Thinking About Kerr

Cheesebeef

ASFN IDOL
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Posts
92,216
Reaction score
70,501
Cheesebeef, badgering people may fly in court but it doesn't on here. This isn't a trial and that is why I told you to chill out. Asking me the same question repeatedly and ignoring my answer repeatedly is why you need to chill out. Especially when you resorted to screaming.

you weren't answering the question. You were talking around it. Now that may fly in court, but it doesn't belong here. ;)
 

Chris_Sanders

Not Always The Best Moderator
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2002
Posts
40,381
Reaction score
32,063
Location
Scottsdale, Az
Oh and Cheese you were right about Denver in the prior years. We went 3-1 against them with Marion. I misread one of the games.
 

Chris_Sanders

Not Always The Best Moderator
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2002
Posts
40,381
Reaction score
32,063
Location
Scottsdale, Az
you weren't answering the question. You were talking around it. Now that may fly in court, but it doesn't belong here. ;)

Alright, I honestly believe I am done with this conversation then. If you won't even acknowledge that I have even given an opinion then we have no further need for discourse.
 

Cheesebeef

ASFN IDOL
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Posts
92,216
Reaction score
70,501
Oh and Cheese you were right about Denver in the prior years. We went 3-1 against them with Marion. I misread one of the games.

and I really hope you don't think I was trying to "trap you" with anything Chris. When you say "we lost both games with Shaq", how am I supposed to read that as anything but we lost the only games we played him? Not everyone's out to get you man.
 

Cheesebeef

ASFN IDOL
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Posts
92,216
Reaction score
70,501
Alright, I honestly believe I am done with this conversation then. If you won't even acknowledge that I have even given an opinion then we have no further need for discourse.

oh my god. Get a sense of humor man. I was just trying to lighten this up a little. that's what winks are for. again, in the immortal words of Stripes (man, it seem like i have to say this to you a lot): Lighten up Francis!
 
Last edited:

Cheesebeef

ASFN IDOL
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Posts
92,216
Reaction score
70,501
Oh and Cheese you were right about Denver in the prior years. We went 3-1 against them with Marion. I misread one of the games.

and unless I'm reading wrong, but we were 2-1 against them last year, 1-1 after the Iverson trade.
 

sLapzsHaQ

I am a mushroomhead...
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Posts
718
Reaction score
0
Yeah, but you guys are great.. I got myself switching sides at every post :D
 

cly2tw

Registered User
Joined
Oct 26, 2002
Posts
5,832
Reaction score
0
For the love of pete don't any of you read stuff earlier in the thread?

I already said that I don't believe we would get past the second round with Marion. This is why I don't consider the trade a success if we do nothing but end up with a lateral move (aka not getting past the second round).

My bad to miss your earlier statement. But as the topic is to evaluate Kerr's move, the proper judgment is not to be based on the outcome alone. With any risky investment decision, you can't insure against all possible events and bad lucks. Given the prospect of status quo with Marion then, almost any move would have been a good move, not to mention the Shaq one which as it turned out now gives us a legitimate hope to win it all. That's why I say it's a 100% good move, not 70% good for the case that we get past the 2nd round and 30% bad for the case we don't.
 
OP
OP
Irish

Irish

Registered
Joined
Apr 11, 2008
Posts
2,668
Reaction score
0
Location
Arizona
My bad to miss your earlier statement. But as the topic is to evaluate Kerr's move, the proper judgment is not to be based on the outcome alone. With any risky investment decision, you can't insure against all possible events and bad lucks. Given the prospect of status quo with Marion then, almost any move would have been a good move, not to mention the Shaq one which as it turned out now gives us a legitimate hope to win it all. That's why I say it's a 100% good move, not 70% good for the case that we get past the 2nd round and 30% bad for the case we don't.

I didn't follow the debate over Shaq immediately after the trade happened, but to me the biggest issue both for and against is the length of his contract. If Shaq breaks down in the next two years, it will look like a disaster because he costs $20 million a year.

On the other hand, if they kept Marion and Banks there would be a lot of trouble due to Marion's insistence on an extension. If it was bad this year, it was all but certain that things would have turned extremely sour next year. For all of his talent, unloading Marion was becoming a necessity even if the team did not get value in return. Getting Shaq has proven to be more than just an effort to unload a troubled player.
 

CaptainInsano

Registered User
Joined
Jul 30, 2005
Posts
1,516
Reaction score
0
The suns would have still been at or close to the cap if Marion did opt, the only option would have been to swing a sign and trade. The suns basically did that early and got shaq while getting rid of banks. They basically did what they were supposed to do.

I really REALLY doubt we could have gotten a better sign and trade in the offseason, but you never know.

I'll stick with shaq, also taking into account the suns won't have banks contract on the books once the rebuilding starts, that extra 5 million in cap space can make a big difference if we are chasing a big free agent.
 

cly2tw

Registered User
Joined
Oct 26, 2002
Posts
5,832
Reaction score
0
The suns would have still been at or close to the cap if Marion did opt, the only option would have been to swing a sign and trade. The suns basically did that early and got shaq while getting rid of banks. They basically did what they were supposed to do.

I really REALLY doubt we could have gotten a better sign and trade in the offseason, but you never know.

I'll stick with shaq, also taking into account the suns won't have banks contract on the books once the rebuilding starts, that extra 5 million in cap space can make a big difference if we are chasing a big free agent.


Exactly. With Nash aging, and Amare not developing with Nash dominating the ball as fast as his potential suggests, we were doomed for at least two more years before rebuiding after Marion's contract expired and Nash's option not picked up. In other words, it'd at most one year later for rebuilding in case the Shaq move failed on the court. It's a small risk against the highly likely outlook that Shaq could contribute sufficiently to make us a much better contender than the team with Marion for at least two more seasons. That's worth taking the risk.
 

nowagimp

Registered User
Joined
Nov 2, 2005
Posts
3,912
Reaction score
0
Location
Gilbert, AZ
Exactly. With Nash aging, and Amare not developing with Nash dominating the ball as fast as his potential suggests, we were doomed for at least two more years before rebuiding after Marion's contract expired and Nash's option not picked up.


Uhhh, amare has plenty of development to do on defense, should keep him busy quite a while. With the suns trying to win a championship, that last thing they need is amare trying to develop his offense more, while his man goes undefended and crashes the oboards relentlessly.
 
Top