Why did we trade for J-Rich?

[Ninjafish]

Well you've completely changed your argument, but are spinning it like you havent noticed. So he didn't shut Kobe down, he "frustrated him."

Hmm... This is what nowagimp said one page ago.

Nobody shuts Kobe down, but a simplistic pts analysis doesnt mean much. If kobe needs 30 shots to get 34 pts and works hard. well then thats good defense on a guy like kobe. Kobe didnt even need to work too hard for the lakers to beat the suns, there was plenty of damage from his supporting cast.

Yet you keep acting like we're the ones that don't know what we're talking about. Give us one good reason why we should continue taking you seriously.

Oh man frustrating him is totally dominating! He frustrated him!

Was he frustrated in the last game we played against the Lakers? When he shot 10 from 13? Bell may have never shut him down, but he always frustrated him. He would not have shot 10 of 13 if Bell was still guarding him, period, and you should admit that.

I was all for moving D'antoni, because we clearly reached our ceiling with him.

Oh, boy. So you're one of those.

 

[mojorizen7]

Oh, boy. So you're one of those.

Please,define "those."
This oughta be good.

 

[Ninjafish]

Please,define "those."
This oughta be good.

Retards.

(Don't worry, I'm just kidding.)

(We just beat the Lakers, so I'm in a good mood now)

 

[YouJustGotSUNSD]

A dick in a good mood is still a dick. I also like how you picked out pieces of my argument with your boyfriend and completely ignored the points I made on your own banter. BTW, you also contradicted your bf's points in the post above.

Oh, I also LOVE this part.

He would not have shot 10 of 13 if Bell was still guarding him, period, and you should admit that.

I should admit to a hypothetical that you made up on the spot? Really? And you continue to question MY credibility?

Kobe took 38 shots today (more than our top 2 scorers combined), almost fouled out (but refs lets him get away with a few fouls in the 4th) and he was -11 (highest on the team). Should I make you admit to a hypothetical to show you how ludicrous you are?

Nah, I'm not a dick.

 

[Ninjafish]

A dick in a good mood is still a dick. I also like how you picked out pieces of my argument with your boyfriend and completely ignored the points I made on your own banter.

We have the same argument. All of your points are negated by the fact that you didn't understand what you were replying to.

Look at your first line to me. "First you claimed Raja shut Kobe down"

No, I didn't. In the future, if you want to be taken seriously, please learn to read.

Then you go on to talk about offensive fouls. I believe nowagimp already answered this when he said "Kobe Bryant fouled out because he was frustrated, and thats the best you can do with the greatest shooting guard since MJ. Kobe pretty much only fouls out when he's frustrated."

Why would you expect me to respond when he already explained this to you? Do you need to hear something twice before you can understand whatever is being talked about? Sorry, I thought you were smart enough to understand with one explanation. My mistake.

Since I'm not a dick, I have no urge to rub it in when someone says something foolish. I saw that you were corrected. I wasn't going to pile up on you. That would be mean. And I was in too good of a mood for that.

I should admit to a hypothetical that you made up on the spot?

Since the hypothetical is at the core of the entire argument of whether or not we missed Bell's defense in the Lakers game, if it's true that Kobe wouldn't have performed as well if he was being defended by Bell (and it is), um.. yes. Have you forgotten what we were talking about again?

Kobe took 38 shots today (more than our top 2 scorers combined), almost fouled out (but refs lets him get away with a few fouls in the 4th) and he was -11 (highest on the team). Should I make you admit to a hypothetical to show you how ludicrous you are?

If you like. I do admit that Barnes defended Kobe well, despite the 49 points. We didn't miss Bell as much yesterday. Credit has to go to Gentry's decision to start Barnes and play him over double the minutes that he played in the previous game against the Lakers. Great move. Barnes should be a permanent starter from here on out. Barnes, Hill, and Barbosa play so fantastic as starters that Gentry may have to consider taking JRich off the bench. It's hard to find any problems with the way they played yesterday. If they can keep playing like that, then I may have to stop complaining about the trade.

 

[CardsFan88]

The way I see it, we traded two guys who weren't fitting the system at that time, for a guy with a whole lot of talent. JR is a core piece, he's one of the guys you build around. When you trade multiple not as talented players to for a single very talented player, this is what you hope for.

Granted Diaw and Bell at times were great for us, but overall going forward we are better for having JR on the roster. Considering we got rid of Diaw's contract, it's even better.

Diaw also has quite a bit of talent, but very rarely did it come out for us.

Recently every trade has seem to be skewed towards saving money or what not. But I'm always for trading multiple role players for a key piece. That's one way to get better. Trade guys you can replace for a guy with a whole lot of talent that's really hard to get a hold of. (It's not to this extreme, but wouldn't you trade all of the bottom half of our roster for Lebron?) It's that line of thinking, just less than half the roster, and someone who is half the talent of Lebron.

 

[binkar]

Nobody shuts kobe down, but a simplistic pts analysis doesnt mean much. If kobe needs 30 shots to get 34 pts and works hard. well then thats good defense on a guy like kobe. Kobe didnt even need to work too hard for the lakers to beat the suns, there was plenty of damage from his supporting cast.

Just a follow-up statistic for you... Kobe shot 54% percent from the field against us (Raja) last season. That's nearly 10% higher than his season average of 46%. Look, in years past Raja frustrated Kobe which can cause him to take stupid shots, make stupid fouls etc. and thats what takes him out of his game. I will agree with yall on that. But when a guy is averages 30+ points on you a night on 54% shooting and those are both above his season averages it's hard to argue that the guy guarding him those games did a great job defensively.

Also, in LA's loss to Charlotte, Kobe was 15-28 from the field for 54% (his season average is 47%) while the rest of the team was 29-71 from the field (40%). I will give credit to Raja for "making" Kobe foul out (though I don't know he deserves it), but won't give Raja's defense the credit for the victory.

Come on guys the proof is there.

 

[elindholm]

Just a follow-up statistic for you... Kobe shot 54% percent from the field against us (Raja) last season. That's nearly 10% higher than his season average of 46%. Look, in years past Raja frustrated Kobe which can cause him to take stupid shots, make stupid fouls etc. and thats what takes him out of his game. I will agree with yall on that. But when a guy is averages 30+ points on you a night on 54% shooting and those are both above his season averages it's hard to argue that the guy guarding him those games did a great job defensively.

Come on guys the proof is there.

Prediction: Nowagimp will now ignore this evidence and instead launch a rambling diatribe about how you don't know what you're talking about and are obviously some sort of moron.

 

[Covert Rain]

Prediction: Nowagimp will now ignore this evidence and instead launch a rambling diatribe about how you don't know what you're talking about and are obviously some sort of moron.

Either that or state that it's "misinterpretation" of the facts because it doesn't support the opinion of the two loudest critics in this thread.

 

[nowagimp]

Either that or state that it's "misinterpretation" of the facts because it doesn't support the opinion of the two loudest critics in this thread.

I'll just quote jeff van gundy on the telecast

" if they had known that they were gonna play this(SSOL) style I'll bet that they would want to reconsider that trade with charlotte again."

This statement also conflicts with erics "expert" opinion that Diaw was better in the half court" I agree with JVG, eric as usual, agrees with himself.


Good enough, I'll bet van gundy knows alot more about it than you guys, LOL! I feel a hell of alot better agreeing with van gundy than any of you guys, no offense. Van gundy also said that "barnes played good defense on kobe despite the 49 pts except for the 3rd quarter(17 easy points)", and I agree. JVG: "He made him work hard". Kind of like Raja used to when he was healthy. There was a time when the suns WANTED kobe to shoot alot and score alot as his team loses at a higher % when he scores over 40, as long as he works hard. JRich was however NOT very good when matched up against kobe, and he didnt make him work to get his shots.

 

[Chaplin]

I'll just quote jeff van gundy on the telecast

" if they had known that they were gonna play this(SSOL) style I'll bet that they would want to reconsider that trade with charlotte again."


Good enough, I'll bet van gundy knows alot more about it than you guys, LOL! I feel a hell of alot better agreeing with van gundy than any of you guys, no offense. Van gundy also said that "barnes played good defense on kobe despite the 49 pts except for the 3rd quarter(17 easy points)", and I agree. JVG: "He made him work hard". Kind of like Raja used to when he was healthy. There was a time when the suns WANTED kobe to shoot alot and score alot as his team loses at a higher % when he scores over 40, as long as he works hard. JRich was however NOT very good when matched up against kobe, and he didnt make him work to get his shots.

Are you saying that Kobe had nothing but easy shots? Are you serious? Come on, I know you're just searching like crazy for ammunition, but Kobe had to work hard for his 49 points. HE TOOK 38 SHOTS! That is a high this season, not just for Kobe and the Lakers, but for the ENTIRE LEAGUE.

 

[nowagimp]

Are you saying that Kobe had nothing but easy shots? Are you serious? Come on, I know you're just searching like crazy for ammunition, but Kobe had to work hard for his 49 points. HE TOOK 38 SHOTS! That is a high this season, not just for Kobe and the Lakers, but for the ENTIRE LEAGUE.

Wow reading defecit disorder? Sometimes I wonder.

 

[Chaplin]

Wow reading defecit disorder? Sometimes I wonder.

Nice follow-up, like most of your other opinions based on facts you make up.

You said that Kobe didn't have to work for his points. I disagree.

 

[SactownSunsFan]

We traded for him because he's got excellent driving skills...

err... I guess that word is kinda taboo right now when it comes to J-Rich.

 

[nowagimp]

Nice follow-up, like most of your other opinions based on facts you make up.

You said that Kobe didn't have to work for his points. I disagree.

If you can solve this reading SRA problem, you advance to the 6th grade:

Van gundy also said that "barnes played good defense on kobe despite the 49 pts except for the 3rd quarter(17 easy points)", and I agree. JVG: "He made him work hard".

Its no wonder the USA gets its ass kicked in education.

 

[elindholm]

I missed Van Gundy saying that, but I'll agree to stipulate that it happened. (Are you sure it wasn't Jackson?) Usually I think he makes good points, but yes, I think he's wrong there. Now, if you change it to "The Suns would rethink the trade if they had known they would lose Stoudemire for the season," then yes, of course. But to say that Diaw played well under SSOL is simply revisionist history. Even if he were on the team now, he'd still be behind O'Neal as an interior option and still be behind Nash and Hill as playmakers.

One advantage of thinking for yourself is that you don't have to accept as gospel the spontaneous spew of every television talking head. I have, of course, watched the Suns a lot more carefully over the past few years than Van Gundy has.

 

[Chaplin]

I missed Van Gundy saying that, but I'll agree to stipulate that it happened. (Are you sure it wasn't Jackson?) Usually I think he makes good points, but yes, I think he's wrong there. Now, if you change it to "The Suns would rethink the trade if they had known they would lose Stoudemire for the season," then yes, of course. But to say that Diaw played well under SSOL is simply revisionist history. Even if he were on the team now, he'd still be behind O'Neal as an interior option and still be behind Nash and Hill as playmakers.

One advantage of thinking for yourself is that you don't have to accept as gospel the spontaneous spew of every television talking head.

That's just it--nowagimp thinks that regardless of whether Amare went down or not, the trade shouldn't have happened. And he's basing that entire argument on how they are playing in Charlotte right now and how they played 3 years ago for us--he is completely ignoring the last season and a half.

 

[binkar]

Prediction: Nowagimp will now ignore this evidence and instead launch a rambling diatribe about how you don't know what you're talking about and are obviously some sort of moron.

We have a winner! You proved to be absolutely right!

 

[binkar]

I'll just quote jeff van gundy on the telecast

" if they had known that they were gonna play this(SSOL) style I'll bet that they would want to reconsider that trade with charlotte again."

This statement also conflicts with erics "expert" opinion that Diaw was better in the half court" I agree with JVG, eric as usual, agrees with himself.


Good enough, I'll bet van gundy knows alot more about it than you guys, LOL! I feel a hell of alot better agreeing with van gundy than any of you guys, no offense. Van gundy also said that "barnes played good defense on kobe despite the 49 pts except for the 3rd quarter(17 easy points)", and I agree. JVG: "He made him work hard". Kind of like Raja used to when he was healthy. There was a time when the suns WANTED kobe to shoot alot and score alot as his team loses at a higher % when he scores over 40, as long as he works hard. JRich was however NOT very good when matched up against kobe, and he didnt make him work to get his shots.

You are still ignoring the facts. Kobe shoots 54% against Raja almost 10% more than his average. Explain to me how that is a positive please.

Please tell me your only leg to stand on now is not "I would rather agree with Van Gundy than you guys!". Come on man that's weak. You yourself said that in the SSOL system with Amare being healthy it would be hard for Diaw to produce anywhere near 9 million dollars worth on the floor. Diaw and Bell have been in the SSOL system the last 2 years and that's when Diaw was considered one of the most overpaid players in the game.

And can you please stop playing the childish "you read worse than a sixth grader" cards etc. It's all getting pretty silly and ridiculous.

Please don't get me wrong I hate this argument because A. I hate the Lakers more than any team in professional sports (except maybe the Spurs) and B. I can not stand Kobe Bryant. So doing a statistical analysis on how Kobe scorches my favorite team more than average is miserable and annoying. But facts are facts, and stats are evidence so I can't disagree with them regardless if Jeff Van Gundy told me to.

 

[KloD]

I'll just quote jeff van gundy on the telecast

" if they had known that they were gonna play this(SSOL) style I'll bet that they would want to reconsider that trade with charlotte again."

This statement also conflicts with erics "expert" opinion that Diaw was better in the half court" I agree with JVG, eric as usual, agrees with himself.


Good enough, I'll bet van gundy knows alot more about it than you guys, LOL! I feel a hell of alot better agreeing with van gundy than any of you guys, no offense. Van gundy also said that "barnes played good defense on kobe despite the 49 pts except for the 3rd quarter(17 easy points)", and I agree. JVG: "He made him work hard". Kind of like Raja used to when he was healthy. There was a time when the suns WANTED kobe to shoot alot and score alot as his team loses at a higher % when he scores over 40, as long as he works hard. JRich was however NOT very good when matched up against kobe, and he didnt make him work to get his shots.

<sigh> Again... you're wrong. If you are going to quote someone, at least get the quote close to correct. I don't recall the exact words he used, but he didn't say anything about the style in that quote. What he said was, if they knew that would be without Amare he bets they wish they could take back the trade. At the time he was discussing the lack of bigs for the Suns. You have a severe case of hearing what you want to hear my friend.

Perhaps if someone still has this game on their DVR, they can give the exact quote. Doesn't matter though, Van Gundy is known for saying all sorts of stupid crap, the guy's a major asshat.

 

[nowagimp]

<sigh> Again... you're wrong. If you are going to quote someone, at least get the quote close to correct. I don't recall the exact words he used, but he didn't say anything about the style in that quote. What he said was, if they knew that would be without Amare he bets they wish they could take back the trade. At the time he was discussing the lack of bigs for the Suns. You have a severe case of hearing what you want to hear my friend.

Perhaps if someone still has this game on their DVR, they can give the exact quote. Doesn't matter though, Van Gundy is known for saying all sorts of stupid crap, the guy's a major asshat.

First it was a long rant from van gundy, something about the suns won 54 games with him at PF a few years back. Could be that van gundy meant now that amare went down. This was kinda what I stated in post #108 in this thread a week ago.


"I admit the suns couldnt find a way to utilize Diaws talents that was worth 9M per, .... expect perhaps now after amare went down. That JRich trade made the suns weaker up front, alot weaker. I like JRich, but the suns needed a big in return for Diaw given Robin Lopez status as a poor mans greg ostertag."

As far as misquoting people, please find where I made any comment about Raja locking down kobe, and yet ... the whiners here quoted it. IF I misquoted van gundy it wasnt so blatant as "locking down kobe", that is assinine.

As far as your criticisms of van gundy, you(nor I) surely couldnt hold a match to what he knows about NBA basketball.

 

[YouJustGotSUNSD]

I think everyone on this board would agree that had we knew Amare's eye was about to fall off, we would like to have Diaw in our starting lineup. This is called stating the obvious, not fortifying your argument.

Thats not a valid argument nor the discussion at hand. Youre deflecting from the primary topic to avoid being called out for your silly claims.

 

[KloD]

First it was a long rant from van gundy, something about the suns won 54 games with him at PF a few years back. Could be that van gundy meant now that amare went down. This was kinda what I stated in post #108 in this thread a week ago.


"I admit the suns couldnt find a way to utilize Diaws talents that was worth 9M per, .... expect perhaps now after amare went down. That JRich trade made the suns weaker up front, alot weaker. I like JRich, but the suns needed a big in return for Diaw given Robin Lopez status as a poor mans greg ostertag."

In hindsight, sure it would be great to have another big guy who can play around. I don't believe that big should be Diaw with this current roster.

As far as misquoting people, please find where I made any comment about Raja locking down kobe, and yet ... the whiners here quoted it. IF I misquoted van gundy it wasnt so blatant as "locking down kobe", that is assinine.

I did quote the word in my first post, but it was used by one of your hindsight buddies earlier in the thread. I was wrong there just as you were calling me a hater. I've never said anything that could be taken as hateful towards Diaw or Bell. I just believe the trade to be a good one and would do it again right now if I was able to. Bell was not playing well, he surely wasn't putting up the effort and numbers he is now and if that was simply because he had issues with Porter... than I'm thrilled he's gone. I'm a team guy, if he isn't a team guy than I don't want him here. Boris is a talented big guy who will be great mixed with a different group of guys, what he could offer this group was nowhere close to being worth $9 mil.
I believe Amare and Jason to be a better building block then Amare and Boris.

As far as your criticisms of van gundy, you(nor I) surely couldnt hold a match to what he knows about NBA basketball.

Of course we couldn't, BUT that doesn't mean everything he states is correct. Van Gundy loves to pass his opinion off as fact. I'd bet a $100 he never even concidered the roll Diaw played in his good season with the Suns.

What he, yourself, and the other only look at stats folks fail to remember is that Diaw's one good year with the Suns, he played center, not PF. Our PF's, Tim T and Marion camped out on the 3 pt line. Diaw couldn't play with Amare, he would have the same problem with Shaq. Unless the Suns had planned to build the team around Boris rather than Amare, they made the right trade.

 

[Covert Rain]

That's just it--nowagimp thinks that regardless of whether Amare went down or not, the trade shouldn't have happened. And he's basing that entire argument on how they are playing in Charlotte right now and how they played 3 years ago for us--he is completely ignoring the last season and a half.

And then some but he can't let the facts get in the way.

We have a winner! You proved to be absolutely right!

 

[nowagimp]

That's just it--nowagimp thinks that regardless of whether Amare went down or not, the trade shouldn't have happened.

No, not quite, what I think is that IF the suns play SSOL, they were better off with boris and raja. In the porter slow down game, JRich gives them an option at SG that is a big upgrade over Raja. In the SSOL style, Bells inability to dribble penetrate wasnt as big a liability, and with Diaw they have more quality depth up front when amare or shaq got into foul trouble. I dont like Lou for one on one D at the PF, he defends that positon at 19 PER against other teams scrubs mostly. Lou is a nice bench player who has admirable hustle and he does a nice job on help defense, but straight up at the PF he's weaker than amare. Diaw on the other hand is a decent PF defensively, better than both and dudley by alot. If the suns are going to run and play some defense they need the depth, and the trade hurt that depth. I think that LB would have displaced Raja this year at the starting '2'. The suns bench got weaker with the trade and with amare and shaq, two guys that have been injured multiple times over the last 3 years, it might have been expected that the suns would have an injury there. And if not, you just cant expect to play shaq for so many regular season games and then have him rested for the playoffs. If gooden were healthy and the suns were able to land him, that would alleviate the depth problem up front considerably. Stromile swift put up awful stats with the freaking grizzlies and the work is that he just doesnt have a fire anymore. If you think diaw is lazy, wait until stro hits the floor. Right now I just dont think the suns can rebound well enough with barnes and hill up front against most teams. But who knows, if matt barnes can rebound like he did against the lakers, I will gladly be wrong.