How does DA's system work now?

[Cheesebeef]

Everyone's assuming that we mosty likely get Grant Hill to fill the JR void, right? Not sure why everyone thinks that's a done deal, especially considering that last year at this time, after the draft day moves were made, everyone thought it was going to allow us to sign TT (who made the same comments about us as Hill has), but even if it DOES happen, can someone tell me how we're still going to be able to spread the floor with our three point shooting like we have for the last three years? We seem to be suffering through a whittling away of one of the biggest components to DA's system, which is being able to completely spread the floor, making it easy for Nash/Amare to get to the basket which results in either a dunk, layup or kick out for 3.

Now, three years ago, we had 4 legit three-point shooters. Last year, we actually had SIX legit-three point shooters. This year we had 4, and one of them was pretty awful during a majority of the season. There's no coincidence that this team went on their BLAZING run in the middle of the season when we actually had 4 LEGIT three point shooters stroking it to go along with the rest of what Nash/Amare/Marion brought to the table. But now, with JR gone (and even if his shot wasn't great, he did space the floor), we are down to 3 three point shooters, which is gonna be a disaster in the playoffs - and you know why?

Because our three three point shooters are ALL smalls - there's no JJat 6'8, JR at 6'8 or TT at 6'10 - which means if we're gonna run DA's system in the playoffs, AND YOU KNOW HE WILL - we're gonna see Raja, Nash, Barbs, Marion and Amare for a good chunk of those games, and against the Spurs, that will absolutely kill us rebounding wise and defensively.

to be honest, what I'm saying is this - Grant Hill ISN'T the guy we need at this point. He doesn't really fit the system - the guy this team needs is STACKHOUSE. Yes, that's probably blasphemy to most of you, but we get a guuy who goes to the hole against everyone AND is that 3 point shooter we're desperately missing right now. And if we were really moving salary to have flexibility, prove it by actually signing a uy who's younger than Hilland fits us better, even if it's gonna cost a little more.

I just wonder how we're gonna run this thing without the kind of team that DA loves. Can DA change his philosophy a little bit?

man, this is a rambling mess! hope you enjoyed it!

 

[arthurracoon]

ill take both of em!

 

[HooverDam]

I agree they need to spread the floor more. That said, I still think Hill will be a good pick up, because of his solid midrange game, something the Suns somewhat lack.

The Suns needed another big who could defend, rebound and occasionally block, a back up point guard and a microwave/3 point shooter/Eddie House type (bonus points for being taller), they so far have no addressed any of those needs.

 

[Treesquid PhD]

Everyone's assuming that we mosty likely get Grant Hill to fill the JR void, right? Not sure why everyone thinks that's a done deal, especially considering that last year at this time, after the draft day moves were made, everyone thought it was going to allow us to sign TT (who made the same comments about us as Hill has), but even if it DOES happen, can someone tell me how we're still going to be able to spread the floor with our three point shooting like we have for the last three years? We seem to be suffering through a whittling away of one of the biggest components to DA's system, which is being able to completely spread the floor, making it easy for Nash/Amare to get to the basket which results in either a dunk, layup or kick out for 3.

Now, three years ago, we had 4 legit three-point shooters. Last year, we actually had SIX legit-three point shooters. This year we had 4, and one of them was pretty awful during a majority of the season. There's no coincidence that this team went on their BLAZING run in the middle of the season when we actually had 4 LEGIT three point shooters stroking it to go along with the rest of what Nash/Amare/Marion brought to the table. But now, with JR gone (and even if his shot wasn't great, he did space the floor), we are down to 3 three point shooters, which is gonna be a disaster in the playoffs - and you know why?

Because our three three point shooters are ALL smalls - there's no JJat 6'8, JR at 6'8 or TT at 6'10 - which means if we're gonna run DA's system in the playoffs, AND YOU KNOW HE WILL - we're gonna see Raja, Nash, Barbs, Marion and Amare for a good chunk of those games, and against the Spurs, that will absolutely kill us rebounding wise and defensively.

to be honest, what I'm saying is this - Grant Hill ISN'T the guy we need at this point. He doesn't really fit the system - the guy this team needs is STACKHOUSE. Yes, that's probably blasphemy to most of you, but we get a guuy who goes to the hole against everyone AND is that 3 point shooter we're desperately missing right now. And if we were really moving salary to have flexibility, prove it by actually signing a uy who's younger than Hilland fits us better, even if it's gonna cost a little more.

I just wonder how we're gonna run this thing without the kind of team that DA loves. Can DA change his philosophy a little bit?

man, this is a rambling mess! hope you enjoyed it!

From a pure offensive standpoint, Stackhouse is an isolation style player I don't think he fits as well as you may think, in fact I think he would kill D'Antoni's offense with his 1990's isolation tendancies, not to mention he is a black hole. On the other hand I have seen Hill run the break in many occasions jump shoot off the break, my vote is for Hill if you are looking purely for offense.

 

[SunsTzu]

I agree. And I think we really need to add atleast 1 quality shooter which doesn't seem likely outside of trading Marion.

 

[da_suns_fan]

What a waste of time.

1) Stackhouse will command AT LEAST the MLE which the Suns probably wouldn't be able to pay.

2) Even if they were, there's no way Cuban would let him go for that "little" amount of money.

 

[Mainstreet]

I'm not banking on Banks as a backup PG... no pun intended. The Suns could have addressed it in the draft but didn't. I wonder if the Suns have any plans about addressing it or just see what drops in their laps.

Also does anyone know if Tucker or Strawberry could fill this role as another distributor like the Suns had envisioned for Salmons?

 

[azirish]

I think the Suns will sign Grant Hill because he wants to come here and he's a lot better player than anyone else they can get for the price.

Oddly enough, I think the moves the Suns have made reflect a recognition that the bombs away style is just not going to beat the Spurs. The Spurs have the shot blocking to give players the comfort of keeping their discipline and not helping off of shooters.

Hill and Tucker are guys who attack the basket without a need for pick and roll. Without help off the outside, they would create some issues as opponents have to worry about dump passes. If the Spurs do help off the guards, then Nash becomes a key three point threat.

So getting a big who can shoot the three would be great, I'm more concern with getting a big who can have an impact on defense.

 

[ArizonaSportsFan]

Perhaps this gets coach to change up a few aspects of the offense. Yes, set up at the three point line, but add more motion and cutting. Barbs is really the only one that does that. But perhaps a few more can still do that. Amare is still going to command the attention of more than one defender, and since Nash is always moving, as well as Barbs, it can create other movement options as well. We'll have to see what happens in camp.

 

[Gaddabout]

Also does anyone know if Tucker or Strawberry could fill this role as another distributor like the Suns had envisioned for Salmons?

This is why they drafted Strawberry. He's a strong defender who can come off the bench and play some point. He's an OK athlete for being 6-4.

The problem is he's not a great decision maker in the half court and his shot is awful. He's probably going to end up being a bigger, less athletic Marcus Banks.

 

[Gaddabout]

Hill and Tucker are guys who attack the basket without a need for pick and roll. Without help off the outside, they would create some issues as opponents have to worry about dump passes. If the Spurs do help off the guards, then Nash becomes a key three point threat.

The problem is neither Hill nor Tucker deserve defensive attention out to the 3-pt line, so they will not spread the defense to create space for something from a shorter distance.

 

[azirish]

The problem is neither Hill nor Tucker deserve defensive attention out to the 3-pt line, so they will not spread the defense to create space for something from a shorter distance.

It is a question of offense versus defense. If the only issue is spreading the floor, then Pike would be a good choice. Obviously last year's three guard play with Nash, Bell and Barbosa was also able to shoot, but that lineup was limited defensively and on the boards.

In any case, I'm not convinced that a 36% three point shooter (Q Richardson) spreads the floor more than a 50% mid range shooter. Yes, teams can help off the mid range shooter more easily, but it still leave him wide open.

 

[hafey]

Ahh, but a 36% 3pt shooters adjusted FG% is 54%. The midrange shooter's is still 50%

 

[green machine]

Maybe they are going to change the offense to incorporate a little more traditional half-court sets. That would let Amare dominate more, maybe allow Banks to not be worthless, and take advantage of the skills a guy like Hill can bring.

 

[nowagimp]

I agree they need to spread the floor more. That said, I still think Hill will be a good pick up, because of his solid midrange game, something the Suns somewhat lack.

The Suns needed another big who could defend, rebound and occasionally block, a back up point guard and a microwave/3 point shooter/Eddie House type (bonus points for being taller), they so far have no addressed any of those needs.

Good point, Hill has a much better mid-range game than Marion, bell, barbs, JR, just about any sun except Nash. The spurs defend the 3, and the rim, leave the mid range game open because they know the suns stink at it. A 3pt shooter, like JR, who cant drive and pull up, plays right into their hands. Even a shadow of grant Hill will be a huge upgrade there. I also want to see the spurs hide Tony Parker on Grant Hill, I love that matchup. Grant Hill will help create space by his ability to drive and pull up and his better handles than just about all the suns 2's, 3's.

I dont think anyone really respected JR enough to create alot of space because its always easier to rush a stationary spot up shooter than one who can either shoot or drive, so his defender could shade the lane area more, not needing to worry about him faking the 3pt shot and taking a shorter mid range 2 pointer, or driving further and dishing to amare off the penetration. Because JR and Bell and Barbs have questionable mid range games the spacing suffered more. Grant Hill is a very good passer, can penetrate and dish, can pull up and shoot very effectively. His defender wont be able to help as much on other players.

 

[azirish]

Ahh, but a 36% 3pt shooters adjusted FG% is 54%. The midrange shooter's is still 50%

However, Hill had more foul shots than anybody other than Amare on the Suns. Also, three pointers are harder to get against a tight defense which is why over dependence on them is such a problem when playing top teams.

 

[hafey]

Oh I agree Hill would be a useful player. I just saying your FG% logic wasn't logical.

 

[nashman]

Strawberry less athletic than Marcus Banks...thats completely false and Banks will probally never be the athlete Strawberry already is.

 

[azirish]

Oh I agree Hill would be a useful player. I just saying your FG% logic wasn't logical.

I'ts complicated because all shots are not created equal. Obviously if you have two wide open shots and the three point shooter hits 35% and the mid range shooter hits 48%; then three point logic suggests you take the three. Lots of players believe in this, but it is not so simple.

First, three point shots are easier to defend than mid range shots. All you have to do is be in the area to disrupt the shot. To stop a mid range shot, the defender has to play much closer and is more vulnerble to a pump and drive. Driving is possible off the three point arc, but it takes so long to get to the basket that the weak side help has time to get in place.

Second, three point misses are harder to do put back rebounds on. The longer the shot, the longer the miss. Due to the long misses, the other team has the opportuntiy to get out into the open court more easily than when rebounds are under the basket. It is rare for three point shooting teams to get as many second chance points.

Third, mid range and close to the basket shots are more inclined to draw fouls than taking three pointers. This tends to even up the "points per possession" numbers while getting the opponent into foul trouble.

Fourth, three point shooting is not only less accurate than two point shooting, it is less consistent. Someone who hits 33% of his shots might average the same number of points as another guy who hits 50% of his two pointers, but will typically go on streaks of being very hot or very cold. By contrast, guys who shoot closer to basket are not likely to go through 0 for 9 nights like a three point specialist will

Fifth, it is harder to get the points when needed at crunch time for a three point specialist than for someone who has a wider range of shots. For example, Kapono is a spectacularly good three point shooter at 50.4% for three; but still averages just under 11 ppg. Barbosa is not as good at 43.4%, but averages 18.1 ppg because he's more than a three point specialist.

My feeling is tht players should be able to average close to 40% for three before being given a gree light. Someone like Marion who averages under 33% should not shoot for three very often.

 

[Chaplin]

IMO, and this is JUST my opinion, we took the wrong approach with Marcus Banks. We tried to force him to completely change to our system, rather than try to give a little to adapt to the way he plays. Because D'Antoni didn't give any leeway in this, Banks turned out to be a bust. We never used Banks correctly IMO, and hopefully this year they can try to integrate him better than he was. Sure, part of the problem was that he just didn't play well, but we've got to take players and take advantage of their strengths, not sign a guy to a huge contract and expect him to do something different. Right now, signing him was a mistake, but if we're stuck with him I think it would be a travesty if we let him sit on the bench for the next 4 years without trying to shake things up and adapt a little more to him. I'm not saying he's Steve Nash, but that's what we did to the team when we signed him and what we did as Amare matured. Why was Jalen Rose unsuccessful? The athleticism was an issue, but he's not as horrible a player as we saw. It's the same thing.

IF Banks returns back into the player we thought we signed, we would have a pretty solid 2nd unit if Grant Hill is signed.

 

[carey]

We never used Banks correctly IMO, and hopefully this year they can try to integrate him better than he was.

I agree. The thing is, it sounds like the 2 guys we drafted have similar strengths and weaknesses to Banks. Strong, good defenders, that can't shoot. Doesn't that just seem odd?

 

[Chaplin]

I agree. The thing is, it sounds like the 2 guys we drafted have similar strengths and weaknesses to Banks. Strong, good defenders, that can't shoot. Doesn't that just seem odd?

It is strange, but here's the thing. Banks is a terrible finisher, much like Barbosa was and to a lesser extent still is. I don't really care that Banks can't shoot. What I want from him is a couple things: The ability to run the offense, even if it's in the half court and not so much on the run, and finishing. They guy is lightning fast and can get by most defenders with ease. The question is why doesn't he do it more often, and why can't he make a layup doing it?

I honestly don't care that he can't shoot 3-pointers. I don't think that is why we signed him, but when he was inserted in those rare occasions, he acted like a glorified shooting guard. I understand he did a lot of that himself, but why didn't the coaching staff sit him down and say, "Hey, Marcus, here's the deal. We need you to run the offense, not take shots every time you touch the ball. You have a green light to shoot if you are open, however we brought you in to play hard-nosed defense and run the half-court for us, not shoot all the time."

 

[azirish]

It is strange, but here's the thing. Banks is a terrible finisher, much like Barbosa was and to a lesser extent still is. I don't really care that Banks can't shoot. What I want from him is a couple things: The ability to run the offense, even if it's in the half court and not so much on the run, and finishing. They guy is lightning fast and can get by most defenders with ease. The question is why doesn't he do it more often, and why can't he make a layup doing it?

I honestly don't care that he can't shoot 3-pointers. I don't think that is why we signed him, but when he was inserted in those rare occasions, he acted like a glorified shooting guard. I understand he did a lot of that himself, but why didn't the coaching staff sit him down and say, "Hey, Marcus, here's the deal. We need you to run the offense, not take shots every time you touch the ball. You have a green light to shoot if you are open, however we brought you in to play hard-nosed defense and run the half-court for us, not shoot all the time."

The sad part is that Banks is not considered to be very "coachable". I don't know why the Suns didn't know that when the signed him a year ago, but unless he has a serious change in heart he's toast.

I'm not sure if he needs better coaching or a therapist. I just wish he'd decide that the coaching staff knows what they are doing and just does it rather than fighting it all the time.

I don't think it's an accident that a key factor in picking Tucker is his "coachability".

 

[Greg Popovich]

Sorry for being so dumb,

who again is JR?

 

[tobiazz]

JR == James Jones