Grizzlies @ Suns 1-2-14

[AzStevenCal]

LOL...

I simply believe a championship team is most often grounded in a hard-nosed, tough defense with strong rebounding capability. I just don't believe that having a guy who plays the PF position as does Frye, who's greatest value is knocking down 3's, contributes to that concept...
Hey, if Frye were a bench guy, backing up a legit power forward who was strong defensively and can consistently rebound, that would be one thing...
Otherwise, I am just not sold on the make-up of this team with Frye as the starting PF... I think Bled/Dragic/Tucker/Plumlee can be a Champsionship caliber line-up, only if there is a legit PF added to that mix. Otherwise, as I said, I think the team will be a very fun, athletic run & gun regular season team that essentially lives and dies by the 3. IMHO, that is not the formula for success in the post season...

As always, time will tell...

I do too. But even with those things, you still need a transcendent player the vast majority of the time. Look at Indiana. They are loaded with talent. They play tough, physical ball, they rebound well and their only trip to the finals was in the previous century.

The easiest way to win an NBA championship is to surround the best player in the game with quality pieces. Every other approach is flawed and requires quite a bit of luck. And our current approach needs time to work itself out before we can even hope for that huge hit of luck.

Although I've been defending Frye of late it's not because I think he's the key to future happiness. I think he's played out of his head this season and is one of several players contributing positively to our record. But he's not a star and he's not going to lead us to the championship. Right now, the same is equally true of Plumlee but for some reason everyone here seems to ignore his frequent disappearing act. I love the guy and he is huge value as a throw in to the Scola trade but I don't think you can win it all with him and Frye as your power players. Put a superstar bruiser next to Miles and he's probably enough but put Hibbert out there and Channing is probably sufficient too. Either way, we need to improve at the power spots eventually. Right now, they are each giving us far more than we had any reason to expect.

Steve

 

[82CardsGrad]

I do too. But even with those things, you still need a transcendent player the vast majority of the time. Look at Indiana. They are loaded with talent. They play tough, physical ball, they rebound well and their only trip to the finals was in the previous century.

The easiest way to win an NBA championship is to surround the best player in the game with quality pieces. Every other approach is flawed and requires quite a bit of luck. And our current approach needs time to work itself out before we can even hope for that huge hit of luck.

Although I've been defending Frye of late it's not because I think he's the key to future happiness. I think he's played out of his head this season and is one of several players contributing positively to our record. But he's not a star and he's not going to lead us to the championship. Right now, the same is equally true of Plumlee but for some reason everyone here seems to ignore his frequent disappearing act. I love the guy and he is huge value as a throw in to the Scola trade but I don't think you can win it all with him and Frye as your power players. Put a superstar bruiser next to Miles and he's probably enough but put Hibbert out there and Channing is probably sufficient too. Either way, we need to improve at the power spots eventually. Right now, they are each giving us far more than we had any reason to expect.

Steve

Yikes... I actually think we're saying the same thing! First, the lee-way granted Plum is largely based on Plum's clear upside potential over Frye's. Channing is a veteran who is what he is...the softest 6'11" guy in the game, who's greatest value is draining 3's.
So yes! Put a "superstar bruiser next to Miles" and this team will be a championship contender! Not this year, but next year for sure as our guys need more seasoning...

 

[AzStevenCal]

Yikes... I actually think we're saying the same thing! First, the lee-way granted Plum is largely based on Plum's clear upside potential over Frye's. Channing is a veteran who is what he is...the softest 6'11" guy in the game, who's greatest value is draining 3's.
So yes! Put a "superstar bruiser next to Miles" and this team will be a championship contender! Not this year, but next year for sure as our guys need more seasoning...

I think we're on the right path but we're only a few steps down the trail. I think next year, if everything goes extremely well, we'll have a chance to be about where Golden State is this season. IOW, we'll be a Championship contender with no real chance of winning it all. Still, it will be nice just to have that to look forward too. We have Cap space, draft picks, a solid nucleus of young players and a front office and coaching staff that seems to know what it's doing. We'll have a lot more losses against Memphis and the like along the way but for the first time in several years we are pointed in the right direction. I'm thrilled despite the occasional bump in the road.

Steve

 

[devilalum]

Yikes... I actually think we're saying the same thing! First, the lee-way granted Plum is largely based on Plum's clear upside potential over Frye's. Channing is a veteran who is what he is...the softest 6'11" guy in the game, who's greatest value is draining 3's.
So yes! Put a "superstar bruiser next to Miles" and this team will be a championship contender! Not this year, but next year for sure as our guys need more seasoning...

I don't agree that Frye is soft. He didn't have any problem going toe to toe with Blake and I don't see him backing down from anybody else either. IMO the biggest shortcoming in his game is his lack of athleticism but he's smart. He's learned to use what he's got. He's got a big body and he can shoot 3s.

 

[AzStevenCal]

I don't agree that Frye is soft. He didn't have any problem going toe to toe with Blake and I don't see him backing down from anybody else either. IMO the biggest shortcoming in his game is his lack of athleticism but he's smart. He's learned to use what he's got. He's got a big body and he can shoot 3s.

I agree that he's not really soft but his inability to hold his position against a certain type of player leads to that label. I've just given into it because the point ends up being the same. He plays hard and he plays physical but his lower body just isn't built to handle the players that know how to use their leverage down there. Blake kept trying to back him down and the refs allowed Frye to set up with an arm and a half in the back (some refs won't let him do it). When Blake faced him up Frye couldn't handle him but the quick double would lead to a pass out and the Clippers never sent it back in again. I doubt that happens the next time we face those guys.

Steve

 

[82CardsGrad]

I don't agree that Frye is soft. He didn't have any problem going toe to toe with Blake and I don't see him backing down from anybody else either. IMO the biggest shortcoming in his game is his lack of athleticism but he's smart. He's learned to use what he's got. He's got a big body and he can shoot 3s.

Sorry... Frye is about as soft as a big man can be...
I would bet big $ that in a 3, 5 or 7 game series, Blake would own Channing...
Yes, Frye played well in that one game against Blake. But as I said before, I think it was more a function of the inability for Paul and other last to get Blake the ball when and where he needed it due to the great defense by Bled, Dragic, Plum Tucker and Green.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[AzStevenCal]

Sorry... Frye is about as soft as a big man can be...
I would bet big $ that in a 3, 5 or 7 game series, Blake would own Channing...
Yes, Frye played well in that one game against Blake. But as I said before, I think it was more a function of the inability for Paul and other last to get Blake the ball when and where he needed it due to the great defense by Bled, Dragic, Plum Tucker and Green.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well that just isn't so. I agree he has trouble holding his position against certain players but there are plenty of big men that play softer than Channing. The Frye I've watched this season has been pretty physical, much more so than someone like Marcin Gortat for example. I don't even think he's any softer than Aldridge although he's nowhere near the ballplayer that guy is. He grabs, he holds, he pushes, he shoves, he fights to hold his spot and he never shies away from contact. In what way is he the softest of the soft? How are you defining "soft"? Are you sure someone isn't clowning you by slipping in a taped game from 2010? He's much closer to weak than soft.

I do agree that Blake will likely have his way with him when next they face each other but that's nothing to be ashamed of. Blake is a far better player and he gets the best of most of his match-ups. Our defense when Bledsoe is active makes up for a lot of our interior shortcomings. When he's not there we get games like last night. When he is, our big guys have an outside chance to stand up to a combo like Blake and DeAndre.

Steve

 

[82CardsGrad]

I dunno... I honestly never thought guys like Gortat and Aldridge were softer than Frye.
I guess I expect more from an almost 7 footer... More strength. More commitment to defense and boards. More command of his inside, down-low game. I see none of that from Frye. So, I see him as soft and again, more of a problem than a solution...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[AzStevenCal]

I dunno... I honestly never thought guys like Gortat and Aldridge were softer than Frye.
I guess I expect more from an almost 7 footer... More strength. More commitment to defense and boards. More command of his inside, down-low game. I see none of that from Frye. So, I see him as soft and again, more of a problem than a solution...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well, I think you have more of a problem with the idea of a stretch four than anything and you're not alone. I am not a huge fan of the outside shooting power forward but with two penetrating guards it makes some sense.

Steve

 

[BC867]

He's much closer to weak than soft.

Weak . . . soft. What's the difference? Either way, playing the post, weak or soft ain't strong.

On any given night, more important than whether a player is good or bad, weak/soft or strong, does he have the edge over the opponent at his position, whether Power Forward or Center?

The great majority of the time, the answer has been 'no'. The only chance Frye has to dominate is if he makes more 3's on offense than an opposing Wing or Point Guard. And, as you and I have both said, that puts extra pressure on our Center.

 

[Suns_fan69]

Well that just isn't so. I agree he has trouble holding his position against certain players but there are plenty of big men that play softer than Channing. The Frye I've watched this season has been pretty physical, much more so than someone like Marcin Gortat for example. I don't even think he's any softer than Aldridge although he's nowhere near the ballplayer that guy is. He grabs, he holds, he pushes, he shoves, he fights to hold his spot and he never shies away from contact. In what way is he the softest of the soft? How are you defining "soft"? Are you sure someone isn't clowning you by slipping in a taped game from 2010? He's much closer to weak than soft.

I do agree that Blake will likely have his way with him when next they face each other but that's nothing to be ashamed of. Blake is a far better player and he gets the best of most of his match-ups. Our defense when Bledsoe is active makes up for a lot of our interior shortcomings. When he's not there we get games like last night. When he is, our big guys have an outside chance to stand up to a combo like Blake and DeAndre.

Steve

That to me is my definition of soft, which is why I also disagree with considering Frye soft. Compared to say, Shawn Marion, who routinely shied away from contact on both ends of the floor.

Channing posts up on mismatches (with ok success I would say) and initiates and absorbs a lot of contact. It's true, he doesn't hold his position well, but makes up for it by bothering a lot of shots and passes with his length.

He's a great fit as a stretch 4, but I think we can all agree he shouldn't be playing at the 5. That's about as damning as I can get on Frye.

 

[elindholm]

I don't think the question of whether Frye is soft is at the heart of the debate. The question is whether a team with Frye as its starting PF can be a championship contender. I think the answer to that question is pretty obviously No. This team is over-achieving this year, and that's great, but there is a long way between being a low playoff seed and being a real contender.

 

[AzStevenCal]

I don't think the question of whether Frye is soft is at the heart of the debate. The question is whether a team with Frye as its starting PF can be a championship contender. I think the answer to that question is pretty obviously No. This team is over-achieving this year, and that's great, but there is a long way between being a low playoff seed and being a real contender.

So you don't think a lineup of Chalmers, Wade, Lebron, Frye and Bosh could compete for a championship? How about starting on a team with George Hill, Lance Stephenson, Paul George and Roy Hibbert?

I think it's difficult to compete at the highest level with Frye as your starter but I don't think it's farfetched by any means. Take our roster and seriously upgrade the wing position and the center position and then let them grow together for a season or two and I could see them contending.

I agree with your final sentence. We're overachieving and we aren't likely to be anything other than a low playoff seed with a quick exit plan.

Steve

 

[BC867]

So you don't think a lineup of Chalmers, Wade, Lebron, Frye and Bosh could compete for a championship? How about starting on a team with George Hill, Lance Stephenson, Paul George and Roy Hibbert?

I think it's difficult to compete at the highest level with Frye as your starter but I don't think it's farfetched by any means. Take our roster and seriously upgrade the wing position and the center position and then let them grow together for a season or two and I could see them contending.

I agree with your final sentence. We're overachieving and we aren't likely to be anything other than a low playoff seed with a quick exit plan.

Steve

I'm curious what a lineup of Chalmers, Wade, LeBron and Bosh with Frye has to do with the Suns.

But, as you know, I absolutely agree with your assessment that it would be difficult to compete at the highest level with Frye as our starter (at Power Forward) or backup Center, as well. Or even to get past the first round.

Also, I wouldn't consider upgrading the Wing position to be our highest priority to our becoming strong in the playoffs. Having a second Center and a strong Power Forward would be the priority. In other words, ABF -- anyone but Frye.

 

[82CardsGrad]

I don't think the question of whether Frye is soft is at the heart of the debate. The question is whether a team with Frye as its starting PF can be a championship contender. I think the answer to that question is pretty obviously No. This team is over-achieving this year, and that's great, but there is a long way between being a low playoff seed and being a real contender.

Yea... This is about right.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[82CardsGrad]

So you don't think a lineup of Chalmers, Wade, Lebron, Frye and Bosh could compete for a championship? How about starting on a team with George Hill, Lance Stephenson, Paul George and Roy Hibbert?



I think it's difficult to compete at the highest level with Frye as your starter but I don't think it's farfetched by any means. Take our roster and seriously upgrade the wing position and the center position and then let them grow together for a season or two and I could see them contending.



I agree with your final sentence. We're overachieving and we aren't likely to be anything other than a low playoff seed with a quick exit plan.



Steve

If you are suggesting that it would take once in a generation type talent like Lebron and Wade to overcome the shortfalls of Frye, well... I can't argue with that.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[AzStevenCal]

If you are suggesting that it would take once in a generation type talent like Lebron and Wade to overcome the shortfalls of Frye, well... I can't argue with that.

No, that's not what I'm saying although it would certainly help. Especially since most championships are won by building around a player that deserves to be in the conversation for best player in the game. I think Frye needs to be on a team where he is surrounded by strong talent but I think that's true of just about every player in the NBA.

Take our current roster and move Plumlee and Tucker to the bench. Replace them in the starting lineup with Hayward and Marc Gasol and we have a solid contending team (once/if they adjust to each other). Or, keep the starters as is and let them grow together for a season or two. If Goodwin and Len develop as hoped and start to deserve consideration as starters, once again I think we become a contender.

I'd rather see us add a quality backup center and draft a power forward that moves Frye to the bench but regardless, I think Frye can contribute on a contending team.

Steve

 

[devilalum]

I'd rather see us add a quality backup center and draft a power forward that moves Frye to the bench but regardless, I think Frye can contribute on a contending team.

Steve

If the Suns released Frye, contenders would be lined up to sign him. Probably not to start but he would be a nice piece to have on the bench for almost any team.

 

[82CardsGrad]

If the Suns released Frye, contenders would be lined up to sign him. Probably not to start but he would be a nice piece to have on the bench for almost any team.

That's my point...precisely.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[AzStevenCal]

That's my point...precisely.

It can't be or this argument would have ended many posts ago.

I think we'd be best served with a power forward that was better than Frye. In much the same way that Miami was better served by starting a better power forward than Udonis Haslem. He's been a very key player for them through the years but he's not really a complete player and they've been at their best when they had enough talent to move him to the bench. As a sub and a spot starter he's been key to much of their success (less now, obviously) and Frye could have similar value to us.

I just take issue with the people that constantly rip Frye given what he's done for us this season. If I were confident that he could continue that run of 47% shooting from three point range I'd be comfortable with him starting but we all know he will return to earth (maybe already has returned). Channing has been a far better defender this season than ever before but that doesn't mean he's a good defender.

He's played very good defense most of the time but there are a handful of big guys that just eat him alive. I'd rather have a power forward that holds his own every night and that you could go to down low when you needed a sure basket. I don't really mind when someone points to his shortcomings after a loss but it bugs me that these same people ignore the many games he's come up huge for us this season. I still think many of you are judging him historically rather than actually rating his play this season.

Steve

 

[82CardsGrad]

It can't be or this argument would have ended many posts ago.

I think we'd be best served with a power forward that was better than Frye. In much the same way that Miami was better served by starting a better power forward than Udonis Haslem. He's been a very key player for them through the years but he's not really a complete player and they've been at their best when they had enough talent to move him to the bench. As a sub and a spot starter he's been key to much of their success (less now, obviously) and Frye could have similar value to us.

I just take issue with the people that constantly rip Frye given what he's done for us this season. If I were confident that he could continue that run of 47% shooting from three point range I'd be comfortable with him starting but we all know he will return to earth (maybe already has returned). Channing has been a far better defender this season than ever before but that doesn't mean he's a good defender.

He's played very good defense most of the time but there are a handful of big guys that just eat him alive. I'd rather have a power forward that holds his own every night and that you could go to down low when you needed a sure basket. I don't really mind when someone points to his shortcomings after a loss but it bugs me that these same people ignore the many games he's come up huge for us this season. I still think many of you are judging him historically rather than actually rating his play this season.

Steve

Fun to watch a big man drill 3's here in December... I just have my doubts about Frye and the strategy of a 6'11" man firing three's as a core part of the offense...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My post above was from the Clippers game...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[AzStevenCal]

My post above was from the Clippers game...

And the sentence that you're responding to was a general comment, not specifically aimed at you.

Steve

 

[BC867]

If the Suns released Frye, contenders would be lined up to sign him. Probably not to start but he would be a nice piece to have on the bench for almost any team.

Exactly. The only area in which he has excelled (considering his size and bulk) has been instant offense. Similar to Leandro Barbosa (with his speed).

Instant offense is best served coming off the bench and, ideally, on-call as opposed to being a regular part of the first 8 in the rotation.

Use him to your advantage when he's hot or the matchup suits it.

 

[devilalum]

Exactly. The only area in which he has excelled (considering his size and bulk) has been instant offense. Similar to Leandro Barbosa (with his speed).

Instant offense is best served coming off the bench and, ideally, on-call as opposed to being a regular part of the first 8 in the rotation.

Use him to your advantage when he's hot or the matchup suits it.

Exactly, and if he wasn't our best PF then JH might be able to use him in that capacity.

 

[AzStevenCal]

Exactly. The only area in which he has excelled (considering his size and bulk) has been instant offense. Similar to Leandro Barbosa (with his speed).

Instant offense is best served coming off the bench and, ideally, on-call as opposed to being a regular part of the first 8 in the rotation.

Use him to your advantage when he's hot or the matchup suits it.

Agreed but we still need to find someone better before we take this step.

Steve