# Suns ranked 3rd in West by Chad Ford



## Ezmo (May 11, 2003)

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=ford_chad&id=2145701 (insider required)



> The skinny: The Suns literally ran away with the West last season, but major changes threaten to end some of the fun. Losing Johnson was an especially tough blow. Not only was he the team's best 3-point shooter, but he was also the primary backup at the point for Steve Nash. Thomas, Bell, Diaw and Grant all add defensive toughness, something the Suns sorely lacked last season. But to get it, you've got to wonder if the Suns traded away the critical elements that made them special last year. I doubt they'll be nearly as good (or entertaining) during the regular season. But if the toughness pays off in the playoffs, GM Bryan Colangelo doesn't care.


ranked behind the spurs at 1 and the KINGS at 2!


----------



## azirishmusic (Feb 25, 2004)

Ezmo said:


> http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=ford_chad&id=2145701 (insider required)
> 
> ranked behind the spurs at 1 and the KINGS at 2!


I'm not even convinced the Kings will finish second in the Pacific. I think GS may be the better team.


----------



## Ezmo (May 11, 2003)

i think the pacific will be highly contested though, with the suns, gs & the kings all vying for the top spots...thats the order i think it will finish, with a few games in between each


----------



## Dissonance (Jul 21, 2004)

Kings are starting to become a trendy surprise pick. They should be improved but this season is gonna be wide open in the west. Altho I do think we're better than them and will finish 1st in pacific.


----------



## BootyKing (Apr 7, 2005)

Yeh i dont really see all this Kings talk. They are a good side but not #2 in West. They had made sum good additions but they werent a #2 last season with Webber or without and SAR doesnt make them a #2


----------



## azirishmusic (Feb 25, 2004)

I guess the reason I'm not that impressed with the Kings is that I can't see relying on Bonzi Wells and rookie to carry the load at SG. Wells is world class flake and is a career backup. 

SAR has always had great stats, but this is the first time he will playing with a playoff team. It will be interesting to see if he can fit into a structured offense where he is not necessarily going to be the focus.

For this team to be more than lower level playoff team, Wells and SAR need to play like champions - something they didn't do when playing together in Portland.


----------



## jasonC (Aug 25, 2005)

Yeah and Steve Nash is a way better 3 point shooter than Joe Johnson. I guess this is overlooked because of Nash's playmaking skills but he is by far the best shooter on the team as well.


----------



## MrFloppy (Jun 25, 2005)

I'm not ashamed of 3rd in the west. Lets face it we are amongst the best and our roster is being under rated. In my opinion it effectively says we're 3rd or above. 3rd in the west is no bad feat but of course we would want a championship.


----------



## azirishmusic (Feb 25, 2004)

What matters is winning the division. Last season that was not too difficult because the Kings had problems, GS did not get going until they picked up Baron Davis, and the LA teams were awful. 

I think the Warriors are a probable playoff team if they stay healthy (and with Baron Davis that is a HUGE "if") and the Kings might be better or might not. The Suns are the best team, but I doubt it will be so easy.

I think Denver may end up with a good record next season and benefit from the problems of the other top teams in the Northwest. The Sonics could fall big time, the Wolves seem to be adrift, the Jazz have more questions than answers (not to mention some very strange trades), and the Blazers have even less talent for McMillian to work with. 

George Karl has a tendency to get good performance from teams when he first takes over, but his approach generally wears thin. It will be interesting to see how long it takes before his players start rebelling like they did in Milwaukee. They may do quite well during the regular season, but the Nuggets did not match up well with either the Spurs or the Suns.


----------



## tempe85 (Jan 7, 2005)

dissonance19 said:


> Kings are starting to become a trendy surprise pick.


Pretty much... when one person started picking them high then all of them did. When someone makes a list they need to include "surprise picks" and the Kings have seemed the safe choice for most people. However personally I don't think the Kings are nearly as good as the hype is showing. I mean are Shareef and Bonzi really that much better than Bobby Jackson and Cuttino Mobley? I mean honestly?? 

To be honest I've always seen Jackson as a very key component on the Kings. He brings a ton of energy off the bench, is a great scorer, and knows his place as a backup.

By the way how do the Kings expect to get Shareef, Stojakovic, Thomas, Williamson, and Skinner minutes? I mean they all play pretty much the same position.


----------



## tempe85 (Jan 7, 2005)

MrFloppy said:


> I'm not ashamed of 3rd in the west. Lets face it we are amongst the best and our roster is being under rated. In my opinion it effectively says we're 3rd or above. 3rd in the west is no bad feat but of course we would want a championship.


Hey with the roster we had last year most people didn't rank us above 8th in the west! I'd say 3rd is a big improvement. :biggrin:


----------



## Carbo04 (Apr 15, 2005)

We will win the Pacific, and it's a pretty open, and shut case. No if's, and's, or but's. But I do predict 3rd in the west. I actually predict Denver to be the west's #1 seed. You saw how they played after the All-Star break with Karl. And this year Camby, K-Mart, and Lenard should all be fully healthy, with a year older/wiser 'Melo. I don't think 65-68 wins is out of the question for them regular season wise. Then San Antonio will be #2. We'll be #3. We won't win as much this regular season, as last. But our moves were to win in the playoffs, not the regular season.


----------



## Dissonance (Jul 21, 2004)

tempe85 said:


> Pretty much... when one person started picking them high then all of them did. When someone makes a list they need to include "surprise picks" and the Kings have seemed the safe choice for most people. However personally I don't think the Kings are nearly as good as the hype is showing. I mean are Shareef and Bonzi really that much better than Bobby Jackson and Cuttino Mobley? I mean honestly??
> 
> To be honest I've always seen Jackson as a very key component on the Kings. He brings a ton of energy off the bench, is a great scorer, and knows his place as a backup.
> 
> By the way how do the Kings expect to get Shareef, Stojakovic, Thomas, Williamson, and Skinner minutes? I mean they all play pretty much the same position.


Exactly, I saw some Kings fans saying they could finish 2nd as well.
And people question our defense. They gonna be able to play defense? They aren't known for it either. Bonzi and SAR aren't exactly gonna help in that area.

They did manage to get better depth than those yrs they were title contenders. But I don't see em as title contenders unless the big 3 player out of their mind. Chemistry could be an issue and that could be said for us. 

Yeah, I agree about Jackson being a big key, he just can't stay healthy. I think over the last 2 yrs they got annoyed by his injuries, and felt it was time for him to go. Grizz will learn about that too.

I think SAR and Thomas will play at PF. Bonzi play behind Peja, and Thomas and Williamson see time behind Miller.


----------



## MrFloppy (Jun 25, 2005)

tempe85 said:


> Hey with the roster we had last year most people didn't rank us above 8th in the west! I'd say 3rd is a big improvement. :biggrin:


Seriously **** the haters. Let them hate and let us throw **** in there face when we win the ****ing championship.

With Finley we ****ing rock, without Finley we ****ing rock. **** the world. We are gonna be world champs. **** the haters man.


----------



## azirishmusic (Feb 25, 2004)

dissonance19 said:


> I think SAR and Thomas will play at PF. Bonzi play behind Peja, and Thomas and Williamson see time behind Miller.


You've stated their stiuation reasonably well. Now answer this question: who is their starting shooting guard?

If Wells is at SF (where he's played his entire career), then Garcia is their only SG. Mobley and Maurice Evens are gone. 

Maybe Wells can get the job done at guard, but Garcia is their only bench guy and there are reasons why he lasted to the 23rd pick. 

One major problem the Kings face is that Wells is not much as a three point shooter. (34.6% last season with a caerre 34.4%). He's replacing Mobley who shot 43.9% for three last season and a career 38.3%. 

The KIngs were one of the top three point shooting teams last season with a team average 37.4%. Christie's poor three point shooting was one of the reasons why he was traded. The Kings rely on the three and now Peja is their only shooter with above 36% for three on their team. (Bibby's long range shooting dropped off quite a bit last season and SAR has a career 30.6% for three).

SG looks like a huge hole and I can't see this team being any better defensively than they were last season when they were sixth worst in shooting percentage by opponents.


----------



## wut about dem Kings (Aug 31, 2005)

The Kings starting five is Mike Bibby, Bonzi Wells, Peja, Shareef Abdur Rahim, And Brad Miller. That starting 5 is probably the best starting 5 in the nba then you add the bench that consist of Jason Hart, Kenny Thomas, Brian Skinner, Corliss Williamson, Kevin Martin, Francisco Garcia, and Jamal Sampson, then being #2 in the West is very possible b/c lets just face it with all do respect to you guys the Suns got a little weaker in some areas and even though I am a Kings fans I really liked the team that you guys had last year. I watched every Suns game and I think if JJ didnt get hurt in the Dallas series that you guy probably would have beat the Spurs so I just think you guys overreacted a lil bit with all the changes you made.


----------



## Seuss (Aug 19, 2005)

Best starting 5? Are you forreal? 


The best starting five would either be Spurs: Manu, Bowen, Duncan, Parker and Nazi. Or the Heats: Shaq, Wade, Walker, Williams and Haslem.


----------



## Kekai (Jan 12, 2005)

Suns may not have the best starting 5 in the league, like we did last year, but the thing we needed were role players, and that is what we got. The best looking starting 5 isn't necessarily the team that is going to do the best.


----------



## wut about dem Kings (Aug 31, 2005)

Well put it this way our starting five is better than yours and we have a deep bench that consist of guys that were starters on other teams.


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

wut about dem Kings said:


> Well put it this way our starting five is better than yours and we have a deep bench that consist of guys that were starters on other teams.


Wut, I strongly disagree. Chad Ford probably didn't get enough caffeine when he typed up the rankings. I just feel Amare, Nasty Nash, and Marion..and co are better as a whole compared to the Kings. They added toughness with the addition of KT. The Kings aren't a cake walk by any means, but I feel Ford should have given the Suns the benefit of the doubt, just by having a MVP recipient and a monster like Amare on that team. How many times we expected the Kings to accomplish this and that only to be disappointed by Peja's disappearing acts?


----------



## Dissonance (Jul 21, 2004)

wut about dem Kings said:


> Well put it this way our starting five is better than yours and we have a deep bench that consist of guys that were starters on other teams.


Big deal that they were starters on other teams? Are they willing to accept a role? That could cause chemistry issues especially with Wells. Just because you have players on the bench that were starters and a "better starting 5," doesn't mean you guys will be better than us because of it either. It doesn't prove anything. It's all just on paper.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

I guess the Kings finishing at #2 isn't all that wild, but I'd personally go with Denver over Sacramento, and I still would go with Phoenix over Sacramento.


Sacramento had a lot of improvement to do at the end of last season. They were one of the lowest quality playoff teams in the West last year, and I don't think they've done enough to warrant being picked #2. If the Kings stay healthy they could have a strong regular season, but in the long run they aren't more dangerous than the Spurs, Suns, Rockets, Mavericks, or Nuggets.


----------



## wut about dem Kings (Aug 31, 2005)

KokoTheMonkey said:


> I guess the Kings finishing at #2 isn't all that wild, but I'd personally go with Denver over Sacramento, and I still would go with Phoenix over Sacramento.
> 
> 
> Sacramento had a lot of improvement to do at the end of last season. They were one of the lowest quality playoff teams in the West last year, and I don't think they've done enough to warrant being picked #2. If the Kings stay healthy they could have a strong regular season, but in the long run they aren't more dangerous than the Spurs, Suns, Rockets, Mavericks, or Nuggets.


The Kings had guys on the court during the playoffs that didn't even play together during the regular season at all. None of the new guys that we got in the Webber trade even played a game with Bobby Jackson or Brad Miller so there was no chemistry at all last year in the playoffs.


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

wut about dem Kings said:


> The Kings had guys on the court during the playoffs that didn't even play together during the regular season at all. None of the new guys that we got in the Webber trade even played a game with Bobby Jackson or Brad Miller so there was no chemistry at all last year in the playoffs.


Getting rid of Bobby Jackson for a starter was awesome. Getting Jason Hart for a second was also awesome. Getting Shareef for the MLE was also awesome. In order for them to get the #2 though, a number of things will have to happen.

1) Chemistry on the court. I'm sure they'll get along well off the court, but on the court how will they fare? Who will be the leader when the game is on the line? I doubt Shareef is that person. Can it be Peja again? Can Bonzi commit to the passing style that Sacramento has in place? Will he show attitude when at least three of the starters probably get more shots than he does? 

2) Injuries. Miller, Peja, Skinner, Shareef...they all missed a nice sum of games last year. What's going to get them healthy this year? Was it just bad luck?

3) Toughness vs Softness. Some are predicting that Sacramento will be a soft team. We'll see.

There are just too many questions for me to place the Kings right now in the #2 spot. Just as there are too many questions to place the Suns in the #2 spot. Until we see the first couple months of games, we won't really have much of an idea as to what type of team they will be.


----------

