player evals
King A said:
at the time of the trade, Childress was widely considered to have a more impact-making / polished game than Diaw and so was/is considered a better player (i.e. a more developed player)
or am i the only one who thought that. If i remember correctly a lot of the guys on this board would have wanted Childress instead of Diaw. And I said it would have been possible to get him, but management didn't want him. They wanted Diaw and the Hawks didn't know what to do with Diaw and were probably glad we didn't ask for Childress
At the time of the draft Nene was considered a more complete player than Amare. Because the coaching staff get a closer look at these players, they may be able to make better judgements, even if some of us are as good at evaluation. This same coaching staff, the one that saw the potential in Amare, probably saw it in Diaw. Time will tell with Diaw, but few of us knew about Amare and his potential. The suns system is also predicated on passing, and obviously Diaw is better than Smith or Childress at this. I think that the suns staff are very good at evaluation and player development. As it turned out, Nash was an even better fit than I suspected, and I liked the signing alot. I agree with some of the board members that are critical of the strategic in-game adjustments, but this staff is pretty good at player evaluation. Also remember that a major consideration is how Childress, Smith, Diaw etc. would fit with the existing pieces like Marion, Amare, Nash. Diaw, as an unselfish player, is probably projected as a better fit than a young, fast "shoot first" gun.