Inside the NBA discounts Suns in Playoffs

[JPlay]

I was watching inside the NBA last night after the Kings/Sonics game and both Barkley and Kenny discounted the Suns chances in the playoffs...and I partially agree with them.

Charles said he may make a rarely public appearance at the Suns game Today vs. Seattle.

He also said that the Suns don't scare anybody in the playoffs because they are the only team that can't get physical. And it's partly true, when the game gets real physical the Suns struggle. We don't have a physical presence to counter the other teams. Charles was saying the Seattle has Fortson, Evans and James. Sacramento has Brad Miller and Webber when needed.

The Suns need a Reggie Evans type of player that can rebound and do the dirty work when the play gets real physical and the shots aren't falling.

 

[scotsman13]

webber can get physical? since when did this happen. webber maybe in the softest power forward in the nba. he doesnt like contact. heck he doesnt even like to get low and post up for the most part.

 

[elindholm]

I was watching inside the NBA last night after the Kings/Sonics game and both Barkley and Kenny discounted the Suns chances in the playoffs

Good for them. I guess Barkley's memory is pretty short, because the same kind of people said that the '92-'93 Suns would have the same problem.

Also, remember that these are the same people who said that the Suns would be terrible this year. Now they're hoping to save face by predicting a playoff collapse. It's a bit like David Aldridge and his relentless insistence that the Suns should have drafted Jeffries instead of Stoudemire.

And just for the record, how is Brad Miller a physical presence?

 

[JPlay]

I was watching inside the NBA last night after the Kings/Sonics game and both Barkley and Kenny discounted the Suns chances in the playoffs

Good for them. I guess Barkley's memory is pretty short, because the same kind of people said that the '92-'93 Suns would have the same problem.

Also, remember that these are the same people who said that the Suns would be terrible this year. Now they're hoping to save face by predicting a playoff collapse. It's a bit like David Aldridge and his relentless insistence that the Suns should have drafted Jeffries instead of Stoudemire.

And just for the record, how is Brad Miller a physical presence?

First of all the 92-93 Suns played a traditional lineup and Oliver Miller and Charles were good defenders and rebounders. You can't honestly say that you don't have the same concern as Barkley does...hell I do. This team needs to improve their D and rebounding or they won't go very far in the playoffs. We outscore every team but in the playoffs we won't always be able to do that. We will have to rely on defense to win some games and I'm not sure the Suns can do that yet.

 

[frdbtr]

Amare has the potential to be extremely physical if he would only set his mind to it. Maybe if the suns get bounced early from the playoffs, or better yet, get a big scare in an early round, he will get the motivation to be physical on defense and start getting more rebounds. For a guy with his athletic ability, it is a shame that he almost never gets 10 or more rebounds in a game.

 

[JPlay]

Amare has the potential to be extremely physical if he would only set his mind to it. Maybe if the suns get bounced early from the playoffs, or better yet, get a big scare in an early round, he will get the motivation to be physical on defense and start getting more rebounds. For a guy with his athletic ability, it is a shame that he almost never gets 10 or more rebounds in a game.

Yeah he should be getting at least 10-12 rebounds a game. Even Nowitzki is averaging 11 per game. I think it's a lack of effort. I remember his rookie year when he would put in crazy effort to get key rebounds, it was awesome. Now he's more concerned about running the fast break to get the highlight dunk.

 

[elindholm]

First of all the 92-93 Suns played a traditional lineup and Oliver Miller and Charles were good defenders and rebounders.

Barkley was a below-average defender, and Miller rarely played. One of the things that was so remarkable about the Suns' overtime win in Game 5 against the Lakers was that Miller played a big role -- when it was surprising that he was even on the floor. The Suns used a "traditional" lineup probably less than half the time during that season and playoff run. Especially in crunch time, it was usually a small lineup with Chambers at center. On the current team, Hunter is about as effective as West was, and Stoudemire is certainly more of a center than Chambers. Heck, the only reason Miller was considered a center (he was generously listed at 6' 9") was because he wasn't mobile enough to play any other position.

You can't honestly say that you don't have the same concern as Barkley does

Sure, as I've had all season. But by now, I know better than to parrot the conventional wisdom about what "can't" work. Saying that the Suns will face new challenges in the playoffs is not the same as saying that they are doomed to fail. And I don't often agree with D'Antoni's glib way of dodging every pointed question, but I agree with him on his assessment of how the Suns will fare in the playoffs, particularly against the Spurs: if they lose, it's because they aren't good enough, not because of their style.

As is typical of people who are mindlessly reciting platitudes, Barkley didn't even define his terms. What will constitute playoff failure for this team? Anything short of a title? In that case, yeah, they'll probably fail. But if they lose to the eventual champion and put up a good fight, I don't think that should be considered a failure.

 

[jbeecham]

By Barkley's standards, 29 teams are failures every year including every team he's ever played for.

 

[frdbtr]

First of all the 92-93 Suns played a traditional lineup and Oliver Miller and Charles were good defenders and rebounders.

Barkley was a below-average defender, and Miller rarely played. One of the things that was so remarkable about the Suns' overtime win in Game 5 against the Lakers was that Miller played a big role -- when it was surprising that he was even on the floor. The Suns used a "traditional" lineup probably less than half the time during that season and playoff run. Especially in crunch time, it was usually a small lineup with Chambers at center. On the current team, Hunter is about as effective as West was, and Stoudemire is certainly more of a center than Chambers. Heck, the only reason Miller was considered a center (he was generously listed at 6' 9") was because he wasn't mobile enough to play any other position.

You can't honestly say that you don't have the same concern as Barkley does

Sure, as I've had all season. But by now, I know better than to parrot the conventional wisdom about what "can't" work. Saying that the Suns will face new challenges in the playoffs is not the same as saying that they are doomed to fail. And I don't often agree with D'Antoni's glib way of dodging every pointed question, but I agree with him on his assessment of how the Suns will fare in the playoffs, particularly against the Spurs: if they lose, it's because they aren't good enough, not because of their style.

As is typical of people who are mindlessly reciting platitudes, Barkley didn't even define his terms. What will constitute playoff failure for this team? Anything short of a title? In that case, yeah, they'll probably fail. But if they lose to the eventual champion and put up a good fight, I don't think that should be considered a failure.

Good post

 

[Cheesebeef]

By Barkley's standards, 29 teams are failures every year including every team he's ever played for.

zing! This and E's last post are without a doubt tied for posts of the day!

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

First of all the 92-93 Suns played a traditional lineup and Oliver Miller and Charles were good defenders and rebounders. You can't honestly say that you don't have the same concern as Barkley does...hell I do. This team needs to improve their D and rebounding or they won't go very far in the playoffs. We outscore every team but in the playoffs we won't always be able to do that. We will have to rely on defense to win some games and I'm not sure the Suns can do that yet.

dude, charles was never a "good defender." he would occasionally make an incredible defensive play, like a steal, or the "knee-in-the-back-make-you-travel" or weakside block, but he was never considered a good defender.

 

[JPlay]

First of all the 92-93 Suns played a traditional lineup and Oliver Miller and Charles were good defenders and rebounders.

Barkley was a below-average defender, and Miller rarely played. One of the things that was so remarkable about the Suns' overtime win in Game 5 against the Lakers was that Miller played a big role -- when it was surprising that he was even on the floor. The Suns used a "traditional" lineup probably less than half the time during that season and playoff run. Especially in crunch time, it was usually a small lineup with Chambers at center. On the current team, Hunter is about as effective as West was, and Stoudemire is certainly more of a center than Chambers. Heck, the only reason Miller was considered a center (he was generously listed at 6' 9") was because he wasn't mobile enough to play any other position.

Charles was an average defender not below average as he dominated most every PF he played against with the exception of Otis Thorpe. You failed to mention Barkleys prowess for rebounding and physical play, which he was most famous for. That is what I am conveying to you. The Suns don't have that phyiscal player. And if you want to bring Mark West into it then he was one of the most physical players the Suns ever had. Granted he would get two fouls in the first quarter of every game. Oliver Miller was only 6'9 but was a shotblocking presence, with his above average wing span.

You can't honestly say that you don't have the same concern as Barkley does

Sure, as I've had all season. But by now, I know better than to parrot the conventional wisdom about what "can't" work. Saying that the Suns will face new challenges in the playoffs is not the same as saying that they are doomed to fail. And I don't often agree with D'Antoni's glib way of dodging every pointed question, but I agree with him on his assessment of how the Suns will fare in the playoffs, particularly against the Spurs: if they lose, it's because they aren't good enough, not because of their style.

As is typical of people who are mindlessly reciting platitudes, Barkley didn't even define his terms. What will constitute playoff failure for this team? Anything short of a title? In that case, yeah, they'll probably fail. But if they lose to the eventual champion and put up a good fight, I don't think that should be considered a failure.

Barkley was not saying the Suns are doomed to fail, he merely stated the obvious which is the Suns don't play the type of basketball that succeeds in the playoffs, where the play is much more physical and intense. Anything short of a championship is considered a failure when you have been the team with the best record for most of the season. This is the mentatlity that this team and our fans must start to have. The Spurs will consider this season a waste if they don't win the championship and that's how most championship contenders feel. The Suns are now in that category and must begin thinking this way if they are to seriously contend.

 

[Mulli]

dude, charles was never a "good defender." he would occasionally make an incredible defensive play, like a steal, or the "knee-in-the-back-make-you-travel" or weakside block, but he was never considered a good defender.

That is the truth.

 

[Brian in Mesa]

Good for them. I guess Barkley's memory is pretty short, because the same kind of people said that the '92-'93 Suns would have the same problem.

Isn't that the team that needed 5 games and an OT period to beat an 8th seeded Lakers team that backed into the playoffs?

Personally, I think the Suns chances will be "discounted" until they win a title. Then people will say "Why not the Suns? They've done it before."

 

[elindholm]

Isn't that the team that needed 5 games and an OT period to beat an 8th seeded Lakers team that backed into the playoffs?

Like the Lakers have never needed to come from behind against an inferior opponent? Sure, the Suns were over-confident to start that series, and it nearly cost them. But it didn't, so big damn hairy deal.

As a "moderator," you really should try to set a higher standard for appropriate behavior on this board. Every single post you make on the Suns forum is a taunt, and that's been true for as long as I can remember. If you're concerned enough about the board to serve as a moderator, maybe you should check with the moderators of this forum as to whether your behavior here is appropriate.

 

[F-Dog]

First of all the 92-93 Suns played a traditional lineup and Oliver Miller and Charles were good defenders and rebounders.

Barkley was a below-average defender, and Miller rarely played. One of the things that was so remarkable about the Suns' overtime win in Game 5 against the Lakers was that Miller played a big role -- when it was surprising that he was even on the floor. The Suns used a "traditional" lineup probably less than half the time during that season and playoff run. Especially in crunch time, it was usually a small lineup with Chambers at center. On the current team, Hunter is about as effective as West was, and Stoudemire is certainly more of a center than Chambers. Heck, the only reason Miller was considered a center (he was generously listed at 6' 9") was because he wasn't mobile enough to play any other position.

You can't honestly say that you don't have the same concern as Barkley does

Sure, as I've had all season. But by now, I know better than to parrot the conventional wisdom about what "can't" work. Saying that the Suns will face new challenges in the playoffs is not the same as saying that they are doomed to fail. And I don't often agree with D'Antoni's glib way of dodging every pointed question, but I agree with him on his assessment of how the Suns will fare in the playoffs, particularly against the Spurs: if they lose, it's because they aren't good enough, not because of their style.

As is typical of people who are mindlessly reciting platitudes, Barkley didn't even define his terms. What will constitute playoff failure for this team? Anything short of a title? In that case, yeah, they'll probably fail. But if they lose to the eventual champion and put up a good fight, I don't think that should be considered a failure.

Agreed.

 

[Brian in Mesa]

Isn't that the team that needed 5 games and an OT period to beat an 8th seeded Lakers team that backed into the playoffs?

Like the Lakers have never needed to come from behind against an inferior opponent? Sure, the Suns were over-confident to start that series, and it nearly cost them. But it didn't, so big damn hairy deal.

As a "moderator," you really should try to set a higher standard for appropriate behavior on this board. Every single post you make on the Suns forum is a taunt, and that's been true for as long as I can remember. If you're concerned enough about the board to serve as a moderator, maybe you should check with the moderators of this forum as to whether your behavior here is appropriate.

Whatever.

 

[Brian in Mesa]

Every single post you make on the Suns forum is a taunt, and that's been true for as long as I can remember.

Absolutely false, but thanks for playing.

 

[Gee!]

Isn't that the team that needed 5 games and an OT period to beat an 8th seeded Lakers team that backed into the playoffs?

No one cares about your stupid Lakers. Well, other than getting a good laugh with every loss this year. I think the losses started, oh say around the time your idiot owner decided to trade Shaq and keep Kobe.

Long live Kobe in a Lakers uniform!

 

[fordronken]

Absolutely false, but thanks for playing.

It may have been hyperbole. And I don't think he's playing.

 

[baltimorer]

The one thing I certainly didn't agree with on TNT last night was the notion that the Sonics have a better chance of winning in the playoffs than the Suns. Obviously, there is a necessity in playoff basketball to play a physical game, but I'm sorry, Danny Fortson and Jerome James don't make me think the Phoenix Suns need to consider a roster make-over. Although Zarko Carbarkapa might disagree with me me, having big brutes in the middle like Danny Fortson don't really scare me.

The truth of the matter is, the Suns do need to get more physical, but that doesn't mean they need bigger players - it means their existing players will need to play a more phyiscal game, especially on the defensive end, if they want to be successful. If you look at the Spurs, a team that is largely considered one of the most physical teams in the league, you see Tim Duncan, a 6'11 finesse player, with Rasho Nesterovic, who isn't much of anything, but if he was something, I'd have to call him a finesse player, ancoring their defense. They are perceived as tough and physical, however, because they have perimeter guys like Bruce Bowen who are willing to concentrate on defense. Steve Nash and Shawn Marion, at their respective positions, don't really have the tools to be strong defenders, but our other guys can be. Joe Johnson is a very good defender; Amare Stoudemire is strong enough; Steven Hunter can give you a shot-blocking presence; Leandro Barbosa's long wingspan can be very helpful in guarding the opposing team's pg for short stints; Bo Outlaw can cause a lot of trouble; Jim Jackson is a strong guy; and I don't know if people are forgetting this, but Walter McCarty, although on offense spends a lot of time in Antoine Walker-land, can be a physical, nitty-gritty guy on the defensive end.

If this team wants to succeed in the playoffs, they will need to be willing to put the effort in on both ends of the court. The Suns do have questions to answer, and their responses to them will most likely decide their fate. However, at this point in the season, you gotta be excited that they have to answer them at all. Chris Webber and the Kings have all but answered the physical question - they're soft; Dirk Nowitzki is soft. For the Suns, maybe the Suns will be able to run their way to a championship and this whole "are they big/strong/physical enough?" question won't even be an issue. However, at this point in the season, there are 25 or 26 teams in this league who don't even deserve to talking about this stuff.

 

[Brian in Mesa]

No one cares about your stupid Lakers. Well, other than getting a good laugh with every loss this year. I think the losses started, oh say around the time your idiot owner decided to trade Shaq and keep Kobe.

Long live Kobe in a Lakers uniform!

Taunting is not allowed here, didn't you get elindholm's executive memo?

:stillsickaboutkobe:

 

[Gee!]

Isn't that the team that needed 5 games and an OT period to beat an 8th seeded Lakers team that backed into the playoffs?

Like the Lakers have never needed to come from behind against an inferior opponent? Sure, the Suns were over-confident to start that series, and it nearly cost them. But it didn't, so big damn hairy deal.

As a "moderator," you really should try to set a higher standard for appropriate behavior on this board. Every single post you make on the Suns forum is a taunt, and that's been true for as long as I can remember. If you're concerned enough about the board to serve as a moderator, maybe you should check with the moderators of this forum as to whether your behavior here is appropriate.

Holy hell. What crawled up your ass and died?

 

[PhxGametime]

Offensively, who's more physical than Amare Stoudemire at the F/C spot in the West? Both JJ's and Q can hold their own offensively, although Johnson uses his height more than brute strength but he can mix it up...


Defensively, the Suns use athleticism more than brute strength but how many teams match up athletically? You're going to have-to average 115 to beat Suns in a series because IMO the refs aren't giving Suns much respect NOW and their still winning...

 

[Gee!]

Taunting is not allowed here, didn't you get elindholm's executive memo?

:stillsickaboutkobe:

I dont believe anyone who cant use the quote function on this board correctly.