Case For Patience

[George O'Brien]

Signing a minimum contract free agent center is a stop gap, but I think it would be better than jumping the gun on a bad trade (well duh). In any case, I think the Suns have the talent to win close to 50 games with this team and get into the playoffs. I'm not sure there is much that can be done that will materially improve on that.

One of the main reasons for patience is that the Suns should be a vastly better situation next summer to work out a major trade.

1. Eisley will have only one year left on his contract, making him a trading asset rather than a liability.

2. The Chicago pick status will be determined. Right now no one knows how high or even if it will apply to next draft.

3. The value of fringe players like Carbakapa, Jacobsen, and Vroman will be easier to determine. Right now they aren't worth much, but that should change.

4. The real potential of Lampe will be better know. Right now we don't know if he will even be a player or how good he might be. Next summer there will be a lot more known.

5. Next summer the Suns will have the MLE. This means that a player who is used in a trade could possibly be replaced through free agency.

Obviously this does not mean the Suns won't be looking for long term solutions this summer. However, unless there is a killer deal available, IMHO patience makes a lot of sense.

 

[SweetD]

One thing I really like about Lampe is his contract since he was a second rounder his contract is small and he can sit on the bench and learn the game and not be rushed into the game.

 

[King A]

i agree george.

and the way the Cs (or just Bryan, i dont know) talked at the Q press conference about their core, i just don't think JJ or Shawn will be traded.
They know they build around that core and even Luc was mentioned and that Jordan didn't need a great center.

Let's compare:

Harper - Nash (hm, Harper denfense, Nash leaderhip. Edge: nash)
Jordan - JJ (hm, no contest, at least for a while Edge: jordan)
Pip - Shawn (both perfect complementary players (Shawn better rebounder) Edge: even
Rodman - Amare (hm, no contest. Edge: Amare)
Luc - Jake (does it really matter. Edge: even)

Kukoc - Q (Toni's a good passer with court vision, Q's more athlethic and will omprove. Edge: even)
Kerr - Barbosa (3pt shooter vs fast able to hit a 3 player. edge: Barbosa)
Wennington - Lampe (does it really matter)

We're yet nearly the Bulls.

JP for some blocking and we'll be fine

 

[scoutmasterdave]

We're yet nearly the Bulls.

Don't get carried away there, turbo. MJ is so infinitely better than JJ it ain't even funny. When MJ was in his prime, I'm not sure it really mattered who they threw around him; he was going to win an MVP award and a title.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

i agree with the patience idea, but the following post is ridiculous.

Harper - Nash (hm, Harper denfense, Nash leaderhip. Edge: nash)
i agree that i'd give the edge to nash, but defensively, and let's be honest, with jordan in the backcourt, there was no need for the "pg" to be an offensive threat. also, as far as LEADERSHIP goes, that's the primary reason harper was on that bulls team. nash doesn't have the edge there.

Jordan - JJ (hm, no contest, at least for a while Edge: jordan)
to even pretend to compare these two is ludicrous. if jordan, in his prime, thought that jj considered himself in the same league as jordan he'd pull a labradford smith on jj and jj would never play the game again. even "in a while" jj will never be comparable to jordan.

Pip - Shawn (both perfect complementary players (Shawn better rebounder) Edge: even
this is where you go from the silly to the outright ridiculous. marion is a great complimentary player. pippen was too. difference? pippen COULD carry the team to a winning season (see season after jordan retired) whereas marion could NEVER do that. pippen was named to the top 50 of all time and was a dreamteamer. marion will forever be a borderline allstar and a member of this year's olympians which is widely considered subpar. this is not even. it's not even close to even. no gm in the history of basketball would choose marion over pippen. none would even consider it.

Rodman - Amare (hm, no contest. Edge: Amare)
as much as i love amare, and as much as he's got more upside than rodman, i'm not so sure this is "no contest." rodman's value went beyond his rebounding and defense (which both far surpassed amare's current contributions). his ability to antagonize other players and get them outta their game mentally was a huge factor in his years in chicago. i'd take amare over rodman also, but to say "no contest" is not being objective.

Luc - Jake (does it really matter. Edge: even)
luc was considered a fairly good one-on-one defensive center, took up more room than jake, and, whilst with the bulls, was a better player. jake would have backed up luc in luc's prime in chicago. they both stink, but you can't just throw this one out as even.

Kukoc - Q (Toni's a good passer with court vision, Q's more athlethic and will omprove. Edge: even)
not even yet. kukoc was clutch and had great vision. q could still develop into that, but he's not there yet. kukoc also provided matchup problems. because he deferred to jordan and pippen he gets the rap that he wasn't as good as billed. i'd argue that his game perfectly complimented the other two. he was better than q is now.

Kerr - Barbosa (3pt shooter vs fast able to hit a 3 player. edge: Barbosa)
for the way that the bulls team was built kerr has the advantage. barbosa has more physical tools and will become a better player, but kerr played his roll for the bulls perfectly. he was to sit out and hit clutch 3s. he did that. his being clutch outweighs barbosa's physical superiority in this comparison.

Wennington - Lampe (does it really matter)
it does matter 'cuz again wennington played his role. he was to hit midrange jumpers and was consistent enough to not be a complete liability on the floor. at this stage in his career lampe is still a liability on the floor. he may improve this season to the point of not being a liability and maybe even an asset, but until he proves it, he's a liability. hence in this comparison the bulls come out on top again.

We're yet nearly the Bulls.
i'm not trying to be totally negative 'cuz i think this suns team has tremendous potential. but when i see such blatant homerism it just makes me cringe and i have to reply. nothing personal, i just think you're nuts.

 

[Freddie]

Ouchie, you took the words right out of my mouth.

 

[arthurracoon]

King A, as much as I liked your opinion...it is waaaayyyy too optimistic.

I would have to agree with Ouchie

 

[King A]

i may have been too optimistic, but let's look at this that way:

our 5 core guys are among the actual top 50 of the nba

most teams don't even have 5 core guys

(yeah maybe top 50 is exaggerated but you know what i mean)