NBA Discussion Thread*

[Winnow]

I would say Nash's value to his team may have surpassed Payton's, but definately not as far as overall skills/talent are concerned.

Probably right. Nash has a slight edge on some fronts (passing, court vision), but Payton has a tremendous advantage in defense, and a significant advantage in scoring.

Are you counting the extra assists Nash gets over Payton as two points to average it out? Nash is a pass first PG. You have to consider Nash's incredible shooting percentage from anywhere on the court, 3P , FG, FT, along with his additional assists over Payton. Nash scores when needed so it's hard to judge the two based on PPG. You'd have to consider wins as well as I believe Nash is the better decision maker which results in more wins. (and coaches will recognize that more than fans) Nash is sub par on defense but he's still a tough nosed player, taking the most charges on the team and has proven multiple time that he can play while beat up (nasty bloody nose in last year's playoffs, chipped tooth this year).

Although Nash can hold his own in most stats and exceeds in shooting percentage, I don't think you can judge him solely based on those. I also think you'll find plenty of long time NBA coaches and NBA players that will have a hard time deciding between players like Payton and Nash. Magic stands along at the top but after that, it takes some thinking.

[Sueven]

Are you counting the extra assists Nash gets over Payton as two points to average it out?

No, I included them in PASSING. Because that's what assists are: Passes.

You'd have to consider wins as well as I believe Nash is the better decision maker which results in more wins.

OK, well there's another advantage to Payton, the guy who has played in three NBA finals (one ring), compared to Nash, the guy who has played in zero. Admittedly Payton only went to one finals as a leading guy, but that's still more than Nash. The Sonics, during Payton's prime, won 55, 63, 57, 64, 57 and 61 games, before Shawn Kemp's dissolution into a cocaine-addled mess knocked them down to mediocre playoff team level.

On what basis do you "believe" that Nash is the better decision maker?

You have to consider Nash's incredible shooting percentage from anywhere on the court, 3P , FG, FT

Yes, Nash is a better jump shooter than Payton was.

Nash scores when needed so it's hard to judge the two based on PPG.

Sure, PPG alone doesn' t tell you much of anything. That doesn't change the fact that Payton was a better scorer. He could penetrate just as well as Nash, and was a more forceful finisher. His strength allowed him to isolate and post-up the weaker point guards assigned to guard him. He was a more versatile, well-rounded, and simply better scorer than Nash. The fact that Nash has an advantage in spot-up jumpshooting does not change this. Payton shouldered more of the scoring load for his team than Nash does. Yes, I know that Nash can step it up and score more when he wants to, but this doesn't prove much. Most any NBA player can average 20 points a game if given the green light to shoot as much as they like. When Nash increases his share of the scoring load, his team usually loses, because he plays his best ball when he's doing more distributing and less scoring. Payton was able to shoulder more of the scoring burden consistent with playing winning basketball.

Nash is sub par on defense but he's still a tough nosed player, taking the most charges on the team and has proven multiple time that he can play while beat up (nasty bloody nose in last year's playoffs, chipped tooth this year).

Nash is one of the worst defensive players in the NBA. Does he play beat up? Sure, and he deserves credit for it. Unfortunately, when an opposing player blows by him for an easy layup, it's worth two points regardless of whether Nash is bleeding or not.

Meanwhile, Gary Payton deserves mention in any discussion of the greatest defensive guards in NBA history. He was first team all-defense nine times. He won the defensive player of the year award-- as a point guard.

It's impossible to overstate the difference between the two players here. Steve Nash is one of the worst defensive players in the NBA. Gary Payton was one of the best defensive players in NBA history. It's about as stark as it gets.

Although Nash can hold his own in most stats and exceeds in shooting percentage, I don't think you can judge him solely based on those. I also think you'll find plenty of long time NBA coaches and NBA players that will have a hard time deciding between players like Payton and Nash.

Stats don't tell too much and aren't overly important here. Listen, I agree that you can probably find some NBA folks who would prefer Nash to Payton. It's a difficult comparison to make because the style differences are so stark. It's like comparing Eddy Curry to Marcus Camby-- they're both centers, but beyond that, they're attempting to do such drastically different things on the court that there's little to functionally compare. But it's definitely true that Payton was a better scorer, a better defensive player, and a winning player who accomplished more than Steve Nash has to date.

Fortunately, Nash's career isn't over. If he can lead the Suns to a title, he'll probably be thought to have surpassed Payton. If he can play several more years at his current level while continuing to keep the Suns playing elite basketball, his legacy will be significantly enhanced. If his career ended now, you'd probably be hard pressed to find many people outside of Arizona who would argue that he's the greater player.

[Winnow]

Nash is one of the worst defensive players in the NBA. Does he play beat up? Sure, and he deserves credit for it. Unfortunately, when an opposing player blows by him for an easy layup, it's worth two points regardless of whether Nash is bleeding or not.

So mean!

I'll agree that Payton was, at minimum, as good as Nash is at the moment. I'm starting to recall Payton winning a fantasy basketball championship for me one year in the mid 90's, filling up the stats in all categories.

If Jason Kidd had a shot, he'd be up there with Magic as well.

[Winnow]

Will the true 2007 NBA Champions please stand up!

Phoenix 100
San Antonio 95

San Antonio gets handed their first home loss to the better team. Shame about the dirty play and cheating refs last year.

[Zamtuk]

sour grapes

[Kelgar]

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/insider/ ... 3dtab3pos2

Try making a list of the game's great little guys, and you'll end up with a pretty short list. Even the great "little players" haven't been all that little -- Jerry West, Michael Jordan, Oscar Robertson and Dwyane Wade all stand at least 6-4, making them taller than the vast majority of the general population.

Chris Paul isn't getting much MVP buzz despite his impressive start.

The list of recent stars below that height is smaller still. Isiah Thomas. John Stockton. Allen Iverson. Steve Nash.

And now, Chris Paul.

Say what? Oh yes. The New Orleans guard is putting together a season that, provided he keeps it up, will put him in the pantheon of the league's greatest little guys. This is getting shockingly little attention because Paul hasn't been on national TV and plays before crowds that would have trouble filling a U-Haul, but his production this season has been nothing short of spectacular.

How spectacular? I submit that Paul is the MVP of the non-LeBron portion of the league thus far. He ranks third in the entire NBA in player efficiency rating at 26.64. And he has the Hornets at a surprising 15-10 despite his teammates' aversion to making shots -- Paul and center Tyson Chandler are the only regulars shooting better than 43.8 percent.

This may come as a shock to the multitudes who haven't seen the Hornets much. But if you consider it a sacrilege for Paul to outrank Nash or Chauncey Billups, get a tape of Saturday's Hornets-Suns game and it might be easier to swallow. Paul got the better of Nash in that pairing. And for the season, he's averaging 21.0 points and 9.6 assists -- leaving the hallowed 20-10 mark well within his sights. Moreover, despite being his team's unquestioned go-to guy, he has an unusually low turnover ratio (just 9.7 percent of his possessions).

What about Deron Williams?

Because they were drafted fourth and third, respectively, in the 2005 draft, the careers of Paul and Williams are inextricably linked -- so much so that people constantly compare the two.

Our own Marc Stein interviewed some scouts about this for the Weekend Dime, and the response was similar to many I've heard -- that a lot of scouts would take Williams over Paul because he's bigger.

Look, don't get me wrong: I like Williams. He's an All-Star caliber player and if the Jazz can snap out of their recent slump he fully deserves to join Paul in New Orleans (for the All-Star Game). That said, the oft-echoed opinion that Williams is equal or superior to Paul is totally indefensible.

It's not like Williams is better at some things and Paul is better at others ... it's more like Paul is better at everything. He's averaging more points, more rebounds and more assists in nearly identical minutes. Despite making more plays he averages nearly a turnover fewer per game. Paul leads the league in steals and is a visibly superior defender. Paul's team is 15-10 with Paul as the best player; Williams' is 14-12 with him as the second-best player.

This isn't a new phenomenon either: Paul had a better player efficiency rating in 2005-06, 2006-07 and now in 2007-08; it wasn't a particularly close race in any of those seasons. Going deeper, Paul fouls less, has a far better net plus-minus, and has a lower opponent PER. And despite Williams' rep as the superior shooter, Paul is also far better from the line (91.6 percent to 79.1 percent this season; 84.4 percent to 75.9 percent career), so he's the one you'd want with the ball at the end of games.

Basically, the only items in Williams' favor are that he has a slightly better true shooting percentage (58.6 to 57.2) ... and, um, he's bigger.

Like I said, I like Williams as a player and don't mean this as a rip on him. But because of the vast disparity in media coverage between the two over the past year, especially during Utah's playoff run last spring, I don't think people quite understand just how good Paul has been, or how wide the chasm is that separates these two.



Even on the off nights -- like Monday night's forgettable performance in a loss to Portland (5-for-15, 11 points, eight assists, four turnovers), there was plenty to remark on. For starters, the guy has to be the best dribbler in the league, with the ball seemingly attached to his hand while he zips around the court like he's on a motorized scooter. To combat that skill, the Blazers played a zone defense designed specifically to contain Paul and dared the other Hornets to beat them from the perimeter. Paul spent the whole game setting up open 3-pointers, only to watch his teammates shoot 3-for-21 from deep. (Come back soon, Peja. Please.)

And then there's the havoc Paul causes at the other end with his ball-hawking D. He leads the league in steals at 2.7 per game -- in fact he's way out in front. His insanely fast hands and equally speedy feet are even more noticeable on loose balls, on which he materializes out of thin air and either cleanly recovers the ball or gets a hand in to jostle it from an opponent. With Paul as one of the linchpins, New Orleans ranks fifth in the NBA in defensive efficiency.

The Paul highlight film for the season includes 12 double-doubles in 25 outings, 20 points in eight of his last 10 games, and perhaps most amazingly, a recently broken string of 21 straight games with at least two steals (including the final two games of last season). He had a 21-assist outing in L.A., and a 43-point effort against Memphis that included the game-winner. His PER doesn't lie, in other words -- he's been awesome.

But you may not realize how amazing he's been until you try to come up with other little players who have put up a PER that can match Paul's 26.64

… and realize there aren't any.

Of the players 6-3 or shorter who have been in the league since the NBA began tracking individual turnovers in 1977-78, none has posted a PER that tops Paul's so far this season. Only one had cleared 26 (Allen Iverson two years ago), and only three had cleared 24 (see chart).

Part of this is because the game has become more guard-oriented recently, as you can ascertain by quickly scanning the dates on the chart (In fact, Billups' performance this season would place him fourth on the same list). But obviously, part of this is because Paul has been so unbelievably good.

Top PER seasons by players 6-3 or shorter since 1977-78
Player Year PER
Chris Paul 2007-08 26.67
Allen Iverson 2005-06 26.02
Terrell Brandon 1995-96 25.45
Gilbert Arenas 2006-07 24.07
John Stockton 1989-90 23.96
Kevin Johnson 1990-91 23.94
Allen Iverson 2000-01 23.91
Steve Nash 2006-07 23.87
Gilbert Arenas 2005-06 23.87
John Stockton 1990-91 23.53

This may not be immediately clear from the numbers, since Paul doesn't have a single gaudy stat besides steals. He's third in assists, for instance, rather than first, and although his 21-point average is nice, he won't be making a bid for the scoring title.

Compare him to the league's other point guards, though, and it becomes clearer how well he's played. Paul has created far more shots than Nash or Billups -- more even than Iverson in fact -- and has turned the ball over substantially less than Nash. Tony Parker and T.J. Ford have created slightly more shots but are inferior passers and have a lower true shooting percentage. Jason Kidd, whom many lump into point guard discussions out of habit, creates far fewer shots, converts a much lower rate of them, and his turnover rate is more than 50 percent higher. And of this gang Paul is almost certainly the most effective defender (though some would pull the lever for Billups or, again out of habit, Kidd).

Perhaps of more interest is the historical comparison. Does Paul's season to date really match the best years of Stockton, Nash, KJ, Kidd and Isiah? Says here it does. If you take everyone's stats from their best seasons and adjust them to the 2007-08 pace and league average TS%, and give everybody 40 minutes on the floor, what you end up with is a comparison in which you almost can't help but give Paul the nod.


Chris Paul vs. other top small guards -- Era-adjusted 40-minute stats
Player Year Pts. Ast. Reb. TO TS% PER
Chris Paul 2007-08 22.3 10.2 4.1 3.2 57.2 26.67
Allen Iverson 2005-06 29.9 6.7 2.9 3.1 54.3 26.02
John Stockton 1989-90 17.4 14.6 2.6 3.5 60.5 23.96
Kevin Johnson 1990-91 22.1 10.1 3.5 3.5 60.5 23.94
Steve Nash 2006-07 20.0 12.5 3.8 4.1 64.6 23.87
Isiah Thomas 1984-85 19.1 12.4 4.0 3.3 52.1 22.20

The key here is that Paul's Hornets play what is easily the slowest pace of any of the guards on this list, at just 92.9 possessions per game. Everyone else was over 95; Isiah and KJ were well over 100. Let some of the air out of those 20-10 seasons from the '80s and it becomes clear how impressive it is that Paul is approaching those numbers this season.

Across the board, Paul stacks up well in this group. Only Iverson scores more, while Paul beats them all on the glass. He's in the middle of the pack in TS% and assists, but combined with the points, he creates as many shots as anyone on this list save Iverson. And check out those turnovers -- as always, we tend to underrate low-mistake players, and for one to be creating as many shots as Paul with so few miscues is a feat.

If you're trying to put words in my mouth by accusing me of saying Paul is better than Stockton or Isiah, don't. I'm not going there -- not yet anyway. As I pointed out above, it's much easier for a small guard to dominate in today's game than it was two decades ago.

More importantly, dominating over 25 games is very different from dominating 82 -- I'm sure you could find a 25-game stretch of any of these players' careers in which they were just as good or better than Paul has been.

Instead, the big takeaway should be this: Paul is on pace to have, arguably, the best season ever by a player 6-3 or smaller, and because of his small market and relatively unamazing per-game stats, absolutely nobody is even talking about it.

So it's time for me to ring the bell. He plays before a minuscule fan base, gets zero national TV exposure and might not even make the playoffs, which is keeping his performance under the radar. But Chris Paul is having a historic season thus far. It's about time somebody noticed

Interesting analysis, especially the part about how his production would be far gaudier than Nash's were he to play in a similar uptempo style alongside similar level talent.

[Winnow]

Interesting analysis, especially the part about how his production would be far gaudier than Nash's were he to play in a similar uptempo style alongside similar level talent.

I don't like "what if" comparisons" as you can't just assume they'll platy well in a different system. He may be more comfortable in the slow down style of play he's in.

PPG is the last stat I look at for a PG. Jason Kidd was awesome one year and averaged 11 PPG for the Suns. Nash has a shit-ton of scorers on his team. He simply doesn't need to score that much. His job is to make sure the entire team scores and wins the game. Watching the Suns play is like watching a passing clinic with Nash, Hill, and Diaw leading the way. Nash rakes in the assists but the Suns team is so unselfish, you'll see the ball get passed a 2nd time (and third time), especially if it goes in to Diaw, which takes away from Nash's NBA leading assist total. If Diaw ever becomes unfrench and gets aggressive, he'll be an all-star.

Chris Paul is looking like a keeper though.

[Sylvus]

I don't like "what if" comparisons"

lol, good one

you're the king of "what ifs", at least when it comes to sports.

[Aardor]

I don't like "what if" comparisons"

lol, good one

you're the king of "what ifs", at least when it comes to sports.

Haha, I have not had a chance to read the article kelgar posted (busy day at work), but that exchange made me laugh out loud at work.

[Sueven]

I'm amazed at how an article about Chris Paul is somehow transformed into a rant about how good at passing the Suns are. Also, you know that Boris Diaw sucks, right? You know he's averaging a COMBINED 14.9 pts/rebs/asts in 26 minutes per game, right? You know that you pay him $9 million a year, right? Sure, passing is one of his stronger suits, but... he sucks.

I'm a little skeptical of Paul for no good reason. I don't get to see him on TV much (ever) and so I really don't have a basis for skepticism.

Hollinger, in comparing Paul to Williams, makes the point that Paul is the best player on his team, while Williams is the second-best player on his, and yet the Hornets have a better record anyway. I think he's overlooking a few things, primarily that Williams has had a (relatively) shitty start to his season while Paul has been superb, and also that Utah was vastly better than New Orleans last year (and probably will end up better this year as well). I also think that there's a big difference between leading a mediocre team (something which guys like Steve Francis and Stephon Marbury are capable of) and being able to be an important part of a great team (something which Steve Francis and Stephon Marbury are not capable of). I have no reason to think that Paul won't be able to subsume his ego when necessary, but that is something which Deron Williams has demonstrated (both on the national team and with Utah last season). So I agree that Paul is kicking ass, but he's got a bit of time ahead of him before we can make a true evaluation.

Also, something about John Hollinger's player analyses rub me the wrong way. PER is a valuable stat and I'm glad it exists, and I also appreciate his insight using other nontraditional statistics, but I think he tends to fall into the same trap that many baseball stat nerds do-- thinking that they've crafted the perfect statistic which explains EVERYTHING. I guess it's to be expected when you invented the stats that you're using, but it still irritates me and forces me to take his conclusions with a grain of salt. I know that he's making a substantially more nuanced argument than this, but if you'll forgive me dumbing down his point, he's basically saying: I invented a statistic, and Chris Paul scores 26.6 and Allen Iverson scores 26.1! The evidence is irrefutable! Greatest season ever!

I mean, the guy predicted Yao Ming as MVP this year. I feel like it's pretty clear that Yao has some major limitations-- mostly the fact that he's slow, can be gotten into foul trouble, and rarely dominates-- which would likely preclude him from winning an MVP award, even if he does have a solid jump in production (although maybe you could say the same thing about Nash and Nowitzki?). And I understand that there's a significant difference between using statistics to predict future performance and using statistics to evaluate past performance. But still...

[Winnow]

Also, you know that Boris Diaw sucks, right? You know he's averaging a COMBINED 14.9 pts/rebs/asts in 26 minutes per game, right? You know that you pay him $9 million a year, right? Sure, passing is one of his stronger suits, but... he sucks.

You're missing all the intangibles.

[Sueven]

That might be true if he wasn't a soft little whiner who disappears during big moments and doesn't appear to be capable of playing hard.

That's not actually fair. He's not little, in reality he's quite tall. Which makes his lack of rebounding even more embarrassing!

[Sueven]

But seriously, I'm actually interested in the Chris Paul / point guards discussion. So hopefully we can talk about that instead of mocking the Suns.

[Winnow]

I was kidding!

Boris has the talent, he showed it his first year with the Suns, but he's a pacifist. I need to break out the YouTube Diaw highlight videos from two years ago!


Suns @ Mavs tonight!

Going for a Texas sweep!

I think there's a decent chance Amare might actually be traded within a year.

[Aardor]

They really should have traded him straight up for KG. Highlights 2 years ago are great and all, but what has he done lately...

I would also like to continue the PG discussion even though i haven't read that article or anything since it, but I will when I get home (then post something naive since I haven't seen the players involved play much).


I am really excited about both of the games tonight on ESPN (celts pistons and suns mavs). It's awesome that ESPN puts all their games on ESPN360, wish NBA.com didn't charge to watch the other ones.

[Sueven]

They really should have traded him straight up for KG. Highlights 2 years ago are great and all, but what has he done lately...

Yeah, that and KG's a better player.

I'm going to Wiz/Bulls tonight. Will post thoughts if anything interesting happens! I'm just hoping for a close game.

[Winnow]

They really should have traded him straight up for KG. Highlights 2 years ago are great and all, but what has he done lately...

Are you referring to Amare in the "what has he done lately" comment or Boris Diaw? Amare has played well. He had a great season last year and is doing ok this year. Garnett would be the better fit for the Suns due to his defense.


Amare's stats this year:



Garnett's:



Amare has more blocks, more points while garnett has more assists (don't need those on the team assist leading Suns) and more steals, both good in FG% and FT%


...So, don't make it like Garnett is that much better than Amare. At least this year. I'd rather have KG but Amare's a very good player and his trade value should be hella high if it happens.

I'm looking forward to an entertaining game tonight. (Phoenix @ Dallas)

[Aardor]

Woops, i was talking about Diaw for the "what has he done lately."

Their stats are not much different, but defensive rebounds and blocks don't really show who plays better defense. Garnett is much, much better at D than Amare.

[Aardor]

Ok, before I read all that crap:

Amare vs Garnett (i feel really odd using ones first name vs ones second)

Amare is a very lazy defender. He's always the last one down the court on D, and this screws them over a lot of D (see the golden state game this year). Not only that, but Garnett can actually cover Duncan, whereas Amare fails miserably.

Offensively, the two players put up similar numbers and are pretty much equals this year. Defensively? it's like comparing Steve Nash to Gary Payton (defensively).

[Sueven]

...So, don't make it like Garnett is that much better than Amare. At least this year. I'd rather have KG but Amare's a very good player and his trade value should be hella high if it happens.

Garnett is that much better than Amare.

They're comparable offensive players. Amare is more explosive and has the ability to put up monster scoring nights, which Garnett doesn't really have. He's also a better finisher around the rim, although not by too much (2 points is 2 points whether you lay it in or tear down the rim). Garnett is a better jump shooter (although Amare is improving), and has substantial advantages in ball handling and passing. And don't act like "oh, he doesn't NEED to be able to pass, he's on the Suns!" That's retarded. Turn one of those nightly turnovers into an assist and that's a three-point swing.

Defensively there is no contest. Garnett is better at everything. Significantly better at everything (except accumulating shot-block totals, apparently... he still does a better job defending the rim).

Then there's the intangibles... Garnett is a leader, an unselfish player, someone who inspires his teammates. Amare is none of those things. Amare isn't really forced to be a leader or an inspiration, since Nash already does that-- but more leadership and inspiration are better than less. And being unselfish is good no matter what your leadership responsibilities.

Amare, as it stands, is NOT a franchise player. He will have to significantly transform himself to attain Garnett's level.

[Sueven]

Wizards/Bulls thoughts

The Wizards are having huge problems in the backcourt right now. Their starting shooting guard is DeShawn Stevenson. He has a ton of limitations. He has no real offensive game. As best as I can tell, he has one offensive move: The pull-up jump shot. He doesn't handle the ball. Usually, he stands beyond the three point line at the wing, and if he happens to get the ball, he either passes it immediately or shoots if he's open. He doesn't seem comfortable when asked to initiate offense. He doesn't move well without the ball. He's not a bad player-- he's an above-average defender, an unselfish, team-first guy, provides some toughness and leadership, can get on a roll hitting three pointers at times, doesn't make many mistakes. However, Because of Stevenson's offensive limitations, the Wizards need to play another guard who is comfortable shouldering the vast bulk of the ballhandling, who's comfortable initiating the offense every time they come up the court. Usually, this is no big deal, because they have Gilbert Arenas. Even without Arenas, Antonio Daniels is a more than capable point who can handle the ball and help cover for Stevenson's limitations. Now he's hurt too. Tonight they started DeShawn Stevenson and Nick Young. Bad news. Young is a good young player, but he's a rookie and he's not even really a point guard, and he and Stevenson are just not going to work together at this point. The Wizards realized this, but there's not a whole lot they can do. They fell behind, and only came back when they started throwing out crazy lineups like Blatche-Haywood-Jamison-Butler-Stevenson, with Caron Butler doing all of the ballhandling. They made it all the way back and even got the lead at one point, mostly because Caron Butler is a motherfucking man and a half, but ultimately they can't play winning basketball like that and they didn't. They had way too many moments where Butler or Jamison would try to rocket a pass into some unsuspecting big man and watch the ball sail harmlessly out of bounds. Butler and Jamison basically played two-man ball, with the big guys picking up the scraps, because they had nobody to initiate their offense and so were forced to just let their best players do what they could.

So, the Wizards need Daniels back.

I got to see Aaron Gray get big minutes, which is exciting, because he grew up like ten minutes from me and also played at Pitt, where I went to school for a year. And he played well! He's clearly your typical lumbering big goofy center, but he's not bad at it-- he can pass, he doesn't foul much, he has enough moves to be a threat in the post. He might actually have a career!

Joakim Noah and Tyrus Thomas are both pretty good looking as well (basketball-wise...). Thomas demonstrated a surprisingly good midrange jumper. He has a quick release and didn't hesitate to shoot. He's also crazy athletic and had a few ridiculous blocks and a few even more ridiculous fouls-that-were-almost-ridiculous-blocks. He needs to improve his feel for the game, and that's something which could just come with experience. Hopefully he's not one of those guys who just isn't an intuitive player.

I wasn't too impressed, Ben Gordon. He's a good shooter and can get his shot off very quickly, but I didn't see much out of him other than that. He can definitely play a role on a winning team, but he's not going to be one of your stars. Maybe he'll be one of those Tony Parker / Reggie Miller types that just makes more plays than it seems like they should, but he hasn't got there yet. He's a hell of a lot better than DeShawn Stevenson. Stevenson plays better defense though.

Maybe the best way to describe Ben Gordon is Gilbert Arenas lite... a slightly slower, not quite as strong version of Gilbert.

[Winnow]

Bad reffing in the Suns/Mavs game but grats to Cart.

Amare was a beast in the second half. No defense my ass.

[Aardor]

Amare was a beast in the second half. No defense my ass.

Glad he can play defense for half a game. Was a fun game to watch, but I personally enjoyed the celtics pistons more. Both games were down to the wire, and all the teams played their respective styles very well.

[Sueven]

I had the game on and was doing something else. At halftime, I overheard one of the announcers, talking about Amare: "his offense is great, his defense... needs improvement."

[Winnow]

I had the game on and was doing something else. At halftime, I overheard one of the announcers, talking about Amare: "his offense is great, his defense... needs improvement."

Should have watched the second half then because that same announcer said multiple times how much he liked what Amare was doing.

[Boogahz]

I had the game on and was doing something else. At halftime, I overheard one of the announcers, talking about Amare: "his offense is great, his defense... needs improvement."

Should have watched the second half then because that same announcer said multiple times how much he liked what Amare was doing.

Four quarters make two halves. Two halves make one game. Actually playing for half of a game does not make a good player.

[Winnow]

Four quarters make two halves. Two halves make one game.

I didn't realize I was dealing with math prodigies on this thread.

[Boogahz]

Well, you obviously don't understand that a player that shows up only 50% of a game is not great. Oh, wait, you didn't bother to quote that part, did you?

[Winnow]

Well, you obviously don't understand that a player that shows up only 50% of a game is not great. Oh, wait, you didn't bother to quote that part, did you?

In that particular game, the Suns as a team had a bad first half. Check Amare's stats again. There is no pattern of Amare showing up only in the second half of games. If he's only showing up for half a game right now, his stats would be something like:

41ppg, 17RB, 4blks, 2 stls (but Garnett would still be better because he has pointy elbows)

Well, that's close to his series stat line against Tim Duncan two years ago in the playoffs so maybe he can be that good.

[Aardor]

Winnow, he obviously means he doesn't show up on defense for half the game. Like he didn't last night, and hasn't in many, many games.

[Winnow]

Winnow, he obviously means he doesn't show up on defense for half the game. Like he didn't last night, and hasn't in many, many games.

Amare would be an MVP candidate if he played defense like he did the second half of the Dallas game all the time. As it stands, he's still one of the best in the the league and whether he plays defense all the time or not, I'm sure the opposing coaches aren't happy to see him on the court.

Marion last night was extremely active. He had quite a few steals but also was disruptive on defense.

Nash Marion Amare and Grant Hill played well last night. Diaw, Barbosa and Bell had off nights. Need either Barbosa or Bell to play well. Can't have them both take the night off. Raja Bell seems to have recurring knee/ankle injuries this year.

Anyone see that monster slam Grant Hill had last night? It was pretty amazing for the old guy.

[Aardor]

He would be an MVP candidate! But instead he barely ever plays D, and only has an offensive game with shot blocks. Now, he will still be a superstar in the league and have a long career (baring injury, etc) with playing bad defense (or bad defense most of the time).

Marion had a great night. Marion is good on D (as is Grant Hill).

Barbosa and Bell seem to have less on nights than off nights, which is unfortunate because bench support would be great for the suns.

The Grant Hill dunk was pretty sweet, but not as good as the Ray Allen dunk in the Celts Pistons game!

[Sueven]

That Grant Hill dunk was sick, especially coming over a monster like Diop. That's a man's dunk right there.

Winnow, if Steve Nash was legitimately the MVP, and Amare was legitimately a franchise player, and Shawn Marion was legitimately an all-star and DPOY candidate, and Barbosa is legitimately the best 6th man in the game... then the Suns would be a fucking 75 win juggernaut.

5 years ago the Lakers showed us what happens when you put two legit MVP candidates on the same team and surround them with talent: They win.

SOMETHING on the Suns is not as good as you seem to think-- I happen to think it's poor defense and a money-grubbing front office-- or Phoenix would simply be a much better team than they are.

You're the very odd fan who seems more like a cheerleader than a fan. Most fans get worried about things, criticize certain players or personnel moves, whatever... it seems like as soon as you hear anything about the Suns, you don't actually consider whether it's good or bad, whether you're happy about it or not, but just snap into politician spin mode and try to figure out a way to rationalize why whatever piece of news you've just received is a GREAT piece of news.

In fact, the only exception that I can think of off the top of my head is your negative reaction to the Steve Nash signing!

[Winnow]

I'm a little worried about this year's team because they seem to be lacking motivation. That was easy to foresee though. When you have three great seasons in a row and then get cheated out of a championship, finding out that beyond dirty play being encouraged, the actual ref was involved in fixing the game, it's hard to get motivated early on the next season.

The Suns will change gears sometime in the second half. I also think there still may be a major trade involving either Amare or Marion before the deadline and the players are aware of that as well. I would like to see the Suns win a championship (beyond the one they deserved last year), but I value being entertained all season long which means I'm happy with the current Suns team.

Being critical, prior to this year, D'Antoni and company have made poor decisions in the draft. I won't go into them all but we could have had Luol Deng from Chicago and Rondo (currently in Boston) as a backup PG for Nash. Those were both picks sold for money. Making D'Antoni the general manager was a failed experiment.

Grant Hill was a fantastic pickup this year.

[Sueven]

finding out that beyond dirty play being encouraged, the actual ref was involved in fixing the game

Source? As far as I know, Donaghy reffed the game, but there is no reason, beyond speculation from Suns fans, to think that he was trying to fix that game, or to think that he preferred the Suns to the Spurs.

Being critical, prior to this year, D'Antoni and company have made poor decisions in the draft. I won't go into them all but we could have had Luol Deng from Chicago and Rondo (currently in Boston) as a backup PG for Nash. Those were both picks sold for money. Making D'Antoni the general manager was a failed experiment.

I wouldn't blame D'Antoni for that, I'd blame your tightwad owner who refuses to pay the good players his management is capable of acquiring.

[Winnow]

I wouldn't blame D'Antoni for that, I'd blame your tightwad owner who refuses to pay the good players his management is capable of acquiring.

How deep into the luxury tax do you want him to go?

Edit:

Hill's dunk on Diop:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3MNU8-_Kiw8

[Sueven]

Wizards 92 Hawks 97. Thoughts:

- Joe Johnson scored the quietest 32 points I've ever seen. Hit some threes.

- Marvin Williams looked pretty decent. I'm interested to see how good he ends up being. Al Horford looked good too.

- Josh Smith was fairly impressive but inconsistent. The whole Hawks team is weird. They have a whole mess of talented players who I like but who haven't fully put it together yet. Will they? Are they just young?

- The only Wizards to play well were Antawn Jamison and Nick Young.

[Winnow]

- Josh Smith was fairly impressive but inconsistent. The whole Hawks team is weird. They have a whole mess of talented players who I like but who haven't fully put it together yet. Will they? Are they just young?

One more year of "building" please. Suns deserve a high lotto pick for Joe Johnson! I thought for sure the Hawks would be better this year.

[Canelek]

Amazing how fast ill-light can be shed from a doomed franchise. It seems the shedding of Zach Randolph last year is starting to pay dividends. I have not been a fan of the NBA for about 5 years, but I like what I see in Brandon Roy. I hope more kids can follow his example. Th NBa was so retardedly out of whack and beyond help...nice to see some good kids show up. I mean really, I am amazed that people actually watch this debacle of bullshit. However, there seems to be a light at the end...maybe the lost and repugnant generation is starting to die out and the new kids have a chance at redemption.

Hooray Darwin?

We shall see...

[Sueven]

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepubli ... unsnb.html

This 3-5 stretch for the Suns started with Minnesota's Al Jefferson matching his career high with 32 points and then saw Miami's Shaquille O'Neal have his best game of the month.

New Orleans backup Hilton Armstrong had a season-high 11 points off the bench. San Antonio's Tim Duncan, a game after scoring eight, had 36 points in his second game back from injury.

Dallas' Erick Dampier, a consistent non-factor in Suns' games past, scored eight in the first seven minutes. And in the past two games, Toronto's Chris Bosh (42 points) and the Lakers' Andrew Bynum (28 points) each had career highs.

All were big men. Most were guarded by Amaré Stoudemire. There was a reason Bynum played 42 minutes of Tuesday's 122-115 victory, in which he made 11 of 13 shots.

"It was out of necessity, basically," Lakers coach Phil Jackson said. "You have an advantage. You have scoring capabilities. He was a threat that kept their defense on edge."

The Suns can become unraveled defensively from the inside out.

"That's where our weakness is, no doubt," Suns coach Mike D'Antoni said.

[Aardor]

So Winnow: The Celtics beat the Lakers last night, making it twice the the Celtics have beat the Lakers this season. The Lakers have beat the Suns twice this season, with the first game being pretty much a blow out, and the second game with LA leading 95% of of the game. Does this prove to you that Boston is a contender as you previously were skeptical about?

Or maybe it's because KG can guard Bynum and Amare just gets scored on =(

[Winnow]

So Winnow: The Celtics beat the Lakers last night, making it twice the the Celtics have beat the Lakers this season. The Lakers have beat the Suns twice this season, with the first game being pretty much a blow out, and the second game with LA leading 95% of of the game. Does this prove to you that Boston is a contender as you previously were skeptical about?

Or maybe it's because KG can guard Bynum and Amare just gets scored on =(

Boston is a contender for sure. They'll lose to the West in the finals though. The Lakers get more fired up to play the Suns than Boston.

Amare the past few games:



Looks to me like the Laker game was more of a fluke than anything. Amare's been playing great.

The Suns lead the NBA in blocked shots, shooting percentage, assists and scoring.

The Arizona Republic
Dec. 29, 2007 10:08 PM
The Suns are No. 1 in the NBA in scoring, shooting, assists, blocked shots and . . . wait, blocks? How did a defensive category sneak in there?

After tying a franchise record and setting an NBA season high with 16 blocks Friday, the Suns overtook Denver's 6.75 blocks per game with a league-best 6.80 per game. Last season, the Suns ranked 14th with 4.8 per game.

Amare's block on Tim Duncan is #9 on the all time greatest blocks list:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GqRpt0s04U

Amare's blocks and dunks set to Matrix music:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fB2kMq54ANw

If you don't want to watch the longer videos, here's a typical trip up and down the floor for Amare (50 seconds)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4zmFMrNlZY

[Kelgar]

So Winnow: The Celtics beat the Lakers last night, making it twice the the Celtics have beat the Lakers this season. The Lakers have beat the Suns twice this season, with the first game being pretty much a blow out, and the second game with LA leading 95% of of the game. Does this prove to you that Boston is a contender as you previously were skeptical about?

Or maybe it's because KG can guard Bynum and Amare just gets scored on =(

Boston is a contender for sure. They'll lose to the West in the finals though. The Lakers get more fired up to play the Suns than Boston.

Boston has the lowest OPP FG%, OPP 3PFG%, OPP APG, and highest rebound differential per game.
On offense, they have the largest point differential at +13.79, are 2nd in outpassing their opponents (+5.24APG), and 3rd in FG%. There is no team in the west which matches up well against them defensively. They are by far the best defensive team in the league while also being at least a top 5 offensive team. Despite what the cocksuckers at ESPN and NBA.com say, they are still the best team in the league.

They easily are the best balanced team and barring injury, should only get stronger as the season progresses.

Looks to me like the Laker game was more of a fluke than anything. Amare's been playing great.

Good teams beat the teams they should be beating. The best teams do this most consistently. Detroit is winless in 2 games against a shitty Chicago team so far this season which is precisely why I think Mike Hollinger, John Schuhmann, and all the other retards who ape these 2 numbnuts' opinions are dipshits for placing Detroit #1 overall in their power rankings.

Unless your team is battling injuries to key players, making excuses only makes you look like a whiny bitch.

Boston has a legit chance at beating any team from the West this season. Of the usual big three from the west, only San Antonio can even come close to matching Boston on both sides of the ball.

[Winnow]

LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Andrew Bynum, a big factor in the Los Angeles Lakers' strong start, will be out at least eight weeks because of an injured left knee.

Ouch. That should slot the Lakers down a bit even though they won tonight.

The Lakers (25-11) had won six straight games -- their longest winning streak in almost four years -- and 16 of 19 entering Monday night's game at Seattle.

The schedule gets much tougher after that, with games against Phoenix, Denver, San Antonio, Dallas and Cleveland. Then, after a home game against the Knicks, the Lakers begin a nine-game road trip Jan. 31 at Detroit.

Suns lost Grant Hill for a few weeks due to an emergency appendectomy. Hill really does have the worst medical luck.

[Sueven]

Might be a good thing. It won't be a lingering injury and it'll give him a couple weeks to rest up in the middle of the season. Hill, that is, not Bynum.

[Aardor]

Suns go down to the Clippers!

[Winnow]

*ahem*

In the Pacific Division, there's been a changing of the gua....oh, nevermind, the Suns are still in first!

Cavs are looking good in the East.

[Aardor]

*ahem*

In the Pacific Division, there's been a changing of the gua....oh, nevermind, the Suns are still in first!

Cavs are looking good in the East.

You had to at least chuckle at the image!

So the Suns can beat the Lakers when they are without Bynum

[Winnow]

*ahem*

In the Pacific Division, there's been a changing of the gua....oh, nevermind, the Suns are still in first!

Cavs are looking good in the East.

You had to at least chuckle at the image!

So the Suns can beat the Lakers when they are without Bynum

And the lakers can't beat the Suns without Grant Hill!

Grants been playing great. and has been out the past week and a half. He'll be back next Tuesday. Diaw's stepped up his game as well. Bell is also back from a long bout with the Flu...and the Suns are in first so all is well. People just expect a perfect record out of them. They'll be fine although there still could be a mega trade involving Amare or Marion before the Feb trade deadline.

[Winnow]

http://www.azcentral.com/sports/suns/ar ... 9suns.html

Sarver: Suns won't trade core

Paul Coro
The Arizona Republic
Jan. 19, 2008 11:09 PM

If you love the Suns' stars and what they do, rest easy and keep enjoying it.

If you want a team shake-up, don't hold your breath.

Managing Partner Robert Sarver said Saturday that the team will not make a major deal before the NBA's Feb. 20 trade deadline and added that nothing will change his mind over the next month.

"As far as doing anything with our core players, that's just not going to happen," Sarver said. "I feel very strongly that we are capable of winning a championship with who we have, and I'm going to let these guys go for another shot at a championship."

National reports have run rampant with rumors that the Suns have discussed significant deals that included All-NBA center Amaré Stoudemire and All-Star forward Shawn Marion.

"They are just flat-out not getting traded," Sarver said. "We are going to play the season with our core. They deserve another chance to win a championship.

"Our best chance to win a championship is with the core we have. Whether we are going to trade Shawn or Amaré and whether we have the right coach and whether our GM is making the right decisions is just a bunch of nonsense."

Marion requested a trade during the summer but has put that aside.

"I don't even worry about all that (trade talk)," Marion said Saturday. "I'm just trying to play ball. He (Sarver) didn't have to say that, but it's good that he did."

Sarver said he looks at the first half of this season, which concludes at home tonight against New Jersey, with a "glass half-full" perspective, because the Suns have the best record in a loaded Western Conference.

With a $71.3 million payroll, the Suns face a luxury-tax penalty of about $3.5 million. They could make a "minor addition" if General Manager Steve Kerr and coach Mike D'Antoni wish, Sarver said.

"We are going to operate at a (financial) loss this year whether we win a championship or not," Sarver said. "There are times to go for a championship. This is a time we can. If we need to do a little more, we will."

Marion seems happy with it so all is good for this year's run at another title!