Suns, Eric Bledsoe Far Apart In Talks

[Covert Rain]

Huh?

Typo...fixed it.

 

[Mainstreet]

Typo...fixed it.

That's it, no penitence to be paid.

 

[BC867]

It's funny, all this time I never knew The Big O was a guard. I guess I figured at his size and in that time frame that he must have been a forward. In my defense, he was (just) before my time of watching basketball.

Oscar averaged a triple-double for a full season. That is incomprehensible.

Scoring AND Rebounds AND Assists. Not just for a few games, but for a season.

The year his Bucks won it all, they were led by The Big O, a young Lou Alcindor (soon to be Kareem Abdul-Jabbar) at Center and a talented Bobby Dandridge at Small Forward. It was a talented, balanced, magical team.

Of course, it was the Suns who had lost the coin flip for big Lou.

 

[Covert Rain]

That's it, no penitence to be paid.

LOL. I actually caught it and fixed it before I read the comment on it. That's typical of me though. I type really fast and catch stuff after the fact and clean it up later. Worst candidate ever for a newspaper editor.

 

[AzStevenCal]

Oscar averaged a triple-double for a full season. That is incomprehensible.

Scoring AND Rebounds AND Assists. Not just for a few games, but for a season.

The year his Bucks won it all, they were led by The Big O, a young Lou Alcindor (soon to be Kareem Abdul-Jabbar) at Center and a talented Bobby Dandridge at Small Forward. It was a talented, balanced, magical team.

Of course, it was the Suns who had lost the coin flip for big Lou.

No, we got big Lou and then discovered he was only like 6'7. I believe you're thinking of Big Lew as in Lew Alcindor.

Steve

 

[Mainstreet]

LOL. I actually caught it and fixed it before I read the comment on it. That's typical of me though. I type really fast and catch stuff after the fact and clean it up later. Worst candidate ever for a newspaper editor.

I'm bad on previewing and then I type like mad in edit mode to correct it. Mistakes seem more obvious after I post.

 

[Covert Rain]

I'm bad on previewing and then I type like mad in edit mode to correct it. Mistakes seem more obvious after I post.

Same here. My thoughts are clear in my head but don't always translate well when I write. Short circuit between my office chair and keyboard I guess.

 

[Superbone]

LOL. I actually caught it and fixed it before I read the comment on it. That's typical of me though. I type really fast and catch stuff after the fact and clean it up later. Worst candidate ever for a newspaper editor.

Hey, at least you catch it.

 

[Covert Rain]

Hey, at least you catch it.

The problem with that is sometimes I don't catch it until the next day.

 

[Superbone]

The problem with that is sometimes I don't catch it until the next day.

That's alright. Somebody here will always say something.

 

[Mainstreet]

The problem with that is sometimes I don't catch it until the next day.

Work on a case of plausible deniability or such.

 

[Mainstreet]

That's alright. Somebody here will always say something.

This is the problem. There is always someone out there to strike and not always in a nice way. This is a discussion board hopefully to air thoughts and discuss things in a civil fashion. I view this board as a fun outlet.

 

[AzStevenCal]

Work on a case of plausible deniability or such.

I usually type my message, add my name and then do a quick re-read before I post. Inevitably, if I have to go in and re-type something I end up adding my name again. I can't tell you how many times I've posted with multiple Steves at the bottom. Have you got a plausible deniability excuse for me that doesn't involve a senior citizen ailment?

Steve

Steve

 

[Mainstreet]

I usually type my message, add my name and then do a quick re-read before I post. Inevitably, if I have to go in and re-type something I end up adding my name again. I can't tell you how many times I've posted with multiple Steves at the bottom. Have you got a plausible deniability excuse for me that doesn't involve a senior citizen ailment?

Steve

Steve

Maybe you are using yourself as a source and giving yourself credit for the thought. Might add a dot com to the last Steve.

 

[AzStevenCal]

Maybe you are using yourself as a source and giving yourself credit for the thought. Might add a dot com to the last Steve.

I don't think I'd trust myself as a source, I know where I've been.

Steve

 

[Mainstreet]

I don't think I'd trust myself as a source, I know where I've been.

Steve

Well, you seem to know where you have been and who you are. My thoughts you are fine.

Steve

Steve

 

[Errntknght]

DarenG,

Again, I never said it was impossible only improbable that playing a 2 PG lineup would lead to deep runs into the playoffs let alone a title.

What I'm saying is that you have not done one lousy thing to show that it is improbable! You can't give a single example where starting two PGs failed in any way, shape or form!

 

[Covert Rain]

DarenG,

What I'm saying is that you have not done one lousy thing to show that it is improbable! You can't give a single example where starting two PGs failed in any way, shape or form!

If you look at every NBA title winner since the league started how many non-two point guard lineups vs 2 PG lineups do you think you are going to find exactly that won the title? Are you seriously suggesting it's lopsided towards 2 PG lineups?

What am I supposed to do...list every single title winner since the league started and provide an analysis of the lineup? I guess I could but I have not heard many people dispute that a more traditional lineup has had more playoff success and title winners overall. You are the first person to infer that was the case. I think it's pretty common knowledge that most teams in the NBA don't play a 2 PG lineup. Why would I need to prove what is held as conventional wisdom? It's not like you have provided overwhelming evidence to the contrary with your own analysis.

I acknowledge I could be completely wrong but I have never heard anybody argue EVER that a two PG system was more successful in the NBA overall versus a traditional lineup. You would be the first.

I don't think I'd trust myself as a source, I know where I've been.

Steve

LOL.

 

[Mainstreet]

Because a two PG system has not succeeded does not mean it will not. Most teams do not have enough quality PGs to start two with the ability to shoot and defend. Then this leads into a previous discussion of my mention of Isiah Thomas and Joe Dumars as a two PG system. Some said Dumars was actually a SG, then this led to a question of labels, PGs, SGs and combo guards.

Two PGs can succeed if they have the right attributes.

 

[AzStevenCal]

I think we've had this conversation here before but when I was growing up, most teams started two guards that could handle the ball and run the offense. They weren't called point guards just yet and to my memory, they actually started calling them lead guards before eventually calling them point guards. But even throughout the 70's many teams still operated with two guards that could each run the offense.

But Errntknight's point/question is valid. When has any team failed in the postseason because they used two point guards at the same time? To me, the only problem with running two points has to do with defending their positions and I think our pair has proven they can do that quite well.

I guess you could claim they've yet to prove it during the playoffs but I see no reason they'd struggle defensively when/if that time comes. Maybe it falls apart offensively when teams have a better chance to prepare for this (perhaps) somewhat unorthodox approach but I wouldn't expect that to happen.

Steve

 

[PhxGametime]

With Bledsoe being top 10 rebounding Guard, top 5 at PG - I'm not worried about small backcourt. Lose Bledsoe and I'd start to worry a bit more. I'm starting to think offering a 5th year but keeping contract as currently is, Suns should have leverage. Five years at 60 Million, Suns at that price could keep Dragic next year, and with Thomas and Ennis being on Roster for next 4 years, they'd have insurance at position. Goodwin could also offer some of what Bledsoe can in a year or two, while playing SG/SF, as well.

 

[KloD]

If you look at every NBA title winner since the league started how many non-two point guard lineups vs 2 PG lineups do you think you are going to find exactly that won the title? Are you seriously suggesting it's lopsided towards 2 PG lineups?

What am I supposed to do...list every single title winner since the league started and provide an analysis of the lineup? I guess I could but I have not heard many people dispute that a more traditional lineup has had more playoff success and title winners overall. You are the first person to infer that was the case. I think it's pretty common knowledge that most teams in the NBA don't play a 2 PG lineup. Why would I need to prove what is held as conventional wisdom? It's not like you have provided overwhelming evidence to the contrary with your own analysis.

I acknowledge I could be completely wrong but I have never heard anybody argue EVER that a two PG system was more successful in the NBA overall versus a traditional lineup. You would be the first.



LOL.

I'm sure I'll kick myself for getting involved, but your argument is faulty. You claim that a 2 PG lineup isn't as successful in the playoffs, but at the same time admit that it's rarely been used. It doesn't matter that a traditional PG/SG combination has won more championships if a PG/PG combo has rarely been used against them. There isn't enough of a sample to validate your claim. It's like saying history shows that you have to have a right handed catcher to win a world series because if you look at all the world series catchers they were almost all right handed. The problem is, there are very few left handed catchers to ever play in MLB. So it's poor logic to claim history suggests you have to have a right handed catcher to win. Chances are you could have an equal chance to win a world series with a left handed catcher if there were just as many as right handed ones. All history suggests is that there have only been a few left handed catchers. So in this argument all history shows is that there have been few teams that used a 2 PG's lineup. That they have rarely won a championship could just as easily be attributed to they've rarely tried compared to the traditional lineup.

Anyway, I think Bledsoe and Dragic have shown that in their first year with only a half season of playing together they can have success. I believe that with some time in the system they will improve. Not only was the system unfamiliar, but playing together was too. If we can keep them on the team, I believe they can certainly grow. Throwing Thompson in off the bench to spell them both should help keep production at a high level. I'm very excited to see this and hope we will get to.

 

[leclerc]

Thomas


Not Thompson

 

[Errntknght]

Because a two PG system has not succeeded does not mean it will not. Most teams do not have enough quality PGs to start two with the ability to shoot and defend. Then this leads into a previous discussion of my mention of Isiah Thomas and Joe Dumars as a two PG system. Some said Dumars was actually a SG, then this led to a question of labels, PGs, SGs and combo guards.

Two PGs can succeed if they have the right attributes.

Dumars was listed as a SG in my data from those years... So was Vinnie Johnson. Isiah was the only listed PG who played significant minutes. On the other hand, all three of them had ast/to ratios of about 2.2 and Joe got 5.7 assists per game vs 8.3 for Thomas. Of course, what Joe was noted for was his defense and it was like whatever he did for the offense was pure gravy.
I remember watching that team play quite a bit and I certainly didn't think of them as a two PG team. Isaiah was clearly the PG and Joe was the 'off' guard though a very capable ball handler and could run the offense when Isaiah sat. VJ was the designated gunner and he came off the bench firing away.

You know, maybe we should bring into the discussion the teams that won with no PG at all in the traditional sense - i.e. any of Phil Jackson's teams. The leading assist men on his Chicago teams were Michael Jordan and Scottie Pippen. Toni Kukoc was the third leader in his years with the team.

In fact, the team with Jerry West and Gail Goodrich could fit in this no PG category because Goodrich was as much a SG as West was - he was the leading scorer on the team. Whats funny is that I remember Goodrich with the Lakers clearly but I'm almost blank about his time as a Sun. My guess is that he was considered a SG here. Some of you guys ought to know your Suns history well enough to say for sure.

One of my clearest memories from those days is Goodrich annihilating Earl Monroe with turn around jumpers he banked off the glass from 16-17 feet.
'Clyde' had to guard West because Jerry was too tall for Monroe to have any chance of slowing him down. Monroe was never a great defender but that was embarrassing for him.

 

[AzStevenCal]

Dumars was listed as a SG in my data from those years... So was Vinnie Johnson. Isiah was the only listed PG who played significant minutes. On the other hand, all three of them had ast/to ratios of about 2.2 and Joe got 5.7 assists per game vs 8.3 for Thomas. Of course, what Joe was noted for was his defense and it was like whatever he did for the offense was pure gravy.
I remember watching that team play quite a bit and I certainly didn't think of them as a two PG team. Isaiah was clearly the PG and Joe was the 'off' guard though a very capable ball handler and could run the offense when Isaiah sat. VJ was the designated gunner and he came off the bench firing away.

You know, maybe we should bring into the discussion the teams that won with no PG at all in the traditional sense - i.e. any of Phil Jackson's teams. The leading assist men on his Chicago teams were Michael Jordan and Scottie Pippen. Toni Kukoc was the third leader in his years with the team.

In fact, the team with Jerry West and Gail Goodrich could fit in this no PG category because Goodrich was as much a SG as West was - he was the leading scorer on the team. Whats funny is that I remember Goodrich with the Lakers clearly but I'm almost blank about his time as a Sun. My guess is that he was considered a SG here. Some of you guys ought to know your Suns history well enough to say for sure.

One of my clearest memories from those days is Goodrich annihilating Earl Monroe with turn around jumpers he banked off the glass from 16-17 feet.
'Clyde' had to guard West because Jerry was too tall for Monroe to have any chance of slowing him down. Monroe was never a great defender but that was embarrassing for him.

I know that in today's terms we'd have called him a point guard but I really believe his position was just called guard at the time. I can almost remember sitting at the kitchen table reading his bio and stats on the back of the milk carton. I really don't recall a "point guard" label for any player on our team back then. I do remember he wasn't the most popular player in town, at least among the older crowd in Scottsdale. Everyone loved Dick VA and Connie was our star but Gail would often force shots instead of giving it up to the Valley favorites. There weren't a lot of tears shed over his trade despite the fact we only got a very mediocre center in return (Mel Counts).

Steve