer Fleming!!!

Also Suns fans: Sign Sohan now!! (He’s a worse 3 point shooter than Ryan Dunn, he’s maybe an inch taller at most and shoots free throws with 1 hand)

— Mario (@Marionotbros2) February 11, 2026

It shows up in the reaction to the Haywood Highsmith signing. Why not a power forward? It is a fair question on the surface. But in the same breath, who exactly are we talking about? There is no player sitting out there waiting to be signed who checks every box and slides cleanly into a real rotation role this late in the season. That is not how the NBA works.

Whoever you bring in right now, Highsmith included, is living at the end of the bench. He is not walking in and claiming steady minutes. The Suns took a swing on Highsmith because they want to see what he can be as a wing option looking ahead, not because he is some immediate fix. That is long-term thinking. That is roster management with the offseason in mind, where other decisions can open pathways for a player like him to matter more.

But so much of the conversation is trapped in short-term panic. We need a power forward. We need size. And in that urgency, people miss the bigger picture. This is not an argument that the Suns do not need one. It is an argument that the player people are dreaming about does not exist. Size, speed, rim pressure, shooting, lockdown defense. If you find someone with two of those traits, that is a win. And even then, he is still competing for minutes in a rotation that already has priorities baked in.

Development is still a priority for this organization. Chemistry is still the oil to their engine. The Suns did not get to this point by accident, and the idea that the fifteenth man on the bench is going to swing the season continues to amaze me every year. I guess that is sports. Everyone chasing the idea of a perfect roster with no flaws, even though it has never existed.

And for a Suns team that is exceeding expectations, it is still surprising how quickly that context gets lost in the noise.

That is fandom, though. It lives in conversation, in debate, in the constant search for how things could be better, because there is always room to get better. That part is healthy. That part is fun. Where it goes sideways is when those conversations turn into calling each other idiots instead of actually engaging with the ideas.

You’re an idiot

— kaden (@kadenphx) February 12, 2026

The truth is, armchair GMs — myself very much included — would benefit from stepping back and seeing the whole picture more often, rather than locking onto one perceived flaw and treating it like the root of all evil. Every roster has holes. Every night presents a different problem. Every matchup exposes something. That is the NBA. That is the season. That is the sport.

Focusing on a single deficiency without context ignores how teams actually function, how minutes are distributed, how chemistry develops, and how progress is rarely linear. Improvement is usually incremental, sometimes invisible, and almost never solved by one name scribbled onto the end of the bench.

So argue. Debate. Dream about upgrades. That is part of the joy. But maybe do it with a little more curiosity and a little less certainty, because the picture is always bigger than the one weakness staring us in the face.