# Suns right now



## Kekai (Jan 12, 2005)

> The explosive combination of Steve Nash and Amare Stoudemire, plus Shawn Marion, insure the Suns of being good, but without Johnson and Quentin Richardson, who was traded to New York for Kurt Thomas, they've fallen a notch.
> 
> Unless they know something about Diaw that few others do, the Suns better get Michael Finley (assuming Dallas waives him). Otherwise, they're back with the Dallas's, Houston's and Denver's of the world. Very good, but not a threat to the global gang in San Antonio.
> 
> ...



I think that is a good assesment of our Suns right now. I just can't believe that we traded so many parts that were so key in our successful season. Why not wait another year, see if these guys can gel a little bit more, maybe bring in one good defender and rebounding big, and keep our core. Its dissapointing to see us change so much after one special season.


----------



## Carbo04 (Apr 15, 2005)

*sigh*


----------



## Dissonance (Jul 21, 2004)

I don't we've taken that much of a fall. Jax hit 42-43 %? Bell shot 40%. We can still spread teams. Padgett can hit too. I think Q's can be made up as I've said with the wide open shots he can get. JJ's cannot. But did we expect another 48% from 3 pt land? He will be missed with the other things he can do. He's one of my fav players. Just everyone is acting like we lost Nash. Amare and Marion or something. I can still see us winning 60.


----------



## Mike Jones (Jul 31, 2005)

*I think this is a bunch of bull****. Yes the Suns wont be as good as last year, but we still have a dynamite team. Steve, Amare, and Shawn are three of the best players in the league. If we pick up Mike then we have four great players in our lineup. Most of these guys have really good stanima so they will be out on the court 35 minutes a game, and the bench isnt that bad? Anyone agree with me?*


----------



## Tiz (May 9, 2005)

I had just read that blog entry from Broussard on ESPN. I think his thinking is a little flawed. He focuses on the losses from the squad and not the gains that have been made.

No doubt Q and JJ will be missed and even Hunter to some extent (JJ obviously the most). BUt we have added to good defenders, something our team was missing last year. KT will help grab some more boards and this will translate into more 2nd chance points and easy points. Bell will bring some toughness to the perimeter and help contain guys like Ginobli, plus Bell shoots great %'s from the 3 (something the author completely skipped over when lamenting the loss of Q & JJ's 3's). Also with Marion moving back to the 3 we can rely more on his long range shots, percentage wise he is nearly equivalent to Q.

We still have the core 3 in tact and have just switched the role of the role players to defense instead of a 3pt arsenal. I still expect the team to lead the league in scoring, while it may not be the 111pt nights of last season, it should be well over 100 a night with all the starters averaging double digits (KT may be right on the cusp). The loss of a couple of points is ok since we should be able to hold competitors to fewer pts with the added D.


----------



## Kekai (Jan 12, 2005)

Mike Jones said:


> *I think this is a bunch of bull****. Yes the Suns wont be as good as last year, but we still have a dynamite team. Steve, Amare, and Shawn are three of the best players in the league. If we pick up Mike then we have four great players in our lineup. Most of these guys have really good stanima so they will be out on the court 35 minutes a game, and the bench isnt that bad? Anyone agree with me?*


No. Our big men are pretty junk


----------



## Mike Jones (Jul 31, 2005)

*Your callin Amare junk?*


----------



## Kekai (Jan 12, 2005)

Mike Jones said:


> *Your callin Amare junk?*


Nosir sorry I didn't specify. Our * backup* big men suck


----------



## Mike Jones (Jul 31, 2005)

Kekai said:


> Nosir sorry I didn't specify. Our * backup* big men suck


 * Yea I agree with you there*


----------



## Kekai (Jan 12, 2005)

Mike Jones said:


> * Yea I agree with you there*


Thank you :clown: I hope that we pick up Lonnie Jones :clown:


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

dissonance19 said:


> I don't we've taken that much of a fall. Jax hit 42-43 %? Bell shot 40%. We can still spread teams. Padgett can hit too. I think Q's can be made up as I've said with the wide open shots he can get. JJ's cannot. But did we expect another 48% from 3 pt land? He will be missed with the other things he can do. He's one of my fav players. Just everyone is acting like we lost Nash. Amare and Marion or something. I can still see us winning 60.


jim jackson was on the suns he last. he's not a new addition that will help make up for the loss of q and jj. they already had his shooting. he'll just see more minutes, which might not be a good thing. for the rockets he was playing 40+ minutes a game and shooting 37% from 3. when he moved to the suns and his minutes got cut down to just 25 a game, he shot 46%. i don't think he can step up and play the minutes q and jj did and still put up the %s he did coming off the bench playing 25 minutes. you keep bringing up padgett, but realistically, how many minutes is he going to see? he got almost 15 minutes a game last season. i doubt he's going to keep marion or amare on the bench for long. i just don't see many minutes for him and he is nothing but a 3 shooter, so i doubt he will make much of an impact anyway. raja bell is a solid player. he'd be great in a jim jackson role playing 25 or so minutes off the bench. but unless the suns bring in someone else like finley, jackson and bell are both going to have to see big minutes. you still have the big 3 of nash, amare, and marion, but that will only get you so far. they make you a lock for the playoffs, but without the guys like jj and q and being able to have jim jackson come off the bench, i don't see how you can expect to be as good as you were last season.


----------



## rebelsun (Nov 25, 2003)

I read his column earlier and understand what he's saying, but think there is something he's neglecting.

*The moves made by the Suns don't benefit them with respect to the style they played last year.* 

I don't know if he considers that the team dynamic is going to change with the new defensive additions. I think they're still going to score a ton of points, but don't think they'll lead the league in scoring. The Suns, IMO, were too offensive-oriented, and the moves made make them a more balanced team, one that may have a better chance against the Spurs and the rest of the NBA elite.

He calls the current roster "traditional." I would call it balanced. How often do the league leaders in points scored go on to win a championship? Ask Donn Nelson about that one.


----------



## Kekai (Jan 12, 2005)

RebelSun said:


> I read his column earlier and understand what he's saying, but think there is something he's neglecting.
> 
> *The moves made by the Suns don't benefit them with respect to the style they played last year.*
> 
> ...



I think he means an up-tempo game. Will we look to fastbreak this year with hardly any fastbreak players or play the halfcourt game with not a very good halfcourt game?


----------



## PhatDaddy3100 (Jun 16, 2002)

Hardly any fast break players? Last time I checked, Nash Marion and Amare are pretty much the best at fast breaking at their positions. Plus Raja Bell isnt too bad either. So we wont suffer that much from fast breaking stand point.


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

RebelSun said:


> I read his column earlier and understand what he's saying, but think there is something he's neglecting.
> 
> *The moves made by the Suns don't benefit them with respect to the style they played last year.*
> 
> ...


but here's the thing. you're the suns. you win 62 games. you have who is starting to age at an important position but probably has a couple more very good years left. you lost in the playoffs when one of your best players was out with an injury for half of the conference finals. you can bring back the entire team from last season and make additions through the draft and with the MLE to improve the team further.

so the suns decide to trade q and their draft pick, trade jj, and change their style of play?

how exactly does that make a lot of sense?


----------



## Dissonance (Jul 21, 2004)

rocketeer said:


> but here's the thing. you're the suns. you win 62 games. you have who is starting to age at an important position but probably has a couple more very good years left. you lost in the playoffs when one of your best players was out with an injury for half of the conference finals. you can bring back the entire team from last season and make additions through the draft and with the MLE to improve the team further.
> 
> so the suns decide to trade q and their draft pick, trade jj, and change their style of play?
> 
> how exactly does that make a lot of sense?


We traded Q to get more size up front in Thomas. We weren't gonna let JJ go, we were gonna match but we saw he wanted to leave so we got something in return.


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

dissonance19 said:


> We traded Q to get more size up front in Thomas. We weren't gonna let JJ go, we were gonna match but we saw he wanted to leave so we got something in return.


i know, but the team you had was obviously doing well. most teams don't want to change a whole lot when they just won 62 games and can keep the same team together. that's why people don't think the suns are going to be as good. they changed a strategy that worked. they trade their two perimeter guys for a decent big man and future picks and sign a solid veteran guard.

championship caliber teams don't make huge changes to their lineups. that's why the suns moves are so strange(and the heat too, but they become more talented with their moves while the suns don't).


----------



## rebelsun (Nov 25, 2003)

rocketeer said:


> i know, but the team you had was obviously doing well. most teams don't want to change a whole lot when they just won 62 games and can keep the same team together. that's why people don't think the suns are going to be as good. they changed a strategy that worked. they trade their two perimeter guys for a decent big man and future picks and sign a solid veteran guard.
> 
> championship caliber teams don't make huge changes to their lineups. that's why the suns moves are so strange(and the heat too, but they become more talented with their moves while the suns don't).


The organization obviously did not believe that the core from last year could win a championship and that some tweaking was needed. I agree with the Q for Kurt trade, but I would've liked to have seen JJ resigned.


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

rocketeer said:


> i know, but the team you had was obviously doing well. most teams don't want to change a whole lot when they just won 62 games and can keep the same team together. that's why people don't think the suns are going to be as good. they changed a strategy that worked. they trade their two perimeter guys for a decent big man and future picks and sign a solid veteran guard.
> 
> championship caliber teams don't make huge changes to their lineups. that's why the suns moves are so strange(and the heat too, but they become more talented with their moves while the suns don't).


We didn't try to change a whole lot. We traded Q for Kurt so that we had the option of playing two styles. You say the strategy worked. No, it didn't. They won a lot of regular season games. Wow, nice. 62 games, woohoo. I haven't met one Suns fan that has said they'd rather win 62 games than have a team that can win big in the playoffs. Go back to what happened in the fourth quarter of every game against the Spurs. We couldn't get a rebound with our small lineup, so we couldn't run. When you can't rebound, you can't run on a team like the Spurs. So the style didn't work. The only reason the Suns were close is because Amare started going absolutely crazy in the half court game. Our interior defense was horrendous. Suns defense is never going to be great like San Antonio or Detroit, because Nash can't stop his guy from penetrating. But now they have the option of putting 6'5 Bell or 6'7 Diaw on anyone they want to at least try and slow down. What did they have before? Leandro? Jim Jackson?

So Q went for JJ, not a huge change. Then JJ says he wants to go. It's not like the Suns can go say..."Oops! Wait, Q come back!" And even if they could, they still would have frontcourt problems like they did last year. Suns had no choice but to change another starter at that point. It's not like they decided they wanted to change the team that won 62 games. They traded an overpaid role in Q to help fill a need they had, and the rest just kinda happened.


----------



## tempe85 (Jan 7, 2005)

RebelSun said:


> *The moves made by the Suns don't benefit them with respect to the style they played last year.*


This is totally ironic. People complained last year that we'd never win a championship with our run and gun style of play and then suddenly when we try to move a little closer to the more "traditional" style of basketball they're saying we've now lost any chance at all! I mean which is it people!


----------



## Dissonance (Jul 21, 2004)

tempe85 said:


> This is totally ironic. People complained last year that we'd never win a championship with our run and gun style of play and then suddenly when we try to move a little closer to the more "traditional" style of basketball they're saying we've now lost any chance at all! I mean which is it people!


Exactly what I said in another 
thread.

http://basketballboards.net/forum/showthread.php?t=189922&page=3&pp=15





> Ok, so now that we're with a more traditional lineup we can't take advantage of mismatches and make it past 2nd rd(altho Marion will split time at PF for Thomas). Before when we didn't have a traditional lineup, and we need more of a traditional line up because we can't win a title. It seems like people want to change this around when it's for convenient for their argument on why the Suns can't do this or can't do that. Which is only things being said about us these days. Also, the fact that JJ and Q, people always used to say how they weren't that great because they could be replaced easily in the system we run. Now, it's we can't run w/o these two. But no one else sees the hypocrisy in all of this?
> 
> I said it before, I think as long as we have Nash, Amare, Marion we can win 60 games. A deeper team, is also a plus. We need role players not stars. Bell, Jackson, and Padgett can make up for Q's 35.8% from 3 pt land with the wide open looks he got. Yes, we'll miss JJ but how many more wins does JJ really mean to us? Now really?


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

ShuHanGuanYu said:


> We didn't try to change a whole lot. We traded Q for Kurt so that we had the option of playing two styles. You say the strategy worked. No, it didn't. They won a lot of regular season games. Wow, nice. 62 games, woohoo. I haven't met one Suns fan that has said they'd rather win 62 games than have a team that can win big in the playoffs. Go back to what happened in the fourth quarter of every game against the Spurs. We couldn't get a rebound with our small lineup, so we couldn't run. When you can't rebound, you can't run on a team like the Spurs. So the style didn't work. The only reason the Suns were close is because Amare started going absolutely crazy in the half court game. Our interior defense was horrendous. Suns defense is never going to be great like San Antonio or Detroit, because Nash can't stop his guy from penetrating. But now they have the option of putting 6'5 Bell or 6'7 Diaw on anyone they want to at least try and slow down. What did they have before? Leandro? Jim Jackson?


62 regular season games and then into the conference finals. their style definately worked. and they were in every game with the spurs. they got to the conference finals and were very competitive there. it would have been very easy for them to go into the off season and keep their core together. don't trade q. resign jj. then they could go out and sign a big with the MLE. swift signed with the rockets for it. he would have been perfect for an uptempo team like the suns. gadzuric was a free agent who could have brought rebounding and defense. there were guys out there. and they could have taken someone in the draft instead of trading their pick. there were ways to improve the team without trading core players.


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

tempe85 said:


> This is totally ironic. People complained last year that we'd never win a championship with our run and gun style of play and then suddenly when we try to move a little closer to the more "traditional" style of basketball they're saying we've now lost any chance at all! I mean which is it people!


is it the same people saying these things? i don't think it is. i think the suns could have won playing their run and gun style. but now that they are going to a more traditional style, i don't think they will do as well(partly because their style perfectly fit with nash, amare, and marion's game and partly because i feel the team has gotten worse through the moves they have made). sure there are people that said the suns couldn't win last year. and there are people saying that the suns won't win now. but i'd think it's mostly different people saying these things and not the same people saying both the majority of the time.


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

rocketeer said:


> 62 regular season games and then into the conference finals. their style definately worked. and they were in every game with the spurs. they got to the conference finals and were very competitive there. it would have been very easy for them to go into the off season and keep their core together. don't trade q. resign jj. then they could go out and sign a big with the MLE. swift signed with the rockets for it. he would have been perfect for an uptempo team like the suns. gadzuric was a free agent who could have brought rebounding and defense. there were guys out there. and they could have taken someone in the draft instead of trading their pick. there were ways to improve the team without trading core players.


Really? Stromile Swift was supposed to be the defensive answer for the Suns? I'm sorry, but he is simply lacking in that department. He blocks shots by helping, but can't defend his own man. I hardly think his "interior defense" or lack thereof would have helped the Suns against Tim Duncan and crew. Besides, we wouldn't have locked up a guy for a multiyear deal that sometimes seems like he would rather be blowing bubbles all over the court than playing basketball. Gadzuric signed for $6 mil a year, more than the MLE. There weren't any other bigs out there that can play defense and average in double figures in rebounding. And also, if we match JJ's offer we pay $20 million to JJ the first year. We traded the pick because we could not afford a first round pick while JJ was around and with Amare's deal kicking in next year. Another thing, Suns could not afford to have Q on their roster later down the road with the big four making huge money. That's a simple fact. Something had to give here. He was overpaid, and I'm glad the Suns found a suitor for him because his role with the Suns wasn't vital. JJ's was a vital role, but nothing they can do when he says he doesn't want to play here anymore. Getting two firsts for JJ is awesome, although it will hurt a bit next year. If we still have those picks by that time, we will be drafting an eventual replacement to Steve Nash.


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

ShuHanGuanYu said:


> Really? Stromile Swift was supposed to be the defensive answer for the Suns? I'm sorry, but he is simply lacking in that department. He blocks shots by helping, but can't defend his own man. I hardly think his "interior defense" or lack thereof would have helped the Suns against Tim Duncan and crew. Besides, we wouldn't have locked up a guy for a multiyear deal that sometimes seems like he would rather be blowing bubbles all over the court than playing basketball. Gadzuric signed for $6 mil a year, more than the MLE. There weren't any other bigs out there that can play defense and average in double figures in rebounding. And also, if we match JJ's offer we pay $20 million to JJ the first year. We traded the pick because we could not afford a first round pick while JJ was around and with Amare's deal kicking in next year. Another thing, Suns could not afford to have Q on their roster later down the road with the big four making huge money. That's a simple fact. Something had to give here. He was overpaid, and I'm glad the Suns found a suitor for him because his role with the Suns wasn't vital. JJ's was a vital role, but nothing they can do when he says he doesn't want to play here anymore. Getting two firsts for JJ is awesome, although it will hurt a bit next year. If we still have those picks by that time, we will be drafting an eventual replacement to Steve Nash.


and kurt thomas is your defensive answer inside? swift would have been another big man that would fit in perfectly with the offense. and gadzuric signed for an average of 6 a year. not starting at 6 a year. starting at the MLE with max increases is about 6 years 36 million the exact deal gadzuric got. so the suns could have offered the same.

yes the suns cap situation would have looked bad down the road. they would have had to make some big moves in a few years. but it would make them a very serious contender until then. as it is, i doubt they'll be able to build the team back into a real serious contender until nash is declining. then they'll have more work to do. getting the 1st for jj is good because it's better than nothing. but they are protected picks. i wouldn't expect getting any good picks unless they come pretty far down the road.


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

rocketeer said:


> and kurt thomas is your defensive answer inside? swift would have been another big man that would fit in perfectly with the offense. and gadzuric signed for an average of 6 a year. not starting at 6 a year. starting at the MLE with max increases is about 6 years 36 million the exact deal gadzuric got. so the suns could have offered the same.
> 
> yes the suns cap situation would have looked bad down the road. they would have had to make some big moves in a few years. but it would make them a very serious contender until then. as it is, i doubt they'll be able to build the team back into a real serious contender until nash is declining. then they'll have more work to do. getting the 1st for jj is good because it's better than nothing. but they are protected picks. i wouldn't expect getting any good picks unless they come pretty far down the road.


The Suns couldn't pay Dan any more than Milwaukee, he wouldn't have come here. Kurt Thomas can rebound and play way better defense than Stromile Swift. We can't have Marion guarding Tim Duncan or Nazr Mohammed and expect to play adequate defense. 

We don't want 2006 picks. We want 2007 picks. One will be non-protected at all in 2007 and the other will be top 3 protected. That's barely protected at all in only two years, not pretty far down the road. When you have more than one first in a draft, you can likely move up. They'll get a chance at a PG.

The salary cap would have been a mess very soon. Not in a few years, in two years max. In two years Marion would have been traded because JJ was too frontloaded to trade. That's crappy, because he is vital to the Suns.


----------



## rebelsun (Nov 25, 2003)

rocketeer said:


> 62 regular season games and then into the conference finals. *their style definately worked.* and they were in every game with the spurs. they got to the conference finals and were very competitive there. it would have been very easy for them to go into the off season and keep their core together. don't trade q. resign jj. then they could go out and sign a big with the MLE. swift signed with the rockets for it. he would have been perfect for an uptempo team like the suns. gadzuric was a free agent who could have brought rebounding and defense. there were guys out there. and they could have taken someone in the draft instead of trading their pick. there were ways to improve the team without trading core players.


If the organization was content with the status quo, then Q would never have been traded.


----------



## Tiz (May 9, 2005)

RebelSun said:


> If the organization was content with the status quo, then Q would never have been traded.


You have to remember though that it was Amare that wanted mgmt to go out and get KT. Amare thinks highly of him and wanted him here badly. Colangelo and Sarver obviously agreed with him. So wen it came time to keep the franchise player happy they had to deal with Isiah and he probably wanted JJ but was willing to take Q and a pick instead.


----------



## Ezmo (May 11, 2003)

getting KT also allows marion to get out on offense earlier. Last season, he was always the man that would take the ball out. Now KT will be taking out, allowing marion/amare/bell to get down court faster. we will still be a fast-tempo team. This was the presser: http://www.nba.com/suns/news/tribune_050702.html


----------



## tempe85 (Jan 7, 2005)

rocketeer said:


> 62 regular season games and then into the conference finals. their style definately worked. and they were in every game with the spurs. they got to the conference finals and were very competitive there. it would have been very easy for them to go into the off season and keep their core together. don't trade q. resign jj. then they could go out and sign a big with the MLE. swift signed with the rockets for it. he would have been perfect for an uptempo team like the suns. gadzuric was a free agent who could have brought rebounding and defense. there were guys out there. and they could have taken someone in the draft instead of trading their pick. there were ways to improve the team without trading core players.


You must be named Isiah Thomas because all you're thinking about is next season. The Suns would totally screw themselves for the future if they had done that. They would have been forced to trade Marion and wouldn't even have the money to replace him.


----------



## LamarButler (Apr 16, 2005)

I think you guys have gotten better with these moves. You guys are contenders if you get someone who plays like JJ and can shoot almost as good. You can't run if you can't rebound. You can't rebound if the ball is always going through the hoop. Am I right? Say if Jimmy or Raja starts you guys got a decent defensive squad. Marion can shut down the Kobes, T-Macs, LeBrons, and Paul Pierces of the league. KT can play good D on Jermaine, KG, and TD. Raja and Jimmy are good defenders also. I also trust that Amare will improve his D since he has great physical tools and a great work ethic.

Most of the time, you guys will have 4 guys on the break which is better than what most teams can do. With Jimmy+Marion+KT+Amare you guys would have great rebounding.

You guys just need a guy like Finley to contend, but Nash is still good at threes and you got Jimmy Jackson and Raja Bell who shoot good percentages at 3's.


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

tempe85 said:


> You must be named Isiah Thomas because all you're thinking about is next season. The Suns would totally screw themselves for the future if they had done that. They would have been forced to trade Marion and wouldn't even have the money to replace him.


the suns could have had 2 more years with this same team before they would have really had big cap problems. i assume you would take 2 years of being a top(or the top) team in the league over a few years with mediocre playoff appearances. resigning jj, adding a player for the mle, and signing a draft pick would only put the suns at around $60 million for this season. that's right around 10th in league salaries. then the next year the salary would jump up to around $70 million with resigning amare. that would be about the 5th highest in the league. after that, they would probably have to look into moving some salary. that could mean any of their big name players(not only marion).

this team had two more years left of having a great shot at homecourt throughout the playoffs. now instead they look like a team that will much more likely be a mid seeded playoff team that may not advance at all.

edit: i didn't figure in the $20 million or whatever for jj's 1st season. but that still doesn't effect it much. just a higher salary for this season which still doesn't make the team salary too huge.


----------



## Ezmo (May 11, 2003)

Say we were to just match the offersheet from Atlanta...
JJ is getting 20 mil the first year with ATL...add in 10 for nash, 14 for Marion, 7 for KT and 3 for Amare...next year the starters would represent 54 million. <<After Amare's extension comes in, replace that 3 mil with 15 mil avg. That means the starting 5 will be 66 million per year or so>>.... Back to this year...Jim Jackson and Barbosa add in 6 million. there's your 60. 60 million for 7 players. I dont remember raja bell's contract, but after that, there isn't much wiggle room for filling in the bench, which would leave us with the same depth problems we had last year.
----
Now let's say we go through with the JJ deal. If Finley is waived and we can sign him, our team will look something like this:

Nash/Barbosa
Finley/Bell/Diaw
Marion/Jimmy J/Dijon
Amare/Padgett/Burke
KT/Tischer

add in some other filler for the end of the bench. Here, we are not in financial hell with our starters like we would be with JJ. WIth JJ's contract and Amare's imminent extension, we would be forced to move marion in 2 years or so, as has been said before. With this lineup, we are more flexible with Amare's extension and are not completely strapped for cash so that we can make some moves in the future.


----------



## BootyKing (Apr 7, 2005)

What do you rekon our chances of getting Finley are? 

Im hearing him and the Heat is a done deal, my god i hope not they are looking deadly atm but if they can work as a team is another thing. I really hope we can land Finley i think we would have a strong lineup with good rotation, but we are still lacking another big.


----------



## Dissonance (Jul 21, 2004)

BootyKing said:


> What do you rekon our chances of getting Finley are?
> 
> Im hearing him and the Heat is a done deal, my god i hope not they are looking deadly atm but if they can work as a team is another thing. I really hope we can land Finley i think we would have a strong lineup with good rotation, but we are still lacking another big.


Do they even need Finley? After making that huge deal. He'd have more minutes with us. And I swear, we're getting garbage for JJ with what we prolly could get elsewhere. I wish we just matched it anyhow as we were even though he said not to match. Now, I'm ****ing pissed off thinking about it.


----------



## Kekai (Jan 12, 2005)

dissonance19 said:


> Do they even need Finley? After making that huge deal. He'd have more minutes with us. And I swear, we're getting garbage for JJ with what we prolly could get elsewhere. I wish we just matched it anyhow as we were even though he said not to match. Now, I'm ****ing pissed off thinking about it.


Yeah I am pissed off thinking about it too that is why I spent the whole day doing ehhhhh stuff :smile:


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

Guys, don't read -too- much into the Miami-Finley thing. Think about it. Dallas doesn't wanna release Finley for one reason. He'll go to Phoenix. So all the sudden rumors come out that it's a done deal with Miami, and it thus far has magically been reported by none other than our own Arizona Republic.


----------



## Kekai (Jan 12, 2005)

Say guys have we even signed Padgett or Burke yet? Is it going to be official or what? I don't mind Padgett, but Burke..ehhh. Could get someone better for the cheapest price out there I think. What if something happens and neither end up coming here, then we are screwed. Better hurry up and sign both of them


----------

