04/25/24
August 25, 2005
Will The Phoenix Suns Be Any Good?: Quentin Richardson and Joe Johnson were both traded in the offseason. With Quentin they lost his three-point ability, and with Johnson they lost a great defender and reserve off the bench. Even though they gained Kurt Thomas, an average defender at best because of his age, the Phoenix will not succeed because again San Antonio Spurs will once again stand in their way. What does everybody else think?
posted by redsoxthrowdown to basketball at 05:48 PM - 22 comments
No the suns will not be as good as they were last year. Face it nobody will be as good as the suns were last year. That is going to be hard to do especially since they are in te tough western conference.
posted by marcusexpress@yahoo.com at 08:12 PM on August 25, 2005
I agree with Scott because no other team in the Western Conference actually improved enough to beat the Suns.
posted by redsoxthrowdown at 08:17 PM on August 25, 2005
kurt thomas isn't that great, move moving amare to 4 takes a lot of defensive pressure off him. as a team, they'll be slower though. nash will be a step slower than he was last year, and next year he'll be two steps slower... they weren't a deep team last year and they have less quality players now than they did before. I just don't see how they possibly are improved. Unless they can pull of some monster trade, they'll be a non-threatening playoff team for a couple years till nash's health gives out.
posted by chmurray at 09:05 PM on August 25, 2005
you are forgetting one guy who is really important Shawn Marion... he is a great shooter, great rebounder, and can play almost all positions expect center... he can help take the load off steve nash.... if the suns can get a good backup point guard they could be good for years to come
posted by redsoxthrowdown at 09:13 PM on August 25, 2005
i like the suns: good characters, etc. but let's not talk about a title until we see grit and floor burns. the suns, to date, are far too open-court, free-flowing to win a title. they are supremely talented and enjoyable to watch. but no chance at a title, unless they achieve the aforementioned terms: grit and floor burns.
posted by ramon at 09:26 PM on August 25, 2005
I like the suns.I dont think they will be as good as last year. They also lost steven hunter(7'0) who averaged 4.0 points 2.5 rebounds and 1.20 blocks(3rd on team) in only 14 minutes per game in the playoffs.the only time this guy got in was when Amare needed a rest. He was 3rd on the team in blocks thru reg season aswell(in only 1/3 the playing time).He altered shots and the suns will miss him. They picked up james jones from indiana today. He is ok coming off the bench but wont make up for the loss of a true shot blocker.
posted by Web_Spiner at 11:49 PM on August 25, 2005
The Suns lost more than a defender and reserve player in Johnson. I also consider him more of a 3-point threat than Richardson. Johnson hit 48% of his attempts from downtown, good enough for second in the NBA. Richardson only hit 38% of his. Johnson was also the third leading scorer, and a starter, not a reserve. At the same time, I have to question Johnson's decision to leave the Suns. Nash found Johnson open to hit the threes. I am not sure that Johnson is good enough, or mature enough, to handle being the number 1 on a team. I guess we'll see.
posted by bdf1010 at 08:44 AM on August 26, 2005
well, the fact that Isiah Thomas picked up QRich is proof he's overvalued. I like most of what the Suns have done this summer, especially the KThomas trade. Remember how well Amare held down the D in the playoffs? He was amazing, but not quite enough. A guy like Kurt will solidify the interior D more than Hunter did. With the addition of Brian Grant, they'll have 12 fouls and 500lbs of backup to Amare's vicious D. I also think that the suns dodged a bullet not signing Johnson. I think Diaw will play very well with Barbosa, making a much more cohesive second squad. Dijon thompson is underrated- he carried Ucklah when he was there. If they get finley, well, i think we all know what will happen. *cue the Queen*
posted by markovitch at 10:31 AM on August 26, 2005
This off season for the suns has not been as impressive as the year before. Trading "Q" and draft pick Nate Robinson for Kurt Thomas wasn't their best move. Nate Robinson might be the most under rated player in this years draft. The suns offensive style is fast paced uptempo basketball. You think that Kurt Thomas can run the fast break? What about Brian Grant? If he plays more than 40 games I'd be surprised. Heck, he did a great job with the lake show. Oh wait, he didnt. Both Grant and Thomas are undersized centers slowing the suns down. However, I understand not resigning Joe Johnson, he is a solid defender/scorer, but is no way worth 70 million. Enjoy Atlanta! If the suns land Finley for the 1.1 million they have left, he will be the perfect replacement. However, it looks like Miami is the front runner being able to offer him 5 million and better chance to win a title. The last straw was losing Steven Hunter. The only true sized center on the team, with exception to the phenomenal job done by Amare, was able to bring rebounds and shot blocking to the table. The void is still missing for the true center in Phoenix. I say leave Amare at the 5 and go from there. He could possibly be on the top 5 list for most points in the NBA at the end of his career. He is on pace now... In the scheme of the western conference, the Spurs and Rockets will probably be ahead of the Suns.
posted by Schwoo at 11:26 AM on August 26, 2005
Look at the Wolves going from their 2003-2004 season to their 2004-2005 season. Thats example enough that there isn't much of a chance for them to be AS good as they were before. I wish them all the luck though.
posted by tina at 12:00 PM on August 26, 2005
Short version: Suns are built better for the playoffs than they were last year, but won't put up the same crazy regular season record. This is the NBA which, much like hockey, doesn't start until June. They still probably can't get past the Spurs (who really could right now) but they are better equipped to try. YMMV.
posted by pivo at 03:13 PM on August 26, 2005
Stephen Hunter the back bone of a defense? Billy King wanted the guy, what does that tell you? Let me spell it out for you:
S.O.F.T.
Hunter falls for pump fakes, gets into foul trouble easily and can not play anything close to resembling physical, positional defense.
posted by lilnemo at 03:44 PM on August 27, 2005
i certainly didnt mean to imply hunter was or is or ever will be the backbone of a defense.i just know that he got a block and a half per game in about 10 minutes.He should get double the time in philly and maybe get 2.5 blocks per game which will be good for atleast 3rd or 4th in the league. with the way iverson and webber let people go by them, hunter is a good shot blocking addition to the sixers.he will play behind sam dalembert.who is also deemed "soft".and was also 16th in the league in blocks at 1.68 per. Amare stoudemire was 20th in blocks 1.63 at the 5 position and no one would dare call him "soft". Maybe hunter is a "soft scorer". But the 76ers dont need scoring. they need a second shot blocker.And i think they got one in hunter.who again by the way was 3rd on his team in blocks in the playoffs at 1/3 the playing time.His playing time will double in philly and hopefully his blocks will also.
posted by Web_Spiner at 03:33 AM on August 28, 2005
i just know that he got a block and a half per game in about 10 minutes At 7 feet he better. sam dalembert.who is also deemed "soft" I've never heard this. Amare stoudemire was ... and no one would dare call him "soft". And? What is your point here? His playing time will double in philly and hopefully his blocks will also. It could happen, but that would mean that Webber and Dalembert are either fouling out a lot or injured. Hunter is good at weak side defense, but he isn't much of a rebounder for a 7 footer (christ the Magic didn't even want him, and that was before they drafted Dwight Howard), in a half court set he gives up position easily and falls for up fakes. His length and speed are assets, but he looks like the second coming of Samaki Walker to me.
posted by lilnemo at 03:12 PM on August 28, 2005
Just refer to my previous post as a response. Dalembert does get into early foul trouble,hence the playing time mark jackson got. instead of arguing with you over something that hasnt happened yet. i'll just wait to see what happens. my point was we are reffering to the defensive aspects of the game. Amare stoudemire was 20th in blocks 1.63 at the 5 position/41 minutes a game and no one would dare call him "soft". that was my entire statement. Hunter was 29 in blocks at 10 minutes a game. whats so hard to understand. sixers need a second shot blocker. not a rebounder or scorer. Hunter will play the same amount of minutes jackson played(approx 16-19)His blocks will hopefully double, along with his points and boards. 10/5/2.5 blocks is ok by me for a 2nd center at about 17.5 minutes a game. Do you understand now? or are you going to continue to argue with no stats or facts and just your opinion? i mean, what the hell,i think bryant is a sissy, does that mean he's not going to get 28 points a game? I mean (shit)how many teams skipped him in the draft(including orlando)a team that let shaq go aswell. Not sure how your basing your argument on a team that did that.Did that mean shaq was "soft" as well? please put some substance in your next post man(besides a pic of your TP in the shower)you must have one of those new shower toilet combos(i hope)
posted by Web_Spiner at 04:40 PM on August 28, 2005
Just because you shit on this thread doesn't mean I shit in my shower. Here's a hint: thats not a pic of my bathroom. And some restrooms (public mostly) have tiles on the wall. On to business. Dalembert does get into early foul trouble,hence the playing time mark jackson got. instead of arguing with you over something that hasnt happened yet. i'll just wait to see what happens. I'd say that Marc Jackson earned some playing time with his ability to actually face up and shoot out to 15 feet out. But yes Dalembert does sometimes get into early foul trouble (as many young PF/C do). Not sure how your basing your argument on a team that did that. Well considering that in Hunter's last year with the team, the Magic were last in defense, allowing 101.1 PPG at an efficiency rating of 107.5, you would think that if Hunter was such a good shot blocker their rating would have been higher. Or that if he was such an asset, that they would have resigned him. Its not like the world was beating a path to his door. Did that mean shaq was "soft" as well? Tell me you are not seriously comparing Stephen Hunter and Shaq. And as far as stats and facts go... From Basketball-Reference.com: Hunter had a Defensive Rating of 107, where the league average is 106. His career rating is 106 versus the league career average of 105. His 2005 PER is 14.7 (not too shabby). But his career PER is 13.2 (not too good). From 82games.com: Hunters net points per 100 possessions is -7.3. So while having Hunter in the game the Suns opponents scored 3.3 pts less/100 poss., he also kept the Suns from scoring at a clip of -10.6 pts/100 poss. His 48 minute PER at the Center position is -1 while his opponents 48 minute PER weighs in at a whopping 16.8. These are not signs of an effective defender. 2005 was without question Hunter's best year. In light of that, Hunter's numbers and career trajectory suggest that at best he will be an average player, and there is nothing wrong with that. My only contention is that Hunters marginal value as a weak side shot-blocker is far outweighed by his inabilty to play effective man defense, score or rebound, the numbers back this up. And I'm sorry, if you don't think the 76ers need rebounding, or inside scoring with the line-up of perimeter shooters they have, you're crazy.
posted by lilnemo at 06:38 PM on August 28, 2005
you're crazy that coming from a person who keeps his toilet paper on his faucet in the tub. you're talking about a player that was in what? His 4th yr?Give me a break. was i comparing shaq to hunter? NO. You were basing hunters worth as a player on being "let go" by orlando. I simply stated they also let shaq "go". hunter was a rookie and 2nd/3rd yr player while with orlando. they could have had Zo or Ming and would have still sucked.You mention his career per,hes in his 4th or 5th yr. your killing me. hey, get his "per" stats from the playoffs. you're talking like hunter already failed in philly.I think he'll be more valuable defensively then marc jackson was. Sixers have webber and rogers, thier pf's shooting that 15 footer. they didnt need thier back up center(jackson) shooting it as well(hence letting him go for cash). Again hunter ranked 29th out of all nba players in blocks last yr in under 10 mins per game.the sixers have 1 shot blocker. Now they have 2. (3 counting deng gai)If i was billy king i would have taken hunter over jackson as well.you're acting like im saying hunter should start.Not at all I agree, he will most likely be an average player. he will also be an above average shot blocker in the sixers defensive scheme. thats my opinion. wet toilet paper is softer than dry toilet paper(fyi)thats a fact
posted by Web_Spiner at 08:46 PM on August 28, 2005
WHAM! George Michael is gay.
posted by lilnemo at 05:42 PM on August 29, 2005
yea.i agree lilkim.that also means that none of your old school minions should post here anymore right? posting things like that after someone disagrees with you is even gayer than george himself.
posted by Web_Spiner at 08:09 PM on August 29, 2005
Stay on-topic . . . stay on-topic . . .
posted by yerfatma at 06:04 AM on August 30, 2005
yes, i'll admit, i am guilty of being way off topic with this one. sorry.
posted by Web_Spiner at 07:16 PM on August 30, 2005
Joe and Q were, respectively, the 4th and 5th best players on that team. And I'll let y'all in on a secret. Steve Nash was the 2nd best player. Amare Stoudemire is very, very good and he's going to get better. And Shawn Marion is so much better than any other team's third option, it's not even funny. The Suns will be fine. The only team with a chance to finish ahead of them in the standings is the Spurs.