Suns @ Blazers Game Thread 12-22-12

[Superbone]

We're in this game right now, I don't know if that will be the case for long. Scola is horrible, absolutely horrible, and after we survive his stint we then get stuck with Beasley who is even worse.

I've decided one thing about this team. They either need to play Scola and Beasley a lot more or not at all. If they want to win, leave them on the bench. If they want a good draft pick, give them 40 + minutes combined. All we're doing now is winning just enough to ruin our draft chances.

Steve

Your Scola hate is out of control.

 

[AzStevenCal]

Your Scola hate is out of control.

I don't think that's possible. It's like hating the bird flu or herpes, it's justified and entirely reasonable. Okay, I'll admit, I did conveniently leave out the fact that at the moment I typed that earlier comment Luis was one of our most consistent scorers (4 for 5 at the time, IIRC). But, this team has one sharp edged weapon, defense, and Scola looks like he's trying to cut through stone with it.

Steve

 

[Superbone]

I don't think that's possible. It's like hating the bird flu or herpes, it's justified and entirely reasonable. Okay, I'll admit, I did conveniently leave out the fact that at the moment I typed that earlier comment Luis was one of our most consistent scorers (4 for 5 at the time, IIRC). But, this team has one sharp edged weapon, defense, and Scola looks like he's trying to cut through stone with it.

Steve

I admit he is defensively challenged but overall, he's not nearly as bad as you are making him out to be. You clearly have it out for him.

 

[Mainstreet]

AzStevenCal dislikes Scola like Phrazbit dislikes Beasley.

I'm coming around to Phrazbit's side. I still see value in Scola. The Suns as a team are just plain bad.

 

[AzStevenCal]

I admit he is defensively challenged but overall, he's not nearly as bad as you are making him out to be. You clearly have it out for him.

Nash was defensively challenged, Scola is on a different level. He's the kind of guy that saps the energy level out there and brings everyone else down near his level. Or, at least, that's what I think I see. I don't think he's quite as bad as Warrick but I'd put him below Beasley (defensively only, he's far better than Beasley all told) which is a scary thought. He seems to have less impact on the second squad but when he's playing with the starters he really drags them down IMO. The good news is he manages to keep his plus/minus numbers looking decent because he takes out the whole squad with his play so his stats don't stand out.

Have you ever played the game with someone who keeps letting his man go, forcing you to chase the guy down. The crowd walks away thinking you're the bozo that keeps letting his man score and trust me, it wears you down. You get to the point where you figure why even make the effort to guard someone, your teammate is going to leave you exposed regardless of what you do. Jermaine sort of plays a one man zone too but he doesn't wander around and pick up some guy who's already being guarded 15 feet from the hoop. His tendency to stay close to the basket is probably what saves the team when he's paired with Luis as he's already in position to pick up the man Scola has abandoned.

And I really don't think I'm being all that unfair about him. If I am, it's only because I sometimes ignore the good things he does for this team. But, I'm convinced the bad side of Luis more than outweighs the good side and this team's best chance to get victories is to play hard especially on the defensive end. I think it's almost impossible to do that when Scola gets significant minutes.

Steve

 

[Superbone]

Nash was defensively challenged, Scola is on a different level. He's the kind of guy that saps the energy level out there and brings everyone else down near his level. Or, at least, that's what I think I see. I don't think he's quite as bad as Warrick but I'd put him below Beasley (defensively only, he's far better than Beasley all told) which is a scary thought. He seems to have less impact on the second squad but when he's playing with the starters he really drags them down IMO. The good news is he manages to keep his plus/minus numbers looking decent because he takes out the whole squad with his play so his stats don't stand out.

Have you ever played the game with someone who keeps letting his man go, forcing you to chase the guy down. The crowd walks away thinking you're the bozo that keeps letting his man score and trust me, it wears you down. You get to the point where you figure why even make the effort to guard someone, your teammate is going to leave you exposed regardless of what you do. Jermaine sort of plays a one man zone too but he doesn't wander around and pick up some guy who's already being guarded 15 feet from the hoop. His tendency to stay close to the basket is probably what saves the team when he's paired with Luis as he's already in position to pick up the man Scola has abandoned.

And I really don't think I'm being all that unfair about him. If I am, it's only because I sometimes ignore the good things he does for this team. But, I'm convinced the bad side of Luis more than outweighs the good side and this team's best chance to get victories is to play hard especially on the defensive end. I think it's almost impossible to do that when Scola gets significant minutes.

Steve

How do you explain the fact that most experts around the league don't agree with you? EJ has mostly good things to say about him and when you listen to other teams broadcasts, they all rave about what a great pickup he was.

I guess they don't all see him on a day to day basis like you do and have been duped.

 

[AzStevenCal]

How do you explain the fact that most experts around the league don't agree with you? EJ has mostly good things to say about him and when you listen to other teams broadcasts, they all rave about what a great pickup he was.

I guess they don't all see him on a day to day basis like you do and have been duped.

Fair points, I must be wrong.

Steve

 

[Superbone]

Fair points, I must be wrong.

Steve

No, I don't think you're totally wrong. But I do think you're being overly critical of him. He's got more good than bad in him, I believe. I think he's a net positive while Beasley is definitely a net negative.

 

[AzStevenCal]

No, I don't think you're totally wrong. But I do think you're being overly critical of him. He's got more good than bad in him, I believe. I think he's a net positive while Beasley is definitely a net negative.

You could be right but I don't think it's by much if so. The reason I dwell on him is the very thing you offered as evidence against me. I listen to Steve Albert rave about what a smart player Scola is but I see a player that is not very bright. Oh sure, he's cunning in some ways but he makes several dumb basketball plays every game. I watch him miss shot after shot because he's set up outside his range and then I hear Eddie rave on about how the guy knows his limitations and is a dead shot from the outside.

I listen to other telecasts and they also say mostly positive things about this guy and yet I watch him and the player I see should be no better than 8th or 9th in a bad team's rotation. Nobody raves about what a great player Beasley is so I don't bother to focus on his shortcomings, they are apparent and well documented. But I truly believe that Scola is fools gold, he does just enough good to convince people that he is something more than what he is. I don't think they focus on just how disruptive this guy is to his teammates on the defensive end or the impact that has on effort levels over time.

Let me end it with this (by end it, I mean my side of it). I'm usually of the opinion that if you hold one position and almost everyone else holds another then you are almost definitely wrong and when that happens, it's in my nature to concede the issue. That's the position I find myself in here so on one level I know that there is a good chance that I'm missing something and I truly want to just acknowledge I'm wrong and walk away from the conversation. But, every time I watch the Suns play, I continue to see evidence that I am right and that makes it very difficult to just bow to popular opinion.

Steve

 

[BC867]

That's the position I find myself in here so on one level I know that there is a good chance that I'm missing something and I truly want to just acknowledge I'm wrong and walk away from the conversation. But, every time I watch the Suns play, I continue to see evidence that I am right and that makes it very difficult to just bow to popular opinion.

Steve

There is another consideration, far above popular opinion. The coach's opinion.

How long and when he is playing Scola is a good indication of how he regards him in trying to win games. And the latest is, of course, that Gentry put Scola back in the starting lineup. And there have been times recently where Scola was the closest thing we had to a go-to guy on offense, our most desperate need.

And still another consideration. It doesn't matter as much if Scola is good or bad as much as better or worse . . . than Morris and even Beasley lately at PF. The three of them are all we have to choose from.

It would be interesting if Frye were able to play. But then, we wouldn't have Scola.

'Sort of a complex situation. Who is the best choice on a team striving to be less worse?

 

[Phrazbit]

Scola isnt good, or even average. But he does juuuuuust enough right and well to trick you. Kind of like the way Amare would think he played a good defensive game because he got 2 blocks... no one noticed the 20 times he missed a rotation or seemingly fell asleep in the lane... he got 2 blocks, all is well. Scola hits some nice jumpers, has some decent post moves and gets a crafty defensive play about every other night. But he spends the majority of the game setting himself up poorly on offense and showing almost no defensive effort.

But I do disagree on one point... he is a much better defender than my boy, the Sleaze. No one is as bad as the Sleaze (who we do have to listen to the announcers praise as though the star is coming out every time he does not totally screw up... but thats very rare nowadays).

I think the other thing that masks Scola's poor play is the general low level of play from his replacement (Morris), so its interchangeable levels of bad. While when Beasley comes out for Dudley or Tucker its impossible to not notice the drastic improvement.