Can fans make amends with Sarver?

[sunsfan88]

Sarver has made some great moves for the past year.

Signed Dragic, acquired more draft picks, fired Blanks, hired the best available GM candidate, and is now going realizing the mistakes he's made.

If he can get the right HC like he did GM and hit gold in this draft with at least one of our many picks, then he gets an A for his work this season.

 

[elindholm]

He also ground the suns offense to a complete stop, and didn't play a lick of defense.

I remember one of those math guys (Hollinger?) showing that the Suns' Nash-Stoudemire-O'Neal offense was even more efficient than those with Marion, so if the offense was at a "complete stop," it was still working pretty darn well. But you're right about the lack of defense.

 

[slinslin]

I am pretty sure the Nash/Shaq/Amare Suns after the firing of Porter had the best offensive rating(compared to full season ratings) in the history of the NBA for that stretch.

 

[slinslin]

I'm really curious about the "completely washed up Shaq" comment. In the full season Shaq played in Phoenix, he averaged 18ppg on 60% shooting, grabbed 8.5 boards, blocked 1.5 shots and was the best center in the Western Conference. He was an all-star, and the guy PLAYED 75 games. 75 GAMES!

And, the Suns got Shaq to address probably the single biggest complaint we hear on these boards: to build the team that could compete in the playoffs.

So, how is it a knock on Sarver for allowing his GM to take a huge risk in trading Shawn Marion - the quintessential built-for-the-regular-season Phoenix Sun, the poster-child for small-ball, can't get it done in the post-season, too small to defend 4s, too little ball-handling/playmaking ability to play the 2 - for a Shaquille O'neal who turned out to be the best true center the Suns ever had?

Yeah I don't get that at all, Shaq was doing pretty well for us while Marion has since gotten exposed as an average NBA player in Miami, Toronto and Dallas.

Not to mention Nash was supposedly pushing for that Shaq trade along with Kerr while Marion was bitching.

 

[Cheesebeef]

I am pretty sure the Nash/Shaq/Amare Suns after the firing of Porter had the best offensive rating(compared to full season ratings) in the history of the NBA for that stretch.

that "stretch" was two or three games before Amare went down. not sure that's really proof of anything to anyone other then someone who believes that Kendall Marshall could both garner us a mid-first round pick and show that he would be in the top 3 in assists if he was a starter based on his "stretch" of three games starting.

 

[Chaplin]

that "stretch" was two or three games before Amare went down. not sure that's really proof of anything to anyone other then someone who believes that Kendall Marshall could both garner us a mid-first round pick and show that he would be in the top 3 in assists if he was a starter based on his "stretch" of three games starting.

:championship:

 

[slinslin]

that "stretch" was two or three games before Amare went down. not sure that's really proof of anything to anyone other then someone who believes that Kendall Marshall could both garner us a mid-first round pick and show that he would be in the top 3 in assists if he was a starter based on his "stretch" of three games starting.

and that coming from someone who believes the NBA game in the 80s was slower and more defensive oriented....


No it was not 2-3 games...

 

[Chaplin]

and that coming from someone who believes the NBA game in the 80s was slower and more defensive oriented....


No it was not 2-3 games...

Actually it was 2 games.

Porter was fired on February 16th during the All-Star break and Stoudemire's injury (detached retina) happened on February 19th. The two games were a home-and-home series with the Clippers, where we won both games by scoring more than 140 points. Stoudemire had surgery on his eye on February 20th.

We also scored 140 the NEXT game without Stoudemire.

Tue, Feb 17 LA Clippers W 140-100 29-23
Wed, Feb 18 @ LA Clippers W 142-119 30-23
Fri, Feb 20 Oklahoma City W 140-118 31-23


We went back down to earth after those 3 games. So while our efficiency was pretty good from the 17th to the 20th, the sample size is so small that it doesn't count in your "history of the NBA" argument.

 

[slinslin]

Actually it was 2 games.

Porter was fired on February 16th during the All-Star break and Stoudemire's injury (detached retina) happened on February 19th. The two games were a home-and-home series with the Clippers, where we won both games by scoring more than 140 points. Stoudemire had surgery on his eye on February 20th.

Gosh good lord, where is the relevance to Amare in my statement?

Under Porter last year the Suns averaged a respectable 107.8 points per game. However in 31 games under Gentry the Suns posted a ridiculous 117.7 points per game – the most in the second half of the season by a wide margin.

The Suns also shot an absurd 51.9% from the field in the second half of the season (50.4% for the whole year). The Gentry Suns also led the league in assists per game in the second-half with 25.4.

The most telling statistic involves the Suns’ record-setting points per possession numbers. The second-half Suns scored more than 120 points per 100 possessions, the best such mark in NBA history when extrapolated out to a full season. While that statistic alone is mind-boggling, note that this was without the Suns’ best offensive player, Amare Stoudemire.
http://valleyofthesuns.com/2009/08/03/the-suns-silver-lining/

 

[Chaplin]

Gosh good lord, where is the relevance to Amare in my statement?

Under Porter last year the Suns averaged a respectable 107.8 points per game. However in 31 games under Gentry the Suns posted a ridiculous 117.7 points per game – the most in the second half of the season by a wide margin.

The Suns also shot an absurd 51.9% from the field in the second half of the season (50.4% for the whole year). The Gentry Suns also led the league in assists per game in the second-half with 25.4.

The most telling statistic involves the Suns’ record-setting points per possession numbers. The second-half Suns scored more than 120 points per 100 possessions, the best such mark in NBA history when extrapolated out to a full season. While that statistic alone is mind-boggling, note that this was without the Suns’ best offensive player, Amare Stoudemire.
http://valleyofthesuns.com/2009/08/03/the-suns-silver-lining/

Cheese quoted your "statement" above, and here you are, backtracking without admitting that you simply were wrong. You yourself brought Amare into the conversation when there was no need to--it just muddled up yet another of your arguments.

 

[slinslin]

I wasn't wrong, now thanks. Reading comprehension?

 

[Chaplin]

I wasn't wrong, now thanks. Reading comprehension?

Considering English isn't your primary language, you get a pass. Perhaps you should read what you write before you post it. Might save you some trouble. Again, read what Cheese quoted.

 

[slinslin]

Considering English isn't your primary language, you get a pass. Perhaps you should read what you write before you post it. Might save you some trouble. Again, read what Cheese quoted.

I said

I am pretty sure the Nash/Shaq/Amare Suns after the firing of Porter had the best offensive rating(compared to full season ratings) in the history of the NBA for that stretch.

Now how is that wrong after I proved to you that for 31 games after Porter's firing they had the highest offensive rating of all time unless you are going to want to suggest that you can't call them Nash/Shaq/Amare Suns because Amare was only playing in the first 3 games when they scored 140 twice.

Do you think Amare was holding back the team offensively?

 

[Cheesebeef]

I am pretty sure the Nash/Shaq/Amare Suns after the firing of Porter had the best offensive rating(compared to full season ratings) in the history of the NBA for that stretch.

it wasn't 2 or 3 games? Really? Then tell me, how many games did the Nash/Amare/Shaq ********* play together after Porter was fired?

Jesus man...just admit you were wrong and move on.

 

[slinslin]

it wasn't 2 or 3 games? Really? Then tell me, how many games did the Nash/Amare/Shaq ********* play together after Porter was fired?

Jesus man...just admit you were wrong and move on.

GOD it does not matter how many games Amare played in that stretch the fact is with Shaq they did that for the entire rest of the season and if you think they would have done worse with Amare staying healthy after scoring 140 twice you are foolish.

Don't try to weasel out again, you did simply not know that the Suns were that good offensively with Shaq and couldn't wait to point out that it was only 2-3 games before Amare went down.

 

[Cheesebeef]

I said

I am pretty sure the Nash/Shaq/Amare Suns after the firing of Porter had the best offensive rating(compared to full season ratings) in the history of the NBA for that stretch.

Now how is that wrong after I proved to you that for 31 games after Porter's firing they had the highest offensive rating of all time unless you are going to want to suggest that you can't call them Nash/Shaq/Amare Suns because Amare was only playing in the first 3 games when they scored 140 twice.

Do you think Amare was holding back the team offensively?

LOL...is this serious? Doesn't matter if Amare would or would not have held them back because WE DON'T KNOW WHAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED and a three games run, two of them against the same WOEFUL Clippers team is proof positive of NOTHING, unless you live in Slin world where entire careers/future seasons can apparently be extrapolated from three games.

 

[slinslin]

LOL...is this serious? Doesn't matter if Amare would or would not have held them back because WE DON'T KNOW WHAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED and a three games run, two of them against the same WOEFUL Clippers team is proof positive of NOTHING, unless you live in Slin world where entire careers/future seasons can apparently be extrapolated from three games.

Dude do you unterstand context? Do you understand that I replied to someone who stated that Shaq being horrible for the Suns was a myth?

Amare is irrelevant to the statement. And there is nothing extrapolated based on 3 games, they were the best offensive team in NBA history in the 31 games after Porter was fired. FACT.

obviously any arguments with you involving any sort of statistical argument is pointless since you
a) don't understand them
b) try your best to not understand them

 

[Cheesebeef]

GOD it does not matter how many games Amare played in that stretch the fact is with Shaq they did that for the entire rest of the season and if you think they would have done worse with Amare staying healthy after scoring 140 twice you are foolish.

Don't try to weasel out again, you did simply not know that the Suns were that good offensively with Shaq and couldn't wait to point out that it was only 2-3 games before Amare went down.

again, TWO GAMES, both against an AWFUL Clippers team doesn't show that the Nash/Amare/Shaq trifecta would have been a great offense. You simply don't have ANY data to back that up. TWO GAMES. You have no idea how those three would have played together for the next 28 games. I don't know how you can possibly argue this. Could it have worked? Sure. Could it have not worked? Sure. We'll never know. THAT'S the point.

 

[Chaplin]

Dude do you unterstand context? Do you understand that I replied to someone who stated that Shaq being horrible for the Suns was a myth?

Amare is irrelevant to the statement. And there is nothing extrapolated based on 3 games, they were the best offensive team in NBA history in the 31 games after Porter was fired. FACT.

obviously any arguments with you involving any sort of statistical argument is pointless since you
a) don't understand them
b) try your best to not understand them

Then why even mention any players at all?

 

[slinslin]

again, TWO GAMES, both against an AWFUL Clippers team doesn't show that the Nash/Amare/Shaq trifecta would have been a great offense. You simply don't have ANY data to back that up. TWO GAMES. You have no idea how those three would have played together for the next 28 games. I don't know how you can possibly argue this. Could it have worked? Sure. Could it have not worked? Sure. We'll never know. THAT'S the point.

THE ARGUMENT IS ABOUT SHAQ, NOT AMARE.

******** it I ignore you now if that is somehow possible.

 

[desertdawg]

 

[Cheesebeef]

THE ARGUMENT IS ABOUT SHAQ, NOT AMARE.

******** it I ignore you now if that is somehow possible.

Lol... Then why did YOU include Amare into the argument? I think it's pretty clear that people were arguing that Shaq slowed down the Amare/Nash combo and you provided proof that he didn't based on games...where that ********* never played together save two games.

 

[elindholm]

Slinslin, just say that you meant the Nash/Shaq Suns, not the Nash/Shaq/Amare Suns, and then everyone's on the same page. Simple solutions, people.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Slinslin, just say that you meant the Nash/Shaq Suns, not the Nash/Shaq/Amare Suns, and then everyone's on the same page. Simple solutions, people.

it really would be simple as that.

 

[Budden]

Slinslin, just say that you meant the Nash/Shaq Suns, not the Nash/Shaq/Amare Suns, and then everyone's on the same page. Simple solutions, people.

Who cares? Perhaps Slin should've just said "After Porter was fired, the Suns had the best (or second best) offense in NBA history." So, seven-seconds-or-Shaq was one of the best offenses in NBA history (perhaps not the best or second best, but it was clearly up there). The point is the same.

It seems to me that this is perhaps the most damning evidence against Robert Sarver's reign. Immediately after having the best offense ever, Sarver elected to get rid of the best player on that team. You can say that it was because the team missed the playoffs, but it was pretty evident that we missed the playoffs because Terry Porter was a historically terrible coach. The difference in personnel from when Porter was the coach to when Gentry took over was that we lost one of our top 3 most potent scorers. The difference in result was that we went from a mediocre offensive team to an amazing offensive team.

Imagine replacing Robin Lopez from the 2010 WCF Suns team with a still-dominant Shaq. I really think we might've won it all. Now, of course Sarver couldn't have known the team was going to be as great as it was in 2010 (we missed the playoffs the year before), but the fact is you NEVER KNOW how good your team is going to be. If there's ever any doubt, Sarver will choose to cut payroll. And there's ALWAYS doubt.