Committed to Speed

azirish

ASFN Lifer
Joined
Jan 26, 2007
Posts
3,876
Reaction score
0
Location
Sun City
Fan reaction to the trade of Kurt Thomas to Seattle has ranged from disappointment to bitter outrange. No one doubted that he is grossly overpaid, but he played pretty well in Spurs series and it leaves the Suns with a vey small lineup.

The general reaction has been that the Suns are being cheap, which is probably true. What has not been discussed is just how big a committment the team has made to speed.

The Suns started with a fast team with some amazing athletes, but in exchanging Jones for Hill and Kurt Thomas for Sean Marks (apparently), it looks like they are going for even greater speed or at least open court skills.

It's not clear this will work against the Spurs, but that is mostly due to Amare Stoudemire's inability to stay out of foul trouble. It seems clear the Suns are making a committment to find a way to have Amare guard Tim Duncan one on one when Duncan is on the floor. If that fails, they must be hoping that Sean Marks' experience as Duncan's backup will be helpful.

The small "speed" lineup is a big gamble, but if it works, the rewards are huge.

The central problem with the way the Suns lineup is structured. Shawn Marion is far better at power forward than small forward. At small forward, his limitations as a shooter and "make his own shot" scorer create a problem. Without a major offensive threat at power forward, Marion is too easy for other small forwards to guard.

But with Marion at power forward, the Suns create a major mismatch against opponents with big, but slow power forwards. Against slower power forwards he has little trouble getting by them for mid range shots or to get to the basket. He's remarkably good at fronting big guys and is a very good rebounder.

Typically a team like the Spurs would like to use their power forwards (Oberto and Elson) to guard the primary low post threat (such as Stoudemire) and not worry too much about the second big. Against the Suns big lineup, Duncan is left to simply hang around the basket and block shots. They never really worried about Kurt Thomas beating them.

The problem with defending against the Suns' small lineup is that it leaves Marion completely undefended, since the opponent's bigs cannot stay with Marion. For the Spurs, it means either using the PF's on Marion or Duncan. In short, if they can't force the Suns out of their small lineup, the Suns create major problems.

Two years ago the Spurs tried to go small against the Suns. The Suns lacked Joe Johnson and Q Richardson had a terrible series, but the solution of Duncan guarding Stoudemire was not very effective. They won, but it is not so clear their small lineup would be so effective with current Suns with a lot more offense.

With or without Kurt Thomas, it seems clear that coach Mike D'Antoni wants to force the Spurs to go small. Unlike the Mavericks who have no small ball lineup to speak of, the Spurs can play small. But they are not geared to play small.

Can the Suns figure a way to defense Duncan without Stoudemire getting into instant foul trouble? That is the $16 million question, because if they can't, there is little chance of them getting by the Spurs. But if they can for the Spurs to play small, the Spurs will have a vastly harder time stopping the Suns.
 

dodie53

A. O. II
Joined
Jan 7, 2007
Posts
6,320
Reaction score
2
Location
Tondo, Manila
why not let duncan score 50 on us
BUT
be sure to shut down or limit parker and floppy's production.

i say, let marion or diaw guard duncan and let amare roam around and be the help defense.
 
OP
OP
azirish

azirish

ASFN Lifer
Joined
Jan 26, 2007
Posts
3,876
Reaction score
0
Location
Sun City
why not let duncan score 50 on us
BUT
be sure to shut down or limit parker and floppy's production.

i say, let marion or diaw guard duncan and let amare roam around and be the help defense.

My guess is that the Suns will end up packing the paint and make the Spurs beat them from the outside. They might, but doubling Duncan on denial and keeping guys in place to cut down on penitration is something the Suns CAN do playing small.
 

Cheesebeef

ASFN IDOL
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Posts
91,185
Reaction score
68,061
My guess is that the Suns will end up packing the paint and make the Spurs beat them from the outside. They might, but doubling Duncan on denial and keeping guys in place to cut down on penitration is something the Suns CAN do playing small.

boy that worked well in Game 5 and 6 when they lit us up like a pin-ball machine. Or the way we did that in 2005 when they rained threes on us.

I don't know a better way to put this, but I think anyone who thinks we can beat the Spurs playing small really doesn't understand the game of basketball at the pro-level.
 

SunsTzu

ASFN Lifer
Joined
Aug 28, 2003
Posts
4,866
Reaction score
1,672
boy that worked well in Game 5 and 6 when they lit us up like a pin-ball machine. Or the way we did that in 2005 when they rained threes on us.

I don't know a better way to put this, but I think anyone who thinks we can beat the Spurs playing small really doesn't understand the game of basketball at the pro-level.

Yeah this goes back to a debate on another thread where people were arguing that it was more important to defend Parker and Manu than KT. If the Suns pack the paint those 2 will roam free and destroy them. The only players on the team that would be able to stop them at the rim are Amare and Marion and if they go for the block on someone elses man they'll be out of position for the rebounds.

Man '05 playoff flashbacks. The Suns manage to hold the Spurs to a lower fg% than what the Suns are shooting but the Spurs annihilate them in 2nd chance points.
 

cepstrum

Shqiptar i Qart
Joined
Jun 20, 2004
Posts
609
Reaction score
0
Location
Tempe
George, if the suns really believe that the way to beat the spurs is to go even smaller, then I only have one thing to say. Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results is the definition of insanity.

I guess, maybe that does make sense though. Insanity is the only excuse I can think of that would justify the moves of the front office lately.

This FO is committed to greed, not to speed.
 
Last edited:

Stargazer

Registered
Joined
Jul 8, 2007
Posts
145
Reaction score
0
I don't really agree with all of the doom and gloom around here. I like the speed game, and I'm glad to see the Suns still committing to it. I liked Thomas, but he's the 8th man, and I don't think losing him is the end of the world. It also seems a little short-sighted to build an entire team around trying to beat the Spurs. A lot can happen in a year, and we may not even meet the Spurs next year.
 
OP
OP
azirish

azirish

ASFN Lifer
Joined
Jan 26, 2007
Posts
3,876
Reaction score
0
Location
Sun City
George, if the suns really believe that the way to beat the spurs is to go even smaller, then I only have one thing to say. Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results is the definition of insanity.

I guess, maybe that does make sense though. Insanity is the only excuse I can think of that would justify the moves of the front office lately.

This FO is committed to greed, not to speed.

I do not agree with the speed is everything approach. My goal is to figure out what their analysis is and what it is they are trying to do. I do not think they are stupid nor insane even if they are wrong.

Can the Suns force the Spurs to play small? History may not be very encouraging, but then again no other Suns team had this much firepower.
 

cepstrum

Shqiptar i Qart
Joined
Jun 20, 2004
Posts
609
Reaction score
0
Location
Tempe
I do not agree with the speed is everything approach. My goal is to figure out what their analysis is and what it is they are trying to do. I do not think they are stupid nor insane even if they are wrong.

Can the Suns force the Spurs to play small? History may not be very encouraging, but then again no other Suns team had this much firepower.

My point is that, profit seems to be the bottom line with this FO. Basketball is secondary. I'm not sure that it is fruitful to analyze their decisions in the context of basketball. In that context, the decisions they have made make no sense at all. AT ALL. Now in the context of return on investment, then getting rid of KT was a great move!

Also, I'm not sure that no other Suns team has had this much firepower. Especially considering that the guy that we recently signed will, more than likely, spend a great deal of time out with an injury.
 

Treesquid PhD

Pardon my Engrish
Joined
Apr 12, 2005
Posts
4,844
Reaction score
105
Location
Gilbert
My point is that, profit seems to be the bottom line with this FO. Basketball is secondary. I'm not sure that it is fruitful to analyze their decisions in the context of basketball. In that context, the decisions they have made make no sense at all. AT ALL. Now in the context of return on investment, then getting rid of KT was a great move!

I don't, I think the Front Office wants to put a fun team on the floor that's capable of winning lots of games and drawing lots of fans/ratings. But they are not going to do everything it takes to win a title. I also think the $$$ and being a good team are about even in importance to the Suns FO and one won't fully drive the other.

So I don't ever expect the Suns to be NY or Dallas and I don't expect them to be totally cheap like the perennial NBA bottom feeders either.

Also, I'm not sure that no other Suns team has had this much firepower. Especially considering that the guy that we recently signed will, more than likely, spend a great deal of time out with an injury.

Sorry I don't get your logic here, because of Kurt Thomas? Other than his 4 points per game what has changed from last seasons team that was pretty much the definition of offensive firepower? Nash, Marion, Bell, Stat, Diaw and Barbosa made up the majority of points last season (look it up) they are all back. Grant Hill is just gravy for this team, losing him will mean absolutely nothing to the offensive output of this team.

Let's face it are the Suns better without KT? No, but are they going to suddenly become Indiana? Get real, this team is going to win the pacific, be a top 4 seed in the west and probably have a good to fair shot at the championship.
 

cepstrum

Shqiptar i Qart
Joined
Jun 20, 2004
Posts
609
Reaction score
0
Location
Tempe
So I don't ever expect the Suns to be NY or Dallas and I don't expect them to be totally cheap like the perennial NBA bottom feeders either.


They will pay just enough to make sure they have an exciting team that wins 50+ games, but gets bounced in the second round.


Sorry I don't get your logic here, because of Kurt Thomas? Other than his 4 points per game what has changed from last seasons team that was pretty much the definition of offensive firepower? Nash, Marion, Bell, Stat, Diaw and Barbosa made up the majority of points last season (look it up) they are all back. Grant Hill is just gravy for this team, losing him will mean absolutely nothing to the offensive output of this team.

Let's face it are the Suns better without KT? No, but are they going to suddenly become Indiana? Get real, this team is going to win the pacific, be a top 4 seed in the west and probably have a good to fair shot at the championship.


I guess this is the problem here. When I say firepower, I am referring to a lot more than offensive firepower. As far as offensive firepower goes, the JJ/Q team was by far the best. To win a championship, you need defense. Without Kurt Thomas our interior defense goes to $hit as does our team defense.

Also, no team with only one front court player has a good chance at a championship. Stop buying the BS the front office is selling.
 

TucsonDevil

Good to be back!
Joined
Jun 28, 2005
Posts
2,575
Reaction score
19
Location
SLC, UT
My goal is to figure out what their analysis is and what it is they are trying to do.

Let me help you and everyone else out... Robert Sarver is looking to maximize profit. For the junior high students in the forum, profit = revenue - expenses (cost). We could continue to debate this in length, but its getting tired. Maximizing profit is not a poor strategy in relation to fans, though. It requires that fans support the team as much as possible (spend money). A typical fan in Phoenix only does that when there is a winner on the floor.

Kurt Thomas and 1st round Draft picks (guaranteed contracts) fall under an old economics principle called 'the the Law of Diminishing Returns'.

BTW, maximizing profit is a good business strategy. Every single one of us would employ the same, if given the chance.
 

Mainstreet

Cruisin' Mainstreet
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Posts
116,842
Reaction score
56,992
Nothing matters as the games are fixed.

Sadly this past season this thought crept into my mind. I still cannot get out of my mind Bowen being allowed to foul with impunity (especially against Nash) and Horry starting an incident with the Spurs coming out on top.

IMO the integrity of the game is in question, especially the inconsistent refereeing during the playoffs and an NBA FO that turns their heads the other way. Where is the concern for the greater good of the game?
 

Rab

Angry Vedder
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Posts
1,539
Reaction score
225
Location
In My Tree
Championship teams can beat you playing more than just one style of basketball.

Spurs do it to the Suns every year, and our only counter is to get smaller? Call me crazy, but I think the FO is crazy.
 

asudevil83

Registered User
Joined
Nov 3, 2004
Posts
2,061
Reaction score
1
George, if the suns really believe that the way to beat the spurs is to go even smaller, then I only have one thing to say. Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results is the definition of insanity.

I guess, maybe that does make sense though. Insanity is the only excuse I can think of that would justify the moves of the front office lately.

This FO is committed to greed, not to speed.

at this point in time i think the suns have thought to themselves:

1.) we are going to play our style of basketball no matter what.

2.) we are going to let 1 of 2 things happen:
a.) let the spurs age and blow by them with our running
b.) hope that some other team takes care of them, so that we dont

what else could explain it?
 

Mainstreet

Cruisin' Mainstreet
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Posts
116,842
Reaction score
56,992
I want the Suns, better than before, bigger, stronger and faster.

I may have to settle for faster. :)

I want other teams to think Phoenix was only playing in second gear last season.
 

Sunsman44

The Sunsman Defense Team
Joined
Jul 20, 2007
Posts
535
Reaction score
0
Location
Arizona & California
Problem with "faster" is that pretty much every other NBA team is doing the same damn thing with exception to the Spurs.

Nellie's Warriors, Skiles' Bulls, Colangelo's Raptors, Iavaroni's Grizzlies, Karl's Nuggets, and even the Kings and Rockets are starting to attempt this style.

There are less and less big men in the NBA and more teams are using smalls as their powers.

If the fast run and gun did not work for the past 3 seasons, why then don't u stockpile a bunch of bigs on the roster and have one of the best defensive clubs in history? I'm talking getting Kirilenko, PJ, keeping Kurt, and using those guys with Amare-Nash-Bell.

You'd have AMARE in the middle with PJ and AK47 at the forwards with BELL and NASH as the guards and BARBS/KURT off the bench.

That would pretty much solves all your defensive needs.

But it don't matter because:

A- the NBA is fake
B- that will never happen because suns won't trade Matrix for AK47
 
OP
OP
azirish

azirish

ASFN Lifer
Joined
Jan 26, 2007
Posts
3,876
Reaction score
0
Location
Sun City
AK is a grossly overpaid defense specialist who should be playing PF, but this guy Boozer is in the way.
 

sharkman

Registered
Joined
May 15, 2007
Posts
249
Reaction score
0
Playing faster is a nice concept....but anyone who thinks that we get faster by adding Grant Hill is smoking the cactus.

I think Hill still has some gas left in the tank...he has excellent handle....can still get to the line....and is the consumate citizen and team mate....but his bionic knees are on their last legs....and they won't add ANY speed. Speed and Grant Hill are opposites.

Is grant Hill a nice reserve for any team? Yes.
Is Grant Hill a decent team mate and distributor? Yes.
Would Grant Hill make for an excellent distributor off the bench? Absolutely.
Will Grant Hill help from 3 point range...or help improve speed? You got to be joking.
 

Errntknght

Registered User
Joined
Sep 24, 2002
Posts
6,342
Reaction score
319
Location
Phoenix
sharkman,
Would Grant Hill make for an excellent distributor off the bench? Absolutely.

I'm hopeful Hill will work out like that but last year he was only good for 2.1 assists per game in 30+ minutes. He had 2.2 TOs per game so assist to turnover ratio was less than 1. Marcus Banks had an assist to turnover ratio of 1.5.

Hill didn't contribute much in the way of rebounding - 3.6 per game, barely beating out Nash who got 3.5, in two more minutes per game.

I expect Hill will do better in both assists and rebounds with Phoenix but probably not a whole lot better.

If we don't add another useful big I'm very worried about our rebounding this year - we could well set a team record for the fewest rebounds ever in an NBA season.
 

sharkman

Registered
Joined
May 15, 2007
Posts
249
Reaction score
0
sharkman,

I'm hopeful Hill will work out like that but last year he was only good for 2.1 assists per game in 30+ minutes. He had 2.2 TOs per game so assist to turnover ratio was less than 1. Marcus Banks had an assist to turnover ratio of 1.5.

Hill didn't contribute much in the way of rebounding - 3.6 per game, barely beating out Nash who got 3.5, in two more minutes per game.

I expect Hill will do better in both assists and rebounds with Phoenix but probably not a whole lot better.

If we don't add another useful big I'm very worried about our rebounding this year - we could well set a team record for the fewest rebounds ever in an NBA season.

I absolutely agree. I fully understand D'Antoni not wanting to go forward with KT's $8mil salary if he didn't fit his fast style of play....but you need to get a big in return that DOES fit the fast style of play.

Every other team in the League is looking for expiring contracts (they are assets)...especially if the expiring contract belongs to a big who can rebound, play defense, and shoot the outside 15 footer...except for the Suns.

Washington has been shopping Etan Thomas for months (since they are going to have to shell out $$ to re-sign AW)...

...while certainly not a quality starter, Etan can rebound, run, block shots...and would be a powerful reserve off the bench...

...and Washington would have jumped at the chance to trade his 3 remaining years for KT's expiring deal...

...and the Suns would have saved $2mil off this year's payroll in the process.

Stromile Swift has been shopped for over 6 months....no he's not a dominant 7 foot defender, but he'd be one of the fastest "bigs" in the League, and in this system could thrive off the bench. He's an excellent shot blocker....one of the best Per-minutes-played...and could have played the role of Hunter...only faster with better FT%.

Instead...we trade an expiring deal...and future picks...for the luxury of ending the deal a year early...while getting nothing in return. I want to trade sports cards with Kerr....

...I'll give him my OJ Simpson rookie card...in return for his Cal Ripkin rookie, plus his Payton Manning rookie...plus his Walter Payton rookie...but only if he includes 3 boxes of unopened 2007 cards. So far my opinion of Kerr is that he is a but munching simpleton who is trying to make points so he can date Sarver's daughter.
 

YouJustGotSUNSD

Custom User Title!
Joined
Jun 6, 2007
Posts
5,168
Reaction score
0
Ok youve used the word but munch like 3 times in the last day. Do you know youre spelling it wrong, and that people assuming youre 12 years old when you call someone that repeatedly?
 

sharkman

Registered
Joined
May 15, 2007
Posts
249
Reaction score
0
Ok youve used the word but munch like 3 times in the last day. Do you know youre spelling it wrong, and that people assuming youre 12 years old when you call someone that repeatedly?

1. Yes I do know I'm spelling it wrong but many sites filter the correct spelling even if it is a legitimate body part.

2. That is more 12 year old than say...having dancing superheroes as your signature?

3. Many on here are not happy with the latest moves by Kerr. Defending him without supporting your position simply makes you appear as though you have a man crush on him.

4. Do you know what an apostrophe is?

:D
 

Staff online

Forum statistics

Threads
551,981
Posts
5,393,573
Members
6,313
Latest member
50 year card fan
Top