Marion at the 4, Zarko at the 2?

[Joe Mama]

I think somebody else in this thread already mentioned this, but I don't understand why some people are getting their panties in a bunch about Shawn Marion playing power forward. The Phoenix Suns were at their best in the playoffs last season when they went with that smaller lineup. That was against possibly The strongest frontcourt team in the NBA.

Joe Mama

 

[Chaplin]

Originally posted by Joe Mama
I think somebody else in this thread already mentioned this, but I don't understand why some people are getting their panties in a bunch about Shawn Marion playing power forward.

Joe Mama

Thank you Joe.

 

[hcsilla]

Originally posted by elindholm


I don't even think there are that many. I agree with Rice and Piatkowski. Will Williams still be in the league? Regarding McCarty, I don't think he sees much time at guard, unless you declare Pierce the SF whenever he's on the floor.

Walt Williams is still an unsigned FA (BTW, he would a good pickup for the Suns, IMO).
No, McCarty isn't really a G but his task last season (especially in the play-off) was standing on the perimeter and hitting 3P-s and he made an excellent job in this.

 

[elindholm]

No, McCarty isn't really a G but his task last season (especially in the play-off) was standing on the perimeter and hitting 3P-s and he made an excellent job in this.

I don't think Robert Horry is a guard either.

The discussion was of "traditional" SGs. If you want to include everyone who has a guard-like offensive game, that's a lot different.

 

[elindholm]

]The Phoenix Suns were at their best in the playoffs last season when they went with that smaller lineup. That was against possibly The strongest frontcourt team in the NBA.

I think the Suns made a good showing against the Spurs. That said, I don't think that the Suns' goal should be able to squeak out two lucky wins in a six-game series. I think their goal should be to amass four wins in a seven-game series.

To say that the Suns were at their best with a small lineup last season misses the point, in my opinion. They still weren't good enough. How are they most likely to get to the next level -- by sticking with gimmicky small ball, or by finding a more conventional lineup that really works? In my opinion, they are more likely to get there with a conventional lineup.

It's sort of like the guy who has an ugly free-throw stroke and makes 60%. His coach shows him proper shooting form, and he tries it for a while, and he makes only 40%, because he's no good at it yet. So then he says, "I'll stick with what I know, because I'm better that way." Well, that may be ... but 60% still isn't good enough, and it won't get much better, because his technique is fundamentally flawed. What the player should do is invest the time and energy in order to learn the correct technique, and then he'll have a chance to become a really good free-throw shooter.

The Suns' "lineup technique" is fundamentally flawed. Right now, it's what they're best at. But it isn't good enough, and I think that they would be well served to invest the energy to correct that technique if they ever want to get really good. We all know that a gimmicky bull-dung lineup with Shawn Marion at power forward is never going to win a championship.

 

[Wally]

Originally posted by Joe Mama
I think somebody else in this thread already mentioned this, but I don't understand why some people are getting their panties in a bunch about Shawn Marion playing power forward. The Phoenix Suns were at their best in the playoffs last season when they went with that smaller lineup. That was against possibly The strongest frontcourt team in the NBA.

Joe Mama

I'm sorry???.......Didn't they loose?????
Did we ever get to see a big line-up?????? No, I think not, so how can we say they played their best?

The only way we'll see a true center play on a consistent basis is if he's a guard in disguise or the Suns ever actually realize there are 5 positions on a basketball team.

Small-ball by any other name is still small-ball.

 

[hcsilla]

Originally posted by elindholm


The discussion was of "traditional" SGs. If you want to include everyone who has a guard-like offensive game, that's a lot different.

I wrote "I'm just wondering how many "immobile" SWINGMEN are in NBA right now".

 

[elindholm]

I wrote "I'm just wondering how many "immobile" SWINGMEN are in NBA right now"

Yes, you are right. You changed the subject, and I guessed that it was your intent to stay within the original discussion. This guess apparently was incorrect.

In the future I will assume that your posts are not to be taken in the context of the previous discussion.

 

[Chaplin]

Originally posted by elindholm

To say that the Suns were at their best with a small lineup last season misses the point, in my opinion. They still weren't good enough. How are they most likely to get to the next level -- by sticking with gimmicky small ball, or by finding a more conventional lineup that really works? In my opinion, they are more likely to get there with a conventional lineup.

In your opinion the Suns are more likely to win a series with a conventional lineup. What makes you say that? A conventional lineup, with the players we have now, does not exactly inspire fear in the hearts of opponents, due to our deficiency at the center spot.

PG: Stephon
SG: Penny
SF: Shawn
PF: Amare
C: Big (Little) Jake

PG: Stephon
SG: Penny
SF: JJ
PF: Marion
C: Amare

Which lineup, pound for pound, inspires more fear? Talent-wise, the 2nd lineup is what would work. But look at it realistically. If the Kings, for example, field a lineup of Divac, Webber, AND Miller, how much do you want to bet we'll see that 2nd lineup? Not even Frank is that dumb.

Like Joe said earlier, the point of lineups is to exploit weaknesses. For some reason, our small lineup worked at various times against the Spurs, and was the main reason we won both games. Yet you say you'd like to win 4, not 2. Well, that goes without saying, doesn't it. But how to do it? Play Big Jake, crossing your fingers that he can make something happen, or go with what has won the first 2 games? A no-brainer, IMO. Sometimes it won't work, but that doesn't mean the Spurs or the Lakers' BIG lineup will work every time either.

 

[SunsTzu]

Originally posted by Wally


The only way we'll see a true center play on a consistent basis is if he's a guard in disguise or the Suns ever actually realize there are 5 positions on a basketball team.

Suns never being able to get a center is not from lack of trying. The fact that the Suns are consistantly good makes it difficult to get a legit center through the draft. Signing a center is also hard when you have good players making big money.

 

[Errntknght]

Come on, we didn't really beat the Spurs two games - they got rattled and muffed plays & FTs down the stretch. When they settled down they were clearly much the better team.

What frosts me about the Suns is even though they know they are dying at center they don't do much about it. They could have played Little Jake 3 times as many minutes as they did last year, which might have made it clear whether he was really worth developing further. FJ should have had him shooting a bunch mid-range jumpers, too, because if he could start hitting those, he might just do, paired with Amare. (I'm not completely convinced that Big J can't be a passable starting C but his back ailment makes him a major question mark.) Scott Williams was a waste of time last year - he played little patches just well enough to get our hopes up then died when we needed him. He's a bigger waste of time this year but he's back on the roster. We could have brought in Drobjnak(?) this offseason and maybe there were others in our price range but no, we stand pat with our bust. Our last three draft picks were all perimeter players, to top it all off.

(By the way Chap, I know that small ball antedates FJ by many years... and 'soft in middle' has been characteristic of the Suns since the team began. But I dislike Frankie for continuing and building on those traditions...)

 

[SunsTzu]

Originally posted by Errntknght
Come on, we didn't really beat the Spurs two games - they got rattled and muffed plays & FTs down the stretch. When they settled down they were clearly much the better team.

What frosts me about the Suns is even though they know they are dying at center they don't do much about it. They could have played Little Jake 3 times as many minutes as they did last year, which might have made it clear whether he was really worth developing further. FJ should have had him shooting a bunch mid-range jumpers, too, because if he could start hitting those, he might just do, paired with Amare. (I'm not completely convinced that Big J can't be a passable starting C but his back ailment makes him a major question mark.) Scott Williams was a waste of time last year - he played little patches just well enough to get our hopes up then died when we needed him. He's a bigger waste of time this year but he's back on the roster. We could have brought in Drobjnak(?) this offseason and maybe there were others in our price range but no, we stand pat with our bust. Our last three draft picks were all perimeter players, to top it all off.

(By the way Chap, I know that small ball antedates FJ by many years... and 'soft in middle' has been characteristic of the Suns since the team began. But I dislike Frankie for continuing and building on those traditions...)

1. How do you plan on playing Little Jake 3 times? He is a bit foul prone and couldn't handle major minutes. Plus i see him as an energy guy like Bo, not someone who is a starter. Big Jake is the only legit center on the club.

2. Our price range is minimum contracts right now. Any one we sign costs the Suns twice what we pay em. Besides even with Drobjnak we'd still be "soft in the middle".

 

[PhiLLmattiC]

Is it me or is Little Jake soft. At least on offense he is. He hustles but he misses some easy shots down low and he just puts up some weak shots that are constantly blocked. He needs to work on that. Danielle Santiago is pretty good now. I watched him play with Puerto Rico against the U.S. at msg. He has some nice low post moves and he's like Big Jakes height just a little skinnier.

 

[Joe Mama]

Little Jake is a nice player, but he clearly isn't a starting caliber center. SunsTzu is correct. Little Jake would foul out of every game if he was getting starter minutes. He is a backup energy guy. That's it.

I've been extremely critical of the Phoenix Suns for failing to play Jake Tsakalidis at all in the playoffs last year. I thought at the very least they should have put him in for a few minutes just to see if it would help.

Eric, I can see your point about sticking with something long enough to see if it will work in the long run. However, as Chaplin and others pointed out, the Suns are one of the most center deficient teams in the NBA. I still believe that if you are trying to win games you have to put your most talented players on the court. It's not as if the Suns never played a center last season. I would venture to bet that they had what we would call "a center" in the game 50% of the time. But it's hard to do more than that with a center rotation the Suns have, especially once Jake Tsakalidis went down.

I don't think I remember Frank Johnson saying we're going to see Shawn Marion at the power forward position the majority of the time. He said we will see him there sometimes. I just don't see the problem with that.

Joe Mama

 

[SirStefan32]

Originally posted by elindholm
]The Phoenix Suns were at their best in the playoffs last season when they went with that smaller lineup. That was against possibly The strongest frontcourt team in the NBA.

I think the Suns made a good showing against the Spurs. That said, I don't think that the Suns' goal should be able to squeak out two lucky wins in a six-game series. I think their goal should be to amass four wins in a seven-game series.

To say that the Suns were at their best with a small lineup last season misses the point, in my opinion. They still weren't good enough. How are they most likely to get to the next level -- by sticking with gimmicky small ball, or by finding a more conventional lineup that really works? In my opinion, they are more likely to get there with a conventional lineup.

It's sort of like the guy who has an ugly free-throw stroke and makes 60%. His coach shows him proper shooting form, and he tries it for a while, and he makes only 40%, because he's no good at it yet. So then he says, "I'll stick with what I know, because I'm better that way." Well, that may be ... but 60% still isn't good enough, and it won't get much better, because his technique is fundamentally flawed. What the player should do is invest the time and energy in order to learn the correct technique, and then he'll have a chance to become a really good free-throw shooter.

The Suns' "lineup technique" is fundamentally flawed. Right now, it's what they're best at. But it isn't good enough, and I think that they would be well served to invest the energy to correct that technique if they ever want to get really good. We all know that a gimmicky bull-dung lineup with Shawn Marion at power forward is never going to win a championship.

Exactly!

 

[SirStefan32]

Joe, I understand that Tsakalidis, Voskhul, and Williams are not exactly the NBA's greatest Center tag- team, but as CENTERS they are much better than Bo Outlaw, Joe Johnson, and Shawn Marion. I am not saying that they are better overall players; I am saying that they are better INSIDE players.

Why is it so hard to have Jake Tsakalidis, Jake Voskhul or Scott Williams on the floor 15 minutes each? If you have to go small, then there is Bo Outlaw on 4 and Amare on 5. But Shawn Marion? Marions is an undersized small forward. He will be eaten alive by Chris Webbers, Tim Duncans, Karl Malones, Kenyon Martins, Jermaine O'Neals of this world.

 

[slinslin]

No they are not.

If you can decide between Marbury, Penny, Marion, Johnson, Stoudemire or Marbury, Penny , Marion, Stoudemire +Voshkul/Williams/Tsakalidis I think you take the first almost every time because Joe Johnson is simply a much better ball player than any of out centers.

Besides that having 6'8 Joe Johnson at PF , 6'10 Amare Stoudemire who can block shots, as well as a 10rpg SF that can block some shots too isn't small ball like Kidd, KJ, Chapman, Person, Nash, Finley or whatever on the court at the same time.

Based on that San Antonio played small ball almost all of the series as well when they played Rose and Duncan in the frontcourt.

 

[SirStefan32]

Originally posted by slinslin
No they are not.

If you can decide between Marbury, Penny, Marion, Johnson, Stoudemire or Marbury, Penny , Marion, Stoudemire +Voshkul/Williams/Tsakalidis I think you take the first almost every time because Joe Johnson is simply a much better ball player than any of out centers.

Besides that having 6'8 Joe Johnson at PF , 6'10 Amare Stoudemire who can block shots, as well as a 10rpg SF that can block some shots too isn't small ball like Kidd, KJ, Chapman, Person, Nash, Finley or whatever on the court at the same time.

Based on that San Antonio played small ball almost all of the series as well when they played Rose and Duncan in the frontcourt.

Yes they are Slin! Johnson may be a better player overall, but all three centers on the roster are better centers.

Small lineup got lucky and won two games against the Spurs. So what? They lost a freaking series! Did you miss that? Spurs are not theonly team Phoenix will have to play, and they will have to win more than 2 games in order to win anything.

Of course I would rather have Marbury/ Hardaway/ Marion/ Stoudemire/ Tsakalidis- Voskhul- Williams tag team than Marbury/ Hardaway/ Johnson/ Marion/ Stoudemire. That might work in the east, but in the West, Marion is barely big enough to be a SF, let alone a PF.

 

[slinslin]

They didn't lose the series because of a small lineup.

They lost a close series against the #1 without playing a really good team and their best player injured in the last 3 games.

They lost a series when Stephen Jackson had a couple of career games averaging more than 20 in the first 3 games.

They lost a series with very questionable calls going against the Suns most of the time.
For a fact the Spurs attempted as many freethrows at AWA as the Suns did for the entire series.
The Suns were called for 8 fouls more per game than the Spurs.

They lost because the refs allowed the Spurs to dictate how the game was played and the Suns had huge problems adapting to the physical "dirty" defense.

Marion was fairly succesful when matched up against bigger players like Nowitzki, Peja, Garnett this season.
And I never saw him defending Webber, Duncan or Malone this year.

You don't put Bo Outlaw and Amare Stoudemire in the frontcourt when you want to go small.
Most of the time when you go small you want to put points on the board quickly.

When you have Bo Outlaw in the frontcourt, Amare Stoudemire will immediately face double teams at all times. Bo Outlaw has no offense which takes away all your inside game.
So you have 3 guys left on the perimeter that have to do it by themselves.

 

[JCSunsfan]

Originally posted by elindholm
]The Phoenix Suns were at their best in the playoffs last season when they went with that smaller lineup. That was against possibly The strongest frontcourt team in the NBA.

I think the Suns made a good showing against the Spurs. That said, I don't think that the Suns' goal should be able to squeak out two lucky wins in a six-game series. I think their goal should be to amass four wins in a seven-game series.

To say that the Suns were at their best with a small lineup last season misses the point, in my opinion. They still weren't good enough. How are they most likely to get to the next level -- by sticking with gimmicky small ball, or by finding a more conventional lineup that really works? In my opinion, they are more likely to get there with a conventional lineup.

It's sort of like the guy who has an ugly free-throw stroke and makes 60%. His coach shows him proper shooting form, and he tries it for a while, and he makes only 40%, because he's no good at it yet. So then he says, "I'll stick with what I know, because I'm better that way." Well, that may be ... but 60% still isn't good enough, and it won't get much better, because his technique is fundamentally flawed. What the player should do is invest the time and energy in order to learn the correct technique, and then he'll have a chance to become a really good free-throw shooter.

The Suns' "lineup technique" is fundamentally flawed. Right now, it's what they're best at. But it isn't good enough, and I think that they would be well served to invest the energy to correct that technique if they ever want to get really good. We all know that a gimmicky bull-dung lineup with Shawn Marion at power forward is never going to win a championship.

This is exactly right, with one exception. I believe, for the last two years, the Suns have been attempting to make the change.

They may have even fired a coach for his failure to properly develop Big Jake.

With Jake's return, it will be interesting to see how they develop.

A small ball line up is OK for short period's of time, and in special situations. But it must not be this team's bread and butter. If it continues, it will be another 30 years without a championship.

 

[elindholm]

Chaplin:

In your opinion the Suns are more likely to win a series with a conventional lineup.

That isn't what I said. I said the Suns are more likely "to get to the next level" with a conventional lineup.

If the goal is to win the greatest number of games possible this season, then small ball is probably the way to go. And that will likely produce another playoff berth, and another exciting first-round playoff loss. Maybe that's all this team should hope for this season, so it wouldn't be a big problem.

But sooner or later, if the Suns want to compete for a championship, they are going to have to have a better crunch time lineup than Stoudemire/Marion/Guard/Guard/Guard. I just don't think that lineup can win a title, no matter who the guards are.

Do the Suns have a championship-caliber center solution at hand? Probably not. But not even bothering to find out is a big mistake. If Tsakalidis and Voskuhl can't get it done, let's know, instead of being forced to guess. I'd rather see the team lose a few more games and gain information than have them go through a repeat of last season.

Joe Mama:

However, as Chaplin and others pointed out, the Suns are one of the most center deficient teams in the NBA. I still believe that if you are trying to win games you have to put your most talented players on the court.

Yes, sure. I don't fault the Suns for their strategy against the Spurs -- it was their only chance, and they made a go of it. But the main goal of this season, in my opinion, should be to build toward the future, not scramble to win one or two extra games here and there. Shawn Marion is in no way the Suns' power forward of the future. Any minute he plays at PF is a waste of time, as far as the development of the team is concerned. Sure, it might help the team win a particular game at some point right now, but at what price?

I would venture to bet that they had what we would call "a center" in the game 50% of the time.

I calculated this before. If you count Scott Williams as "a center," they had one on the floor for slightly over 28 minutes per game, if my memory is correct.

slinslin:

They lost a series when Stephen Jackson had a couple of career games averaging more than 20 in the first 3 games.

Have you noticed that unheralded players often seem to have career games against the Suns? This is because their gimmicky lineup forces them to gamble on defense more than almost any team in the league. If the other team's role players can't step up, the Suns' defense can be quite effective. But if someone like Stephen Jackson can figure out how to take advantage of being more open than he has been all season long, the strategy doesn't look too good.

The Suns were called for 8 fouls more per game than the Spurs.

This is because they committed more fouls. I didn't see much of a problem with the officiating. Of course there were some mistakes here and there, but overall I don't think it made a difference in the series.

They lost because the refs allowed the Spurs to dictate how the game was played and the Suns had huge problems adapting to the physical "dirty" defense.

The playoffs are always more "dirty" than the regular season. This is why small/finesse ball doesn't work in the playoffs.

 

[Chaplin]

Originally posted by SirStefan32
Yes they are Slin! Johnson may be a better player overall, but all three centers on the roster are better centers.

Small lineup got lucky and won two games against the Spurs. So what? They lost a freaking series! Did you miss that? Spurs are not theonly team Phoenix will have to play, and they will have to win more than 2 games in order to win anything.

You're just not getting it.

This has nothing to do with positions. On paper, we have 3 Centers. No question. But on the court, it's a whole different matter. No team goes a full 48 minutes with a Center, 2 forwards and 2 guards. NONE.

But being Suns fans, several people want to single out the Suns and proclaim them as being deficient because they sometimes go for stretches without a center. Well, uh, it's been said before, but a lot of teams don't even have that. The Indiana Pacers this year will go with Jermaine O'Neal at center. He's not a true center. The Orlando Magic don't have a true center, neither do the Miami Heat, or the LA Clippers. Neither do the Dallas Mavericks or the Boston Celtics.

Everyone wants us to pigeon-hole our players. Let's do that for some games. See how many wins we get. I guarantee you, if Frank is forced to play one of our 3 centers (assuming Scotty isn't on the Injured List) every minute of every game, we will lose games more than win them. The small ball lineup (or "skill ball" as Grgrich says) wins us games more than a conventional one. Period. But that doesn't mean a conventional lineup won't work--it would sure be more effective defensively against a bigger lineup from the opposition, as we pushed for in the Spur series. But will it win us games?

 

[Chaplin]

Originally posted by elindholm
That isn't what I said. I said the Suns are more likely "to get to the next level" with a conventional lineup.

Semantics. The meaning is the same.

If the goal is to win the greatest number of games possible this season, then small ball is probably the way to go. And that will likely produce another playoff berth, and another exciting first-round playoff loss. Maybe that's all this team should hope for this season, so it wouldn't be a big problem.

I agree, it'd be nice to know if our big lineup would work, but what exactly are the odds of that happening, with our current stock of players? We don't know, but it's not good, and you know it.

Shawn Marion at PF is useless. Really? Obviously you're not taking into account the other teams' lineups at the time.

In fact, I will venture to say that in today's lineup, conventional lineups are anything but conventional--the players are just different. Most SG and SF are interchangable--and those sometimes are interchangable with PG. C and PF are also nearly identical. Actually, the C position might just be eliminated in a few years--after guys like Mutombo, Shaq, Mourning, and Divac all retire.

 

[JCSunsfan]

Chap, going small is fine, at times, when matchups and game flow dictate. I don't think we have any argument there.

But 6-8 Bo Outlaw was our starting center for a lot of games last year. To me, there is not much future in that.

Big Jake needs to be healthy, and play significant productive minutes, for this team to grow.

I'd love to see 6 pts, 9 boards, and 3 blocks from Jake in 25 or so minutes a game.

 

[elindholm]

What exactly are the odds of that happening, with our current stock of players? We don't know, but it's not good, and you know it.

Do the Suns want Tsakalidis around for the long term? Can he hold down 20 or so minutes per game? How do they expect to find out, if they go to a small lineup every time they fall behind?

Or is Tsakalidis's responsibility to be so incredibly awesome that the Suns never fall behind at the start of the game, and if they do, he is a failure? Because that's sure how it has looked ever since he joined the team. They start him, and if they fall behind, it's his fault. Yank, time for small ball.

In fact, I will venture to say that in today's lineup, conventional lineups are anything but conventional--the players are just different.... Actually, the C position might just be eliminated in a few years--after guys like Mutombo, Shaq, Mourning, and Divac all retire.

I agree that the labels don't mean much and that it doesn't make sense any more to talk about a "true" or "traditional" center.

So I should have said this: I don't think that a lineup of Stoudemire/Marion/SmallGuy/SmallGuy/SmallGuy can realistically compete for a title, no matter who the SmallGuys are. You can call the positions whatever you want. If Shawn Marion is the second-biggest player on the floor, you're not going deep in the playoffs.