Who will the Suns draft at #13?

[sunsfan88]

I think it's HILARIOUS how a thread about the draft turned into a thread about the officiating.

 

[Phrazbit]

okay, I have some real problems with this. First of all, I don't blame Divac one bit for his "flopping". He shouldn't have had to flop. How else are you supposed to effectively guard somebody who is bigger and stronger than you and just keeps running into you until they are a few feet from the basket or you get called for a foul? Sure he exaggerated the contact a lot of time, but more often than not it was the only way to get the referees to blow the damn whistle.

The only guys that really, really piss me off with the flopping are Manu, Scola, and Reggie Evans who flop regularly when there isn't even any contact. I think the only way to really stop flopping this for the referees to watch video and recognize who the worst offenders are. Then they have to be very disciplined about calling fouls "drawn" by those players. I don't really see how you can make flopping a technical porn discipline people who flop outside of what I just mentioned.

I just think charging, palming, and the overall inconsistency in the way fouls are called from game to game and player to player are much bigger problems. I don't include traveling because while everybody complains about traveling IMO they are much better about calling it now than they were 10-20-30 years ago. I mean Michael Jordan traveled without getting called for it more than the top three players today combined. I also can't tell you how many times I've read or heard people complain about traveling when it was not a travel.

Joe

Divac didnt only flop against Shaq, he was an equal opportunity flopper.

But its really gotten out of hand, as much as its spread around the league you still have european players taking it to whole new levels. Dirk had a few years where he was hitting the floor after every shot he took, even if no one made a contest. He finally eased up on that garbage but I assume its only because it was killing Dallas in transition when he didnt get calls. Manu has taken flopping to a near art-form. As good as he is at several aspects of the game his best talent might be his ability to draw bogus fouls.

Another aspect of the soccer style mindset is guys laying on the ground acting like they've been cleaved with an axe after fouls. Hopping up after a contact used to be a point of pride in the NBA, dont let the competition know something hurt. Now guys do it just to sell the play. It screws up the pacing of games, especially late.

The most pathetic I've seen in the playoffs was Gallinari on Denver trying to draw an offensive foul late in game 4. It was a 2 or 3 point game at the time, LA had the ball, Gallo gets screened and hits the floor like someone clocked him with a chair and the moron just LAYS there after not getting the whistle, replays showed how blatant the flop was (he was holding his face... but the contact was in the shoulder/chest area), the Lakers take advantage of a free 4 on 5, work the ball around and end up with a wide open 3, it hits game over. If that was a Suns player I would have torn my hair out.

The NHL has a rarely called penalty against flopping, soccer does too. The NBA needs to make the extremely obvious flops count as a dive foul on the flopper. And in the cases of a play like when James Harden faked being elbowed by Tyson Chandler and drew a flagrant, the player should be fined.

And as for charging, I agree with others, they need to revise the rule. The part about the defender needing to be set before the offensive player leaves his feet is almost never factored in. In these plays where guys are just jumping in right front of someone going full speed but "setting their feet" for a split second should not be offensive fouls. It not only goes against the spirit of the rule but its a really dangerous play, especially when these guys are getting undercut right at the rim. I realize it will be yet another judgment call for the refs to contend with but I think its more straight forward than this garbage of trying to see if a players feet are "set" for a millisecond while surrounded by players in traffic. And its hard to imagine they could screw it up as often as they do current charging calls.

And the Suns should draft Ross.

 

[slinslin]

I think it's HILARIOUS how a thread about the draft turned into a thread about the officiating.

no surprise given that the freaking Suns organization once again excludes their fans entirely from the draft process for the 8th straight year.

it is a joke and a way to lose more fans not regain fans.

15 days to the draft and we didn't have a single article about the Suns , their workouts or anythinge else. Apparently this year even the local media is excluded from the workouts entirely.

Not sure why Paul Coro is still the Suns beat writer. It is about 2 times a year he comes up with a worthwhile article.

 

[95pro]

i got tired of chalmers flops last night, i believe it was chalmers. one where the announcer said "looks like he gots hit in the kneck", then several others when fisher was guarding him. was pretty funny.

 

[AzStevenCal]

I've held the opinion for years that a defender be required to make a play on the ball in order to get a charge call. Then you don't have concern yourself about where the offensive player was in his action - if the defender is in front of him long enough to be able to jump up and contest the shot, then he was there in time. It simplifies the whole question and its visual - and happening right where the ref should be looking. Jumping in front of a driving offensive player is always a foul if you don't contest the shot. They should shrink the charge circle about in half so the defense gets a little break to compensate.

The other thing that is hurting the game is not calling moving picks according to the rules... there are hardly any picks but moving picks now.

You're right, this is a big one. There's probably no putting the genie back in the bottle but I'd also like to see them revisit all the traveling/illegal dribble rules and interpretations. They still allow a lot of carries and most of the fancy spin moves are nothing more than traveling. No player in the league should be allowed to drive a dozen feet to the hoop without putting the ball on the floor.

Steve

 

[overseascardfan]

no surprise given that the freaking Suns organization once again excludes their fans entirely from the draft process for the 8th straight year.

it is a joke and a way to lose more fans not regain fans.

15 days to the draft and we didn't have a single article about the Suns , their workouts or anythinge else. Apparently this year even the local media is excluded from the workouts entirely.

Not sure why Paul Coro is still the Suns beat writer. It is about 2 times a year he comes up with a worthwhile article.

Article in todays AZ Republic says PHX has brought in and are looking at C Fab Melo & PF Andrew Nicholson. Article mentions that both are considered late 1st rounders but that their stocks are rising. I think PHX may be looking to acquire another pick. Coro mentions that PHX is likely looking for a G rather than frontcourt help.

 

[Russ Smith]

Nope, don't watch AAU ball, but I don't see a reduction in charges leading to the NBA being a layup line either. AAU ball from what I read isn't just bad defense, it's completely indifferent.

As Joe said, "Call an offensive foul if the offensive player just rams right through a defensive player or drops his shoulder into or whatever. Don't reward defenders for jumping in front of offensive players."




Agree with all this.

But getting in front of the driving player before he's left his feet IS good defense. If the driver is so out of control he can't stop or change direction that's on him, not the defender.

I don't like flopping or stepping in as the guy is in the air, but goood solid defense includes getting in the path of a driving player. That play last night where Collison did it and got called for a block, it's bang bang but looked to me like he was there. earlier I think it was Battier that drew a charge when the replay showed he was clearly still moving his body forward into the offensive guy, that's supposed to be a block.

I hate the guys who jump in as the guy is leaving his feet or already left his feet that's not only late, it's dangerous. And I hate the guys who lean in bump and then fall back flopping. But just getting in front of the guy with the ball has to be legal or you can't play defense.

AAU is an extreme example of what I'm talking about, I've actually seen arguments between players and coaches during games because some kid took a charge. It's outright hilarious but it's because there is some unspoken agreement that offense gets you a scholarship so they do everything they can to promote offense. It's like the old baseball saying about why Dominican players swing at every pitch, "walks don't get you off the island."

Done correctly it's actually fun to watch. There was a play last night where Westbrook hit Ibaka and a pick and roll, Battier jumped in to draw the charge but Ibaka made a jumpstop and kicked it out to Durant who stuck a 3. Just perfect basketball actually by both teams. The ball rotated faster than the defense could but both sides played it perfectly. Of course Battier had to ruin it at the end by flopping but they didn't call it.

 

[Russ Smith]

Well, you can't really get away without some kind of charge call. But, it used to be that you had to establish position before the offensive player committed to that spot and that apparently fell by the wayside years ago. Now, they often allow them to take the position away from the offense even when the offensive player is in the air on his way to that spot. It's absurd. If you're a secondary defender you should always be required to fully own the spot and remain stationary prior to the offensive player beginning his move.

Steve

Define beginning his move? if you mean before he leaves his feet I agree, if you mean before he starts to drive, you just outlawed defense. These guys are too athletic.

 

[AzStevenCal]

Define beginning his move? if you mean before he leaves his feet I agree, if you mean before he starts to drive, you just outlawed defense. These guys are too athletic.

I mean when he physically commits to that spot. If a player is running at full speed and then begins to jump, he's committed to that spot even before he leaves the ground.

Steve

 

[Mainstreet]

Charging can also be when both the offensive and defensive player are in motion and the offensive player continues to drive into the defensive player who is backing up, essentially running over the defensive player. It is called but not enough to my liking.

 

[Chaplin]

Remember this play?


Nash tried taking a charge on Kobe in the playoffs. Kobe jumped so high that his shins hit Nash's shoulder. Nash was called for a foul, and every Suns fans complained it was a block. It should have been a no-call. It sucked that Kobe dunked on Nash, but I'd much rather see a player make an athletic offensive play like that than watch a defensive player fall on the floor and get bailed out. You'd think the NBA would want the same. The charge call kills so many athletic plays around the rim.

Hmm, I know this isn't pertinent, but is that the play that led to Raja clotheslining Kobe? I think it might be.

 

[slinslin]

Article in todays AZ Republic says PHX has brought in and are looking at C Fab Melo & PF Andrew Nicholson. Article mentions that both are considered late 1st rounders but that their stocks are rising. I think PHX may be looking to acquire another pick. Coro mentions that PHX is likely looking for a G rather than frontcourt help.

Yeah well Coro's articles lately include absolutely no information worth reading.

Seems like most of what he is writing is just copy & paste.

 

[Mainstreet]

Hmm, I know this isn't pertinent, but is that the play that led to Raja clotheslining Kobe? I think it might be.

It wasn't one play that led Raja to taking Kobe down. It was Kobe's persistent elbowing Raja in the face with nary a call from the referee. Finally Raja reached his boiling point. The referees swallowing their whistle (on Kobe throwing elbows against Raja) still irritates me. Also Raja seemed never to be the same defensive player after that. It took the edge off his defense.

 

[Chaplin]

It wasn't one play that led Raja to taking Kobe down. It was Kobe's persistent elbowing Raja in the face with nary a call from the referee. Finally Raja reached his boiling point. The referees swallowing their whistle (on Kobe throwing elbows against Raja) still irritates me. Also Raja seemed never to be the same defensive player after that. It took the edge off his defense.

True, but I think that play was the tipping point because it was his best buddy Nash that he ran over and dunked on.

 

[Errntknght]

I mean when he physically commits to that spot. If a player is running at full speed and then begins to jump, he's committed to that spot even before he leaves the ground.

Steve

This argument has been going on for sixty years that I know of - the definition of the offensive player being committed plus whether or not the two players met the definition in particular instances, even with slow motion video its hard to watch both guys at once.

No one seems to have even considered my suggestion about the defender having to make a play on the ball to avoid a blocking call. Essentially this uses the laws of physics to decide whether he was there in time - if he can jump and contest the shot then he must have jumped very shortly after the shooter so he had to be there in time. He's certainly not going to jump before the shooter begins his jumping motion regardless of how long he was in position.

Another thing I like about it is that it rewards defenders for doing what they are supposed to do - attempt to make it hard for shooters to get a clear shot.


A more radical approach to all the problems with officiating is to turn the clock back about forty years and remove all technical definitions of infractions and trust the referees to call the game according the spirit of the game. At the time I thought introducing the technical definitions was a good move but coaches used them as guidelines as to how far they could push the limits on both offense and defense. On top of that they could argue calls on the basis of the tech. definitions.

There was plenty of wrangling about the refs calls in the 'good old days' but it was nothing like it is today - everyone knew that virtually every call was a judgement call so they knew they didn't have any basis to argue, except questioning the refs judgement. Too much of that and you seriously irked the refs. I wouldn't say the refereeing was better in those days because home teams got a significant edge in most games - there were a few refs that didn't give teams a home court advantage, very few. (Joey Crawford was one of them - I hate to admit it now but he was my favorite ref back then for that reason.) The refs might not have been better - they weren't so heavily screened and trained then - but they were less intrusive and the amount of haggling was much less so the games were more enjoyable to watch.

The theory behind just trusting the refs is that they can focus on the overall play if they don't have to stay aware of too many technicalities. We have extreme cases now like Violet Palmer who never seems to have a clue about whats happening in the game, though she'll spot traveling and carrying the ball all over the place. (To her credit she does get right most of the time.)

 

[leclerc]

What I want to see is the NBA take back the game a bit. The palming and carrying is out of hand, travelling is rampant, for all the Euro step praise out there the fact is half the guys who do it walk everytime they do it. Stop rewarding flops, stop rewarding offensive players who drop the ball down and then intentionally rip up into the defender who's not left his feet and just has his hands up(as taught). There's too much playing to the refs instead of playing the game.

And that's one of the reasons I've moved my focus to the NFL the last five years. In addition off course to the fact that it's pure brilliance.

NFL rules.

Go Suns!

 

[leclerc]

I blame soccer and the Europeans (namely Vlade Divac) for bringing that crap over to the States. Because it's rewarded we have to watch Scola and Ginobli flopping around like fish, acting more than playing basketball.

The refs need to stop rewarding players that fall on the ground. If they didn't clearly see the action that caused the fall, it should be a no-call. Players caught flopping on the court should be T'd up and fined afterward. Opposing teams should be able to submit egregious flopping and acting to a committee to review for fines/suspensions.

Ginobli is so pathetic and Scola is not much better. I would love it if they got the calls their "play" deserved. What-a-burger fines Manu Ginobli $ 1,000 for each flop (to Suns charity). That would be sweet.

 

[leclerc]

It wasn't one play that led Raja to taking Kobe down. It was Kobe's persistent elbowing Raja in the face with nary a call from the referee. Finally Raja reached his boiling point. The referees swallowing their whistle (on Kobe throwing elbows against Raja) still irritates me. Also Raja seemed never to be the same defensive player after that. It took the edge off his defense.

I'm so sick and tired of the elbows Kobe throws when he squares up to the basket (holding the ball above his head and clearing space with the elbows), and when he tries to establish position on the block. Just because he's a "superstar" he never gets called for it. If you sell a bunch of jerseys then the refs don't do anything. It's a form of corruption baby.

OT: I think we should get help at the guard position this year. Looks like there's some pretty good SG talent available. Not sure if we should take a chance on PJIII or not...

 

[Russ Smith]

This argument has been going on for sixty years that I know of - the definition of the offensive player being committed plus whether or not the two players met the definition in particular instances, even with slow motion video its hard to watch both guys at once.

No one seems to have even considered my suggestion about the defender having to make a play on the ball to avoid a blocking call. Essentially this uses the laws of physics to decide whether he was there in time - if he can jump and contest the shot then he must have jumped very shortly after the shooter so he had to be there in time. He's certainly not going to jump before the shooter begins his jumping motion regardless of how long he was in position.

.)

My problem is you're assuming that making a play on the ball constitutes good defense, and not making a play on the ball doesn't. There's tons of situations where just being in front of the guy is enough to make him miss or turn the ball over.

Last night LeBron kept hooking his man in the low post. The man often was making no play on the ball so in your case can they not call a foul on LeBron for the hook?

For me, rules against charges etc are essentially saying offense is better than defense. I don't like flopping at all, but I do appreciate a good defensive player so I would hate to see rules that make it harder to actually play defense.

Again though, if they just enforced the travels and carries and moving screens, the charge/block would be less of a problem because offensive guys wouldn't get to that spot nearly as easily IMO.

 

[Phrazbit]

My problem is you're assuming that making a play on the ball constitutes good defense, and not making a play on the ball doesn't. There's tons of situations where just being in front of the guy is enough to make him miss or turn the ball over.

Last night LeBron kept hooking his man in the low post. The man often was making no play on the ball so in your case can they not call a foul on LeBron for the hook?

For me, rules against charges etc are essentially saying offense is better than defense. I don't like flopping at all, but I do appreciate a good defensive player so I would hate to see rules that make it harder to actually play defense.

Again though, if they just enforced the travels and carries and moving screens, the charge/block would be less of a problem because offensive guys wouldn't get to that spot nearly as easily IMO.

I dont mind them calling charges in certain situations but these plays where guys are just jumping right infront of someone going full speed are absurd. They're dangerous and they go against the spirit of rule.

The play you brought up is a good example of an offensive foul that does not get called enough. Offenders using their free arm to just shove a defender out of their way. That was a patented Shaq move too, back a guy down and while turning towards the hoop use the off arm to hurl the defender out of his way.

 

[Russ Smith]

I dont mind them calling charges in certain situations but these plays where guys are just jumping right infront of someone going full speed are absurd. They're dangerous and they go against the spirit of rule.

The play you brought up is a good example of an offensive foul that does not get called enough. Offenders using their free arm to just shove a defender out of their way. That was a patented Shaq move too, back a guy down and while turning towards the hoop use the off arm to hurl the defender out of his way.

Agreed the jump in ones are not only not supposed to be charges, as you said they're dangerous.

I think the problem wtih the circle as the TV guys like to point out is refs got lazy, they call everything inside the circle a block, and everything outside a charge, whether the defender is there or not.

IIRC in college the rule was such that if the PRIMARY defender is inside the circle it can still be a charge, it's only the help defender that has to be outside. Not sure if that's the case in the NBA I forget. but in college I think I saw one case since that rule went in where someone got the charge call inside the circle because it was the primary defender. The refs either missed that part or they just don't care because it's easier to call it inside circle block, outside circle charge.

But then these are the same people who got the held ball rule because they can't throw the ball up straight and won't blow the whistle to re jump when they made a bad toss.

 

[elindholm]

My problem is you're assuming that making a play on the ball constitutes good defense, and not making a play on the ball doesn't. There's tons of situations where just being in front of the guy is enough to make him miss or turn the ball over.

Thank you, I was about to make a similar point, which is that playing defense is often about denying the offensive player access to a particular spot, rather than "making a play on the ball" specifically. In fact thinking about "the ball" as the defense's point of focus encourages playing defense with your hands and arms instead of with your feet.

I was never anything more than a terrible player, but I remember my first junior-high school coach telling me, when playing man-on defense, don't look at the ball or the offensive player's arms or eyes, just look at his midsection. He can't go anywhere without his midsection, and you can see what you need to in your periphery to challenge the shot when that time comes. And even in pickup games where I was overmatched in pretty much every way, I was able to play pretty good defense by not biting on fakes or getting distracted by a bunch of Globetrotters wizardry with the ball.

The point is, establishing "making a play on the ball" as a litmus test for proper defense is contrary to some pretty fundamental defensive principles.

As for the offensive player who's going so quickly that he is committed to a particular path even before leaving his feet, there's a term for that, and it's called "being out of control." I see no reason whatsoever to reward offensive players for that. Okay, strike that, I see one reason, which is that it would cut down on injuries, but that wouldn't be enough to justify the policy.

 

[AzStevenCal]

This argument has been going on for sixty years that I know of - the definition of the offensive player being committed plus whether or not the two players met the definition in particular instances, even with slow motion video its hard to watch both guys at once.

No one seems to have even considered my suggestion about the defender having to make a play on the ball to avoid a blocking call. Essentially this uses the laws of physics to decide whether he was there in time - if he can jump and contest the shot then he must have jumped very shortly after the shooter so he had to be there in time. He's certainly not going to jump before the shooter begins his jumping motion regardless of how long he was in position.

Another thing I like about it is that it rewards defenders for doing what they are supposed to do - attempt to make it hard for shooters to get a clear shot.


A more radical approach to all the problems with officiating is to turn the clock back about forty years and remove all technical definitions of infractions and trust the referees to call the game according the spirit of the game. At the time I thought introducing the technical definitions was a good move but coaches used them as guidelines as to how far they could push the limits on both offense and defense. On top of that they could argue calls on the basis of the tech. definitions.

There was plenty of wrangling about the refs calls in the 'good old days' but it was nothing like it is today - everyone knew that virtually every call was a judgement call so they knew they didn't have any basis to argue, except questioning the refs judgement. Too much of that and you seriously irked the refs. I wouldn't say the refereeing was better in those days because home teams got a significant edge in most games - there were a few refs that didn't give teams a home court advantage, very few. (Joey Crawford was one of them - I hate to admit it now but he was my favorite ref back then for that reason.) The refs might not have been better - they weren't so heavily screened and trained then - but they were less intrusive and the amount of haggling was much less so the games were more enjoyable to watch.

The theory behind just trusting the refs is that they can focus on the overall play if they don't have to stay aware of too many technicalities. We have extreme cases now like Violet Palmer who never seems to have a clue about whats happening in the game, though she'll spot traveling and carrying the ball all over the place. (To her credit she does get right most of the time.)

Although I agree with much of what you say here I'm with Russ on your idea. There's already too much of that swipe at the ball crap that passes for defense these days, I'd rather go the other way. Do they no longer teach kids that you play defense with your feet first? It sure seems like it's a lost concept.

I do like the idea of going back to basics though. The refs used to focus on whether or not a player had gained an unfair advantage and if so, foul and if not, play on. This concept applied to the offense and the defense and it made for a more watchable game.

I was also a Crawford fan up until the league punished him for the run-in with Duncan. Joey was one of the few refs that wouldn't bow down to Duncan like he was the second coming of Naismith. Tim's antics were clearly intended to be disrespectful of Crawford and the league failed to support his actions. He's been a joke of a referee ever since and IMO the refs in general haven't been the same as a result of the league bending over for Duncan and Pop.

Steve

 

[Mainstreet]

The Suns have closed workouts to the media so not much is coming out about potential draftees. Some of them the Suns might draft if they get another first or second round pick. Some others appear to be the FA type.

Anyway from Paul Coro's article at azcentral dated 6-12-12, here are some of the players that are in the Suns first workout group. See link below.

Fab Melo, (Syracuse) 7' center
Andrew Nicholson, (St. Bonaventure) 6'10" power forward
Alex Young (Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis) 6-6 shooting guard
Zack Rosen (Penn) 6-1 PG,
Chris Johnson (Dayton) 6-6 shooting guard
Ashton Gibbs (Pittsburgh) 6-3 point guard

Any thoughts on what the Suns are thinking?

http://www.azcentral.com/sports/sun...-men-get-look-phoenix-suns-draft-workout.html

 

[Matt L]

The Suns have closed workouts to the media so not much is coming out about potential draftees. Some of them the Suns might draft if they get another first or second round pick. Some others appear to be the FA type.

Anyway from Paul Coro's article at azcentral dated 6-12-12, here are some of the players that are in the Suns first workout group. See link below.

Fab Melo, (Syracuse) 7' center
Andrew Nicholson, (St. Bonaventure) 6'10" power forward
Alex Young (Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis) 6-6 shooting guard
Zack Rosen (Penn) 6-1 PG,
Chris Johnson (Dayton) 6-6 shooting guard
Ashton Gibbs (Pittsburgh) 6-3 point guard

Any thoughts on what the Suns are thinking?

http://www.azcentral.com/sports/sun...-men-get-look-phoenix-suns-draft-workout.html

Not excited about any of those names