Would you rather. . .

[JCSunsfan]

1. Have Grant Hill or Shawn Marion? I do not see us getting both. At this point, I vote for Hill, as long as we don't pay too much. I think he will be better in the locker room and better for developing our younger players. He also can move to a backup role more easily.

2. Have Chandler or Frye. I hate to say this, but I think I would prefer Frye. Chandler is by far the better player, but he comes with much higher risks. Frye is fairly healthy and will have a much, much smaller price tag.

3. Have Richardson or Barnes? Its a moot point. It will be Richardson. But it is an interesting question. I vote Richardson by the way. We probably should quit thinking about his contract and enjoy the contribution he makes to the team.

4. Have Mike DAntoni or Kerr as a GM? To tell you the truth, I like DAntoni as a GM less than I like Kerr. The problem is ownership, but DAntoni is a coach, not a GM. A coach focuses on winning now. A GM has to think about the future.

 

[Chris_Sanders]

1. Marion. He is the better player and Hill playing an entire season was a fluke compared to the rest of his career.

2. Chandler. Again I want talent.

3. Richardson. See above.

4. Neither option matters as both are hampered by ownership.

 

[ASUCHRIS]

1. Marion. He is the better player and Hill playing an entire season was a fluke compared to the rest of his career.

2. Chandler. Again I want talent.

3. Richardson. See above.

4. Neither option matters as both are hampered by ownership.

Co-sign.

 

[da_suns_fan]

1. Have Grant Hill or Shawn Marion? I do not see us getting both. At this point, I vote for Hill, as long as we don't pay too much. I think he will be better in the locker room and better for developing our younger players. He also can move to a backup role more easily.

2. Have Chandler or Frye. I hate to say this, but I think I would prefer Frye. Chandler is by far the better player, but he comes with much higher risks. Frye is fairly healthy and will have a much, much smaller price tag.

3. Have Richardson or Barnes? Its a moot point. It will be Richardson. But it is an interesting question. I vote Richardson by the way. We probably should quit thinking about his contract and enjoy the contribution he makes to the team.

4. Have Mike DAntoni or Kerr as a GM? To tell you the truth, I like DAntoni as a GM less than I like Kerr. The problem is ownership, but DAntoni is a coach, not a GM. A coach focuses on winning now. A GM has to think about the future.

1) Hill

2) Chandler

3) Tough one but I would pick Barnes. At least he didnt kill our cap and wasnt untradeable. And LB does EVERYTHING Richardson does only better.

4) Oooh...tough one. Someone who is incompetent (D'Antoni) or someone who just does whatever the owner wants (Kerr).

I mean..which was worse: Signing Marcus Banks or trading for J-Rich? Giving Boris the big contract or trading for Shaquille Oneal? Selling off draft picks or giving them away as a bribe for Kurt Thomas?

Too tough to call.

 

[Hat]

1. Marion. He is the better player and Hill playing an entire season was a fluke compared to the rest of his career.

2. Chandler. Again I want talent.

3. Richardson. See above.

4. Neither option matters as both are hampered by ownership.

Agreed, but I'm going to have go with Hill over Marion on this one.

no what i'm sayin'?

 

[elindholm]

1. Hill. Class is more important at this point than, uh, whatever it is that Marion brings to the table.

2. Chandler. The risk is two years at most.

3. Heavens above, Richardson for sure. Barnes was awful. The only reason to pick Barnes would be if you'd simply cut him and eat the salary, so if you view Richardson as a negative, you could go that route.

4. Kerr. Both are incompetent, but D'Antoni is also stubborn. Kerr is beginning to show some evidence of learning from his mistakes.

 

[Duke of Oysters]

You must be registered for see images

1. Have Grant Hill or Shawn Marion? I do not see us getting both. At this point, I vote for Hill, as long as we don't pay too much. I think he will be better in the locker room and better for developing our younger players. He also can move to a backup role more easily.

2. Have Chandler or Frye. I hate to say this, but I think I would prefer Frye. Chandler is by far the better player, but he comes with much higher risks. Frye is fairly healthy and will have a much, much smaller price tag.

3. Have Richardson or Barnes? Its a moot point. It will be Richardson. But it is an interesting question. I vote Richardson by the way. We probably should quit thinking about his contract and enjoy the contribution he makes to the team.

4. Have Mike DAntoni or Kerr as a GM? To tell you the truth, I like DAntoni as a GM less than I like Kerr. The problem is ownership, but DAntoni is a coach, not a GM. A coach focuses on winning now. A GM has to think about the future.

1. Hill - Better locker room presence. However, if given the choice I would spend the money on a big guy instead. I'd be OK with just signing Gortat and seeing what kind of team we would become.

2. A healthy Chandler

3. I would lean toward Barnes only because he has something more to prove.

4. D'Antoni. Even though we may have not agreed with his decisions, he was more decisive in his decisions

 

[AzKarl]

Suns Front office does not seem to have a plan

When Shaq was traded why was there no press conference to state what was happening with Wallace and the 2 throw ins on the deal? We should be under the luxury tax with the disposal of these folks shouldn't we? The Suns appear reactionary and clueless and as a fan since 1968 I am disgusted.

 

[Skumbag]

1. Marion -- we keep Amare

2. Chandler -- if we keep Amare and get Marion

3a. JRich -- if we move Amare (give him the rock and let him show us what he can do)
3b. Barnes -- If we keep Amare (cuts cap and Barbs moves to starter)

4. D'Antoni -- D'antoni brought anger and sorrow from losing to the Spurs. Kerr brought us all to recognize where the remote was to change the channel

 

[joshstmarie]

please just rebuild this mess.

 

[mojorizen7]

1. Clark
2. Chandler
3. Barnes
4. Kerr

 

[nashman]

Marion with all his whining is still better than Grant Hill at this point in their careers
Chandler
JRich
and Kerr we don't have any option on!

 

[JCSunsfan]

I would rather have Clark/Hill than Marion/Clark. Hill can slide to the reserve role and be a team guy. Marion will stunt the development of Clark. Hill can also start if Clark needs time.

I don't think there is much chance of Marion coming here. I don't think he wants to.

 

[dodie53]

1. marion
2. chandler
3. barnes
4. DA

 

[JCSunsfan]

1. marion
2. chandler
3. barnes
4. DA

Ha, we agree 0%.

 

[Mainstreet]

4. Have Mike DAntoni or Kerr as a GM? To tell you the truth, I like DAntoni as a GM less than I like Kerr. The problem is ownership, but DAntoni is a coach, not a GM. A coach focuses on winning now. A GM has to think about the future.

I don't think this is fair comparison for DA. DA was a GM in name only for one year. DA was strictly a coach that was thrust into the GM position to await the arrival of Kerr.

Griffin was the GM behind the scene for that year and he is the one that is responsible for the signing of Banks. Making DA a temporary GM is just one more example of Sarver trying save a buck.

I think if one is going to compare Suns' GMs, compare BC to Kerr. DA was strictly a coach period no matter what title Sarver put on him.

 

[silverslugger]

Marion
Chandler
Richardson
N.A. lol

 

[cly2tw]

1. Hill over Marion at any price. Better defender and scorer. True leader. Marion has only one advantage that he is, or was, a freak of nature.

2. Chandler, as Frye is simply unproven, unknown.

3. JRich. I would touch Barnes with any contract. He is not good playing less than 20 min. But he is doing more damage than good to his own team if starting.

4. Kerr. He seems to be learning. His problem is lack of experience dealing with all the reality and egos.

 

[FArting]

1. Hill
2. Chandler
3. J Rich
4. D Antoni

 

[Lorenzo]

at this point I would still rather have marion over hill for phoenix. marion fit in like a glove for that team. He was overrated sure, but he did things for the suns that no one else did(not even shaq). and that's play defense and rebound the darn ball every time out. and his open court hustle and clean ups at the offensive end were always timely.

 

[Mainstreet]

at this point I would still rather have marion over hill for phoenix. marion fit in like a glove for that team. He was overrated sure, but he did things for the suns that no one else did(not even shaq). and that's play defense and rebound the darn ball every time out. and his open court hustle and clean ups at the offensive end were always timely.

Marion will be a solid player for Dallas. He is a nice pick-up no matter what some may say. Yes, I think Marion would have helped Phoenix more than Hill, but this is debatable. I like Hill a lot. The Suns are banking on signing Hill on the cheaper side. It looks nebulous at the moment.

 

[Lorenzo]

Marion will be a solid player for Dallas. He is a nice pick-up no matter what some may say. Yes, I think Marion would have helped Phoenix more than Hill, but this is debatable. I like Hill a lot. The Suns are banking on signing Hill on the cheaper side. It looks nebulous at the moment.

well said. I like grant hill no doubt. he is a more complete player as a whole. but he is a bit older now. too bad he couldn't stay healthy in his prime. the nba missed out on having a great HOF player.