# Amare Stoudemire out 4 months!



## RipCity9 (Jan 30, 2004)

Phoenix is in serious trouble.


----------



## J_Bird (Mar 18, 2005)

Hmmm. Microfracture surgery . Sounds familiar.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

I know that I hurt my knee that one time a team gave me a big bag of money to carry around, too.

Bad news for the Suns.

Ed O.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

Bummer. 

It's interesting to see how Randolph and Amare have paralleled each other. Both are PF's who don't play much defense (although Amare plays a little more). Both are black holes at times. Both had breakout seasons, got their big contracts and then had to cope with microfracture surgery.

The difference between a Karl Malone and an Antonio McDyess career sometimes hinges on a single stumble.


----------



## tlong (Jan 6, 2003)

Terrible news for the Suns! Amare depends on his jumping ability more than other players and this surgery could turn him into just an ordinary player.


----------



## cpt.napalm (Feb 23, 2005)

This has huge implications across the board. Hope people haven't had fantasy drafts yet. Pheonix is gonna be hurting. They dealt too much this summer and now lose their franchise player. Steve Nash is going to have his work cut out for himself. I think that there will be quite a few western conference teams that will be able to take a few games from the Suns this year. Blazers chances are looking better each day.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

theWanker said:


> Bummer.


yup, sad news for Bball fans. 

Does anyone know whether the injury happened to a weight bearing part of the knee? That seems to be the most critical element on whether guys have been able to recover or not.

STOMP


----------



## Foulzilla (Jan 11, 2005)

Wow, this sucks. Amare really is a joy to watch, I hope this doesn't hurt his explosiveness. It is interesting how it parallels Zach. Hope they both come back better then ever.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

it occurs to me that if this is true, it's basically Nash, Marion and a bunch of role players. I honestly don't think they are a playoff team anymore. If only they'd landed Finley....


----------



## cpt.napalm (Feb 23, 2005)

Now lets see if we could swindle PHX into dealing Amare now that he is damaged goods. Outlaw, Ratliff, Miles? I will go try and figure a trade that works.


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

The positive for him is that he is quite young and is in very good health / condition. I'd guess that he's going to miss more than 4 months of the regular season, but not much more (assuming the surgery / rehab is successful).

Phoenix put a LOT of eggs in that particular basket. It will be interesting to see what they do now to keep them from breaking. And not to wallow in his / their misery, but this might be good news for the Blazers (paper-thin) post-season hopes.

PBF


----------



## Foulzilla (Jan 11, 2005)

theWanker said:


> it occurs to me that if this is true, it's basically Nash, Marion and a bunch of role players. I honestly don't think they are a playoff team anymore. If only they'd landed Finley....


Yeah it's definintely going to hurt. I think they squeak into the playoffs anyways, presumin Amare only missed part of the season.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

J_Bird said:


> Hmmm. Microfracture surgery . Sounds familiar.


yes... Zach's surgery was in what.. April??? and its now October and he is not at full strength.

So I think Phoenix may have to write off Amare for the season... He may make the playoffs if they go deep into the finals maybe.

bummer for Amare...


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

yeah this pretty much sinks the suns season this helps the lakers more than it helps us amare ouch!


----------



## deanwoof (Mar 10, 2003)

this just moved marion into first round status fantasy wise. and also dont forget about kurt thomas. and even brian grant for later round steal. 

back to amare... poor kid. i hope he heals correctly.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

Amare is one of the more exciting players to watch in the league. I hope he heals up good and resumes his career on track.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

wow, phoenix seems to be cursed. It seems they get a window, and then something bad happens.


----------



## dkap (May 13, 2003)

> wow, phoenix seems to be cursed.


It's much worse than that, the curse seems to be on anyone signing a max contract. Zach, Amare, Grant Hill, Kidd, Weber, Alan Houston, Jermaine O'Neal, Brand ... even Duncan and Finley to lesser extents. If your name isn't KG or Shaq, good luck surviving a max contract. Unbelievable.

And yes, I'll miss watching Amare play, even if it's against us.

Dan


----------



## chromekilla (Aug 21, 2005)

hmm phoenix doesnt look good with out amare.hope zbo doesnt go down this year.
phoenix is out for a big hit after that contract and hes basically getting the first year free if he doesnt play. hes gonna be out for a while.
good luck to zbo and amare though.


----------



## MAS RipCity (Feb 22, 2003)

Bye Bye Phoenix, an aging Nash and all-around stud Matrix can't carry this team for 4 months without Stoudem,ire. Man they shoulda really held onto Q and Joe Johnson...Kurt Thomas isn't gonna cut it.


----------



## gatorpops (Dec 17, 2004)

Portland does not play them till January twice and then again twice in March. This may allow us to get our act together and get a win or two more than would be expected with Amare. Sad for him but we had the same problem last year and a whole lot of teams beat us without mercy. 

I just may have to adjust our win predictions if this sort of thing keeps up with other teams. The healthy teams win more games. 

Keep your fingers crossed about Zbo. Go Blazers!

gatorpops


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

unless his operation is much different and lesser than Zachs, 4 months seems awful quick to return.

Zach was under the knife early april, and he's still not 100%. 

And thats what..6 months later?

6 months from now (if everything goes right) is mid april...which is at the end of the season.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Trader Bob said:


> yes... Zach's surgery was in what.. April??? and its now October and he is not at full strength.
> 
> So I think Phoenix may have to write off Amare for the season... He may make the playoffs if they go deep into the finals maybe.


Yuppers Hap

I can not see how they are saying 4 months.... no way :nonono:


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

Trader Bob said:


> Yuppers Hap
> 
> I can not see how they are saying 4 months.... no way :nonono:


heh, totally missed you saying that

:angel:


----------



## Chalupa (Jul 20, 2005)

Wow, I thought they were a 5-8 seed playoff team before Amare went out. That team will have a very hard time even making the playoffs now. Heck now the Blazers have chance of being better than Phoenix.


Just feels like Amare totally screwed over Phoenix with that contract.


----------



## BlazerFanFoLife (Jul 17, 2003)

zach and amare are different types of individuals, Amare just seems liek the type of guy who will heal faster, hes also leaner so less weight goes on the knee and it seems like its not as bad as zachs was because it was spotted early


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

theWanker said:


> it occurs to me that if this is true, it's basically Nash, Marion and a bunch of role players. I honestly don't think they are a playoff team anymore. If only they'd landed Finley....


I agree. This is the lineup I expect from them:

Steve Nash
Raja Bell
Shawn Marion
Kurt Thomas
Brian Grant

I suppose they might slot in Jim Jackson instead of Raja Bell, but I think that would be an even worse lineup. Either way, I'd say it's highly arguable whether that lineup is better than the Lakers, Clippers and Warriors in their own division. It's not as good as the Kings.

Unless Stoudemire returns to give them a monster two months at the end of the season, I don't think the Suns will make the playoffs in the West, if they have to run that lineup out there for four months.


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

Minstrel said:


> I agree. This is the lineup I expect from them:
> 
> Steve Nash
> Raja Bell
> ...


I doubt they start Brian Grant. I'm pretty sure that, unless it fails miserably in preseason, they'll go with Kurt at center and go small. Kurt of course will not be like Amare was in that lineup, but I think it's their best option at this point. Rebounding and interior defense will suffer, but I don't think Kurt/Shawn is much worse defensively than Amare/Shawn was last year. Unless they plan on using Pat Burke quite a bit, I expect to see Shawn Marion and even James Jones take a lot of PF minutes. Perhaps if they play a relatively big team they'll start Thomas and Grant together, but I just don't see that happening in the majority of games.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

ShuHanGuanYu said:


> I doubt they start Brian Grant. I'm pretty sure that, unless it fails miserably in preseason, they'll go with Kurt at center and go small. Kurt of course will not be like Amare was in that lineup, but I think it's their best option at this point. Rebounding and interior defense will suffer, but I don't think Kurt/Shawn is much worse defensively than Amare/Shawn was last year.


Kurt Thomas is small for a power forward. He would be a terrible center. If the Suns do that, they're basically resigning themselves to being one of the worst rebounding and defensive teams in basketball. That would be a quick ticket to the bottom of the lottery, in my opinion.

Stoudemire can legitimately play the center position. Putting Thomas at center is equivalent to putting Marion at center. So I don't think Thomas/Marion would be equivalent to Stoudemire/Marion. On top of that, the Suns traded off size for incredible offensive explosiveness last season. With Thomas, Jackson and Bell, they would have no size _and_ no offensive explosiveness.

I really think putting Thomas at center would be suicide. If they'd rather try Burke or Hunter as a starter, I suppose I could see that. But I think they'd rather use the established Grant.


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

Minstrel said:


> Kurt Thomas is small for a power forward. He would be a terrible center. If the Suns do that, they're basically resigning themselves to being one of the worst rebounding and defensive teams in basketball. That would be a quick ticket to the bottom of the lottery, in my opinion.
> 
> Stoudemire can legitimately play the center position. Putting Thomas at center is equivalent to putting Marion at center. So I don't think Thomas/Marion would be equivalent to Stoudemire/Marion. On top of that, the Suns traded off size for incredible offensive explosiveness last season. With Thomas, Jackson and Bell, they would have no size _and_ no offensive explosiveness.
> 
> I really think putting Thomas at center would be suicide. If they'd rather try Burke or Hunter as a starter, I suppose I could see that. But I think they'd rather use the established Grant.


There is no Hunter.

Thomas played a lot of center in his career, I think he'd be able to at least hold the fort a bit until later on. I think you go overboard in saying playing Kurt at center is akin to Marion at center. Two inches taller, twenty pounds heavier, tougher on the interior. Both Grant and Kurt are 6'9, so it's not like the size is an issue. Grant is probably 15-20 pounds heavier, but he's also just not as good. Do you start your better player is the question. Regarding explosiveness, they are a lot less explosive with Kurt and Grant in the lineup than with either one and Marion. Even when Amare went to the bench last year or he didn't play they could still score, because the style simply got guys open shots. That was also with Hunter in the lineup, a virtual non-threat on offense. At least Kurt can hit his open shots and pick-and-roll with Nash. Your lineup seems like the defense doesn't get a whole lot better, but they will be pretty bad on offense. 

Kurt played a lot of center for New York (played mostly PF last year) from 2001-2003 and did OK. He still rebounded very well. Granted the competition was not great at the time in the East, but with Shaq out of the West there's not a whole lot of power centers around that are going to kill him now either. Yao and Duncan are the only ones I really fear for that lineup, but it's not exactly like Amare could do anything to stop them.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

My mistake on Hunter. Didn't realize he was gone.



ShuHanGuanYu said:


> Both Grant and Kurt are 6'9, so it's not like the size is an issue. Grant is probably 15-20 pounds heavier, but he's also just not as good. Do you start your better player is the question.


It's not just a question of Grant vs. Thomas (and Thomas would start either way)...it's having Grant, Thomas _and_ Marion (who is a fabulous rebounder) on the floor or just Thomas and Marion. The first group of three would provide pretty good rebounding for the team, but Thomas, Marion and Jim Jackson would be substandard.



> Regarding explosiveness, they are a lot less explosive with Kurt and Grant in the lineup than with either one and Marion.


Granted (no pun intended), but they're unexplosive either way. The point is that they're undersized and unexplosive one way and have decent size and are unexplosive the other way. Might as well have size if you're not going to be explosive to balance being small. Smallball has rarely been effective, and the only time it's even worth trying is when you have unearthly explosiveness by going small.



> Even when Amare went to the bench last year or he didn't play they could still score, because the style simply got guys open shots.


They also had Joe Johnson and Quentin Richardson then. Not so much anymore.

As to Thomas having played center for stretches for New York, *A.* New York was terrible and *B.* the West has bigger front courts in general, so a smaller frontline hurts more, even when not up against a power center. Also, a small front court makes slashing by the opposing team much easier.


----------



## RP McMurphy (Jul 17, 2003)

I don't think Kurt Thomas is tougher in the paint than Shawn Marion. Thomas's offense mostly consists of jump shots from the elbow. This is a guy who barely got to the free throw line once per game last year. He's not that great a defensive player either (certainly not better than Marion). If the Suns have a starting lineup with five finesse players they won't be a good basketball team.


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

Minstrel said:


> My mistake on Hunter. Didn't realize he was gone.
> 
> It's not just a question of Grant vs. Thomas (and Thomas would start either way)...it's having Grant, Thomas _and_ Marion (who is a fabulous rebounder) on the floor or just Thomas and Marion. The first group of three would provide pretty good rebounding for the team, but Thomas, Marion and Jim Jackson would be substandard.
> 
> ...


New York won 48 games one of those years. The others were definitely not his fault, he still did well. He never wanted to play center, but he took the challenge and did better than expected.

Their rebounding was substandard last year and they still won games. In the regular season, all you need to do is win games. James is a pretty good rebounder. It would be likely be Nash, Bell, Jones, Marion, Thomas. Jackson would sub at SG and SF. Their rebounding wouldn't be worse off that it was last year. I don't see how they are going to run the ball with Grant and Thomas in the lineup at the same time, that just won't work. With one or the other in there, it's ok. Normally, wichever one of them is in crashes the board and outlets the ball for the fastbreak, or takes the ball out of bounds. With both of them in there, or with Burke, you lose a large portion of your fastbreak offense. Smallball has often been effective in the regular season, and that's all we're worrying about here. They just need to stay fast to do it, and with Kurt and Grant in there, fast is the one thing I would not describe them as.

I'm not saying the small ball idea is going to put them where they were last year, but it's what they practiced in training camp and what they played all year. It wouldn't make sense to abandon that style, especially when they're going to play it again when Amare gets back. And I don't see how you have a fastbreak team with both Thomas and Grant in at the same time, but we'll see.



RP McMurphy said:


> I don't think Kurt Thomas is tougher in the paint than Shawn Marion. Thomas's offense mostly consists of jump shots from the elbow. This is a guy who barely got to the free throw line once per game last year. He's not that great a defensive player either (certainly not better than Marion). If the Suns have a starting lineup with five finesse players they won't be a good basketball team.


Thomas is a better post up defender than Marion. I can tell you that is just about fact from watching them play. Marion is good at getting blocks by people underestimating his jumping ability. But people posting him up, he gets killed sometimes. There are different forms of defense, and Marion is an excellent outside and a great penetration defender. Not a good post up defender simply due to height and muscle.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

ShuHanGuanYu said:


> Their rebounding was substandard last year and they still won games. In the regular season, all you need to do is win games. ...
> Their rebounding wouldn't be worse off that it was last year.
> ...
> Smallball has often been effective in the regular season, and that's all we're worrying about here.


You don't seem to be understanding my point. Last year's team could _afford_ to be out-rebounded because they were insanely explosive.

Without Stoudemire, Johnson and Richardson, this year's Suns team will _not_ be explosive. You can't be explosive simply by playing a style...you also need the talent. The Suns are far less talented offensively this season. Therefore, they cannot afford to be out-rebounded like they were last year.


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

Minstrel said:


> You don't seem to be understanding my point. Last year's team could _afford_ to be out-rebounded because they were insanely explosive.
> 
> Without Stoudemire, Johnson and Richardson, this year's Suns team will _not_ be explosive. You can't be explosive simply by playing a style...you also need the talent. The Suns are far less talented offensively this season. Therefore, they cannot afford to be out-rebounded like they were last year.


Just because I disagree doesn't mean I don't understand. I think that this team is still better off by going small. Even when JJ was out, they still went small and weren't affected too badly by it. Q is not exactly explosive, definitely no more so than Bell. That point alone makes me disagree with your assessment. Maybe Q is explosive from 3, but not in general. House is an explosive scorer. Jones has some skills to show, I believe he'll do well offensively like he did last year when given minutes. Bell has also improved offensively, and has been nailing threes pretty well as of late. Your argument is based off of points I don't agree with, while it is rather simple to _understand_.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

ShuHanGuanYu said:


> Just because I disagree doesn't mean I don't understand.
> ...
> Your argument is based off of points I don't agree with, while it is rather simple to _understand_.


Okay. You never actually addressed that point, so I wondered.



> I think that this team is still better off by going small. Even when JJ was out, they still went small and weren't affected too badly by it. Q is not exactly explosive, definitely no more so than Bell. That point alone makes me disagree with your assessment.


I'm saying that Nash, Johnson, Richardson, Marion and Stoudemire together are an extremely explosive unit, because they're all fast, athletic and good shooters (outside of Stoudemire, in shooting, obviously). Not that every player is a dynamo on his own. Losing three of those players (Stoudemire and Johnson being highly talented, Richardson being a nice complimentary part in that offense) creates a very mediocre offense, overall.

With a mediocre offense, they can't afford to give up defense and rebounding like they did last year.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

What about replacing Bell at the 2 with Barbosa.....


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

Minstrel said:


> I'm saying that Nash, Johnson, Richardson, Marion and Stoudemire together are an extremely explosive unit, because they're all fast, athletic and good shooters (outside of Stoudemire, in shooting, obviously). Not that every player is a dynamo on his own. Losing three of those players (Stoudemire and Johnson being highly talented, Richardson being a nice complimentary part in that offense) creates a very mediocre offense, overall.
> 
> With a mediocre offense, they can't afford to give up defense and rebounding like they did last year.


Mediocre offense? OK, so we went from "not as good of an offense without JJ and Q" to a "very mediocre offense". That's definitely stretching in my opinion. JJ was awesome, but don't forget that Q would come down and brick a shot within 2 seconds even more often that he caught fire. The Suns' talent extends much further down the bench this year. Jim Jackson, Leandro Barbosa (when playing alongside Diaw at the point so his frail body isn't taken advantage of), James Jones, Eddie House can all score the ball. They all shoot a higher percentage than Q did. Joe they will miss, but I think his loss will be at least shadowed a bit by the fact that they have more shooters to possibly catch fire each game. They have 5 or 6 guys that shoot over 40% from three (Jackson around 45%), and with Nash that should continue or even get better. It's going to take time to figure out how each player fits into their system, but if Bell and Jones played like they have so far in the offseason...I'm quite confident they'll help the Suns greatly. Bell was 5 of 6 from three and has been hitting them all offseason. Jones played very well thus far. House's shot has been off, but it'll come around without doubt. I think the Suns will try to fastbreak like crazy and spread the floor with their shooters. It was easier of course when Amare was in, but Nash can still penetrate any defense thrown his way. Without Amare in there, they will have their scoring struggles. But I don't see the logic in playing two big slow guys, when they have pretty much never done that and never intended to do that, and killing the speed advantage they have over their opponents.


----------



## MercyKersey (Jul 22, 2003)

Did Amare Scam the Suns on this one? Signs a huge max contract then a few days later suddenly needs microfracture surgery? I dont follow the suns closely at all, but this sure feels like a cover up job to me..
I wouldnt be surprised if amare and his agent knew he probably needed surgery but played thru the pain so the suns would think hes fine so they would sign him.. After he gets his money he needs surgery? I smell cover up..


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

MercyKersey said:


> Did Amare Scam the Suns on this one? Signs a huge max contract then a few days later suddenly needs microfracture surgery? I dont follow the suns closely at all, but this sure feels like a cover up job to me..
> I wouldnt be surprised if amare and his agent knew he probably needed surgery but played thru the pain so the suns would think hes fine so they would sign him.. After he gets his money he needs surgery? I smell cover up..


No way to know really. Could be. I don't think so, but could be. Hard to speculate because we have nothing other than speculation to go off of.


----------



## MercyKersey (Jul 22, 2003)

Ya, nothing but speculation on my part. Just seems kinda crazy that the suns would sign him prior to surgery.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

It just occured to me how much more likely it is that Joel makes an All Star appearance this year. Off the top of my head I can't think of anyone ahead of him after Yao and Brad Miller, and they usually take 3 guys. Maybe Dampier, or Magliore... can anyone think of any other likely candidates?

STOMP


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

ShuHanGuanYu said:


> Mediocre offense? OK, so we went from "not as good of an offense without JJ and Q" to a "very mediocre offense". That's definitely stretching in my opinion.


Mediocre without Johnson, Richardson *AND* Stoudemire.

I didn't think the Suns offense was mediocre until Stoudemire was lost.

And, incidentally, I do like the talent of Diaw and Barbosa, but until they are consistently productive, I don't count them.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

STOMP said:


> It just occured to me how much more likely it is that Joel makes an All Star appearance this year. Off the top of my head I can't think of anyone ahead of him after Yao and Brad Miller, and they usually take 3 guys. Maybe Dampier, or Magliore... can anyone think of any other likely candidates?
> 
> STOMP


Possibly Camby.


----------



## cpt.napalm (Feb 23, 2005)

Minstrel said:


> Possibly Camby.


If he makes it to the All-Star break in one piece.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

cpt.napalm said:


> If he makes it to the All-Star break in one piece.


 True that.


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

Minstrel said:


> Mediocre without Johnson, Richardson *AND* Stoudemire.
> 
> I didn't think the Suns offense was mediocre until Stoudemire was lost.
> 
> And, incidentally, I do like the talent of Diaw and Barbosa, but until they are consistently productive, I don't count them.


Yeah, I thought it was pretty obvious we were talking about Stoudemire being out too. I was saying it was stretching to call them a very mediocre offense without JJ, Q *AND* Stoudemire. I have a feeling they're still gonna put points up on the board.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

ShuHanGuanYu said:


> Yeah, I thought it was pretty obvious we were talking about Stoudemire being out too.


Wasn't clear from this:

_Mediocre offense? OK, so we went from "not as good of an offense without JJ and Q" to a "very mediocre offense"._



> I was saying it was stretching to call them a very mediocre offense without JJ, Q *AND* Stoudemire. I have a feeling they're still gonna put points up on the board.


Nash, Marion, a few average players and a few prospects is no better than ten other teams in the Western Conference alone. The Warriors, with Baron Davis, Jason Richardson and Troy Murphy have as much, or more, offensive talent. Ditto the Clippers, with Brand, Maggette, Mobley, Livingston and Kaman.


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

Minstrel said:


> Nash, Marion, a few average players and a few prospects is no better than ten other teams in the Western Conference alone. The Warriors, with Baron Davis, Jason Richardson and Troy Murphy have as much, or more, offensive talent. Ditto the Clippers, with Brand, Maggette, Mobley, Livingston and Kaman.


Unless those "average" players step up, and unless what you call "prospects" can also step up. If you'd rather focus on paper-talent, go for it. If Thomas and Nash can work a two man game, if Thomas and Grant can rebound the ball defensively and provide interior toughness, if Jackson and Bell and Jones and House cannot score the ball in transition or from 3, if Leandro can continue to improve, if Leandro or Diaw or House can run the ball while Nash is sitting, etc...those are the questions. Not whether they are simply mediocre or not mediocre. This team is still built to run. They still have an MVP candidate in Nash and an All-NBA team player in Marion. They have a stronger bench than they did last year, and that will help them. They won't have much inside presence, and that means they'll lose more games. But guys are still going to get open shots in the transition game that the Suns run, and with Nash dishing the ball on penetration. People say "Oh, well without Amare they can just stay at home with the shooters." They just don't know and evidently didn't watch them last year. Even when Amare was out, they still played their style and got open shots. They have the shooters to hit those shots.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

ShuHanGuanYu said:


> Unless those "average" players step up, and unless what you call "prospects" can also step up.


Sure. That's true for every team in the league. If their average players and prospects all "step up," they could do well. The point is, the Suns are mediocre in terms of proven talent.

You can pose a million "ifs" for every team. I can do it for Portland: if Telfair becomes an elite point guard, if Outlaw and Webster can finish on the wings, if Przybilla continues his break-out, if Randolph returns to his form of two years ago, if Miles delivers on all his potential, the Blazers will be one of the top teams in basketball.

More likely, though, Portland will be one of the worst teams in the West this year, based on their proven talent. And, by the same token, most likely Phoenix will be mediocre on offense and weak on defense and rebounding based on their proven talent.

But sure...*if* a lot of hopes comes true, Phoenix could be better. Same for every team in the league lacking proven talent.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Unfortunately as of right now all we can go by is what's on paper. On Paper Nash and Marion look great, I like both those players alot. On Paper Raja Bell can be a pretty solid contributor. On Paper Diaw is a decent roll player of the bench. On Paper what is really scary is Brian Grant and Kurt Thomas. The reason this worries me is because the Suns are Run and Gun and neither Kurt or Brian at this point are runners.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

Schilly said:


> Unfortunately as of right now all we can go by is what's on paper. On Paper Nash and Marion look great, I like both those players alot. On Paper Raja Bell can be a pretty solid contributor. On Paper Diaw is a decent roll player of the bench. On Paper what is really scary is Brian Grant and Kurt Thomas. The reason this worries me is because the Suns are Run and Gun and neither Kurt or Brian at this point are runners.


If you think about it, a lot of what made Phoenix good, was their outside shooting.

that opened up the middle for Amare, and caused a lot of their running to work out.

The Suns are now missing over *half* of their 3 point fg's from last year + 58 ppg (including Amare).

Thats a LOT of points (and outside shots) for Diaw and Bell to make up.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

The Suns will be one of the worst teams in the West next year, simply because they have no size w/o Amare. However, that will give them a serious chance at drafting either Rudy Gay or LaMarcus Aldridge, which would suck (for other NBA teams), especially with Amare coming back from the 2006-07 season on a mission.

It sucks Amare's out for so long, but in the long run, it might end up making Phoenix even better.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

HKF said:


> The Suns will be one of the worst teams in the West next year, simply because they have no size w/o Amare. However, that will give them a serious chance at drafting either Rudy Gay or LaMarcus Aldridge, which would suck (for other NBA teams), especially with Amare coming back from the 2006-07 season on a mission.
> 
> It sucks Amare's out for so long, but in the long run, it might end up making Phoenix even better.


I'm sensing shades of San Antonio Circa 1997


----------



## cpt.napalm (Feb 23, 2005)

Reminds me of a situation that put our current champions in the position that they are now.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

I'd be surprised if Phoenix were bad enough to have a real shot at the #1 pick. I think they're lottery bound, but in the 5-10 (expected, since there's always uncertainty in a lottery) pick range.

The real wild card for Phoenix is the two months that Stoudemire could return for. Depending on what they get from him then, two months is plenty of time to get well shed of the basement.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

Minstrel said:


> I'd be surprised if Phoenix were bad enough to have a real shot at the #1 pick.


I wouldn't. Given the recovery time required by others having undergone microfracture knee surgery, 4 months seems very optimistic. It may be the Suns are trying to put out a positive front to keep hope alive for their season ticket sales. If he's not coming back, I see their talent putting them amid the other clubs most likely in the mix for #1. I don't see them being to be able to outscore teams anymore, and they were never that good at D... I see them losing the battle of the boards nightly as well.

I (and others) questioned Steve Nash's MVP last year, as I thought he was arguably the 3rd best player on the Suns. His supporters mainly pointed to how much the team improved apon his arrival. We'll just have to see.

STOMP


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

Hap said:


> If you think about it, a lot of what made Phoenix good, was their outside shooting.
> 
> that opened up the middle for Amare, and caused a lot of their running to work out.
> 
> ...


Just Diaw and Bell? Not James Jones or Eddie House or Leandro Barbosa? Joe Johnson's totals were high because he played so many minutes. He actually didn't shoot them as often as some people think. Jim Jackson hit 45% of his threes, and hit more often when he was on the court. Plus, that included Q who shot a rather low percentage. He often jacked up 26-28 footers over someone. I am fine with the Suns taking less bad threes and going for smarter shots. They still have Nash, Jackson, House, Jones, Barbosa, and Bell who all shot over 40% last year from three. The attempts JJ and Q got will go to them. Those threes are not necessarily "missing" because some of those will be replaced as the others guys get more attempts.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

STOMP said:


> I wouldn't. Given the recovery time required by others having undergone microfracture knee surgery, 4 months seems very optimistic. It may be the Suns are trying to put out a positive front to keep hope alive for their season ticket sales. If he's not coming back, I see their talent putting them amid the other clubs most likely in the mix for #1.


Well, if you're right in your expectation that Stoudemire won't be back this season, I agree that they could be that bad. Especially if they run Kurt Thomas out at center...they'll be annihilated on the boards, have a very poor defense and their offense will be mediocre.



> I (and others) questioned Steve Nash's MVP last year, as I thought he was arguably the 3rd best player on the Suns.


Count me among the "others;" I thought it was a farce.


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

Minstrel said:


> Sure. That's true for every team in the league. If their average players and prospects all "step up," they could do well. The point is, the Suns are mediocre in terms of proven talent.
> 
> You can pose a million "ifs" for every team. I can do it for Portland: if Telfair becomes an elite point guard, if Outlaw and Webster can finish on the wings, if Przybilla continues his break-out, if Randolph returns to his form of two years ago, if Miles delivers on all his potential, the Blazers will be one of the top teams in basketball.
> 
> ...


Perhaps they are mediocre in terms of proven talent. But you have a guy in Bell who has been shooting better than ever as of late. You have James Jones who has also been hitting very well as of late and was able to break out last year when he was given the chance. You have House, who is a three master and can hit in bunches. You have Barbosa in his third year, contract year, looking to prove himself. You have Shawn Marion moving back to the 4 and retaining the speed advantage he had over 4's last year. You have Steve Nash, who is better at running the team than he ever was. We're asking these new guys to continue to hit shots, which is what they do well anyways. ANd you're asking them to run, when most of these players are built to run anyways. Telfair becoming an elite guard is a lot more of a stretch than asking Jackson/Jones/Bell to take shots when they are open. Bell and Jones have not had the chance to prove themselves (well, Bell has done well). Randolph and Miles have. Yes, there are if's with ever team, but the chances of those if's panning out are not the same. Our disagreement is that you don't think those if's will pan out for the Suns. I do.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

ShuHanGuanYu said:


> Perhaps they are mediocre in terms of proven talent. But you have a guy in Bell who has been shooting better than ever as of late. You have James Jones who has also been hitting very well as of late and was able to break out last year when he was given the chance. You have House, who is a three master and can hit in bunches. You have Barbosa in his third year, contract year, looking to prove himself. You have Shawn Marion moving back to the 4 and retaining the speed advantage he had over 4's last year. You have Steve Nash, who is better at running the team than he ever was. We're asking these new guys to continue to hit shots, which is what they do well anyways. ANd you're asking them to run, when most of these players are built to run anyways. Telfair becoming an elite guard is a lot more of a stretch than asking Jackson/Jones/Bell to take shots when they are open. Bell and Jones have not had the chance to prove themselves (well, Bell has done well). Randolph and Miles have. Yes, there are if's with ever team, but the chances of those if's panning out are not the same. Our disagreement is that you don't think those if's will pan out for the Suns. I do.


What about the inside game? Way I'm seeing the suns Roster there are really only 3 guys 6'9" or taller Thomas and Grand (both 6'9") and Pat Burke (6'11"), none of which is going to be able to get out and run...

So is the lineup going to be like
PG Nash
SG Bell
SF Jones
PF Marion 
C Thomas

Man I gotta love fan optomism but since this is the Blazers board not the Suns board I'm gonna have to say that I just don't see that team being very good. That lineup is nowhere near what the Suns had last year and nowhere near anything Nash ever ran with in Dallas. 

If Amare misses the whole season that team maybe sneaks into the playoffs at number 8...at best. Chances are they are more like a 35 win team.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

I just want to add that one thing to look at is the # of 3's hoisted

Johnson took 370
Richardson 631

replacements

Bell 134
Jones 166
Jackson 295

those 3 guys combined don't add up to tne # of 3's heaved up by richarson alone

Diaws not a shooter


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

Schilly said:


> What about the inside game? Way I'm seeing the suns Roster there are really only 3 guys 6'9" or taller Thomas and Grand (both 6'9") and Pat Burke (6'11"), none of which is going to be able to get out and run...
> 
> So is the lineup going to be like
> PG Nash
> ...


They will lack inside game. That wasn't being argued. It's pretty easy to see that losing Amare is going to kill their inside game. The original argument is to start Grant and Thomas because they are going to have a mediocre offense anyways, and I disagreed. Don't dismiss what I say just because I'm a Suns fans. I've taken these kinds of stands with other teams as well, and I watch almost every team in the NBA.

With your 3pt totals, you are not taking into account the number of minutes these guys played or where they previously played. For example: Bell can shoot em, but wasnt asked to in Utah. You're comparing totals of guys who were given a green light to guys who were not. For example: Jones was told to pass the ball around a few times, even if you pass up an open shot, and then if you get a good shot later on take it. Why do you think that in Suns training camp these guys are shocked and are laughing in interviews about the fact that they've never had a green light like this before? That doesn't give a very accurate analysis in my opinion. I've already done this analysis in one of my older posts, and I am too lazy to go find it. The guys we have are good shooters, and couple with increased minutes, their totals are going to increase. Totals are often worthless when you don't look at the whole picture.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

ShuHanGuanYu said:


> ... I watch almost every team in the NBA.


The league pass is a beautiful thing. The good, the bad, and the ugly... I'm looking forward to watching them all again and again.

STOMP


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

STOMP said:


> The league pass is a beautiful thing. The good, the bad, and the ugly... I'm looking forward to watching them all again.
> 
> STOMP


Me too! I can't for this thing to start. There's so many teams this season that I want to watch. Namely Cleveland, Atlanta, Houston, Milwaukee, Miami, Indiana, New Jersey, Philly, Lakers, New York, Clippers...mostly Eastern teams. Interesting.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

The Suns are not going to be very good with no inside game. I mean Brian Grant is an injury waiting to happen and then your big rotation is what? Marion, Kurt Thomas and Pat Burke? :uhoh:


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

HKF said:


> The Suns are not going to be very good with no inside game. I mean Brian Grant is an injury waiting to happen and then your big rotation is what? Marion, Kurt Thomas and Pat Burke? :uhoh:


Hey! Pat Burke one had a quadruple double against me in Live 04..Man he even hit 3's. Me and my friend would fight about who gets him.


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

70% of Seattle's offense was from the outside last year, and they did fairly well. They did have some inside toughness, but when talking about offense...not really.

Suns biggest problem will be getting to the free throw line.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

Minstrel said:


> Well, if you're right in your expectation that Stoudemire won't be back this season, I agree that they could be that bad.


I'm no doctor (I don't even play one on TV), but just for reference it's been 6 1/2 months since Zach had his surgery and he's just now finishing up his rehab and starting to play basketball again. Though I've little idea if their respective injuries are similar, Zach's injury was to a non weight bearing part of the knee which is supposed to aid in recovery. 

I hope that Amare makes a full and speedy recovery ahead of the estimates, but I jus thave my doubts.

STOMP


----------



## dkap (May 13, 2003)

Can there be any question that the Suns: a) lost a large percentage of their outside shooting, b) lost the bulk of their athleticism, and c) lost their primary matchup advantages that caused everyone so many headaches? Those are all undebatable points, in my opinion.

Marion is a great athlete and finisher, but not much on his own. Nash is individually great in flashes, but prefers to play off others for long stretches, sometimes entire games. His history tells us he won't last the season if relied on too heavily. His brilliance comes from being lethally effective when you can't cheat off the other players on the floor, and with Amare, JJ, and Q gone, the Suns no longer have that luxury. They look to be an extremely easy team to match up with now.

(I thought the Suns had a horrendous off-season prior to Amare's injury announcement, now it's exponentially compounded.)

Dan


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

ShuHanGuanYu said:


> 70% of Seattle's offense was from the outside last year, and they did fairly well. They did have some inside toughness, but when talking about offense...not really.
> 
> Suns biggest problem will be getting to the free throw line.


and if the Sonics lost Ray Allen (their best player) and had traded away their best outside shooter (lets just say Ray for easy comparisons), Rashard Lewis, *and* another player (lets say Daniels since he is gone)..there's no one on this planet that would say the team would be near as good, regardless of who else they have.

The suns lost their best player, their best 3 point shooter, and a guy who had almost a 3rd of their 3 point shots. Regardless of whether or not you want to agree to this, the Suns aren't going to be near what they were last year, even WITH Amare healthy all year.


----------



## cpt.napalm (Feb 23, 2005)

Nash and Amare demanded double teams, or at least required teams to commit to guarding them. Their shooters benfitted. Now with Amare out. All defenses will have to do is clog the top of the lane to stop nash and marion from pentratinng. Then other defneders can commit ot their man so that even if the wings wanted to shoot at he levels of Rich and JJ they wont get as many open looks. Nash won't get any where near as many assists without easy catch and shoot passes to the wings. 

Heck put a Ratliff Pryz front line in and the suns are shut down.


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

Hap said:


> and if the Sonics lost Ray Allen (their best player) and had traded away their best outside shooter (lets just say Ray for easy comparisons), Rashard Lewis, *and* another player (lets say Daniels since he is gone)..there's no one on this planet that would say the team would be near as good, regardless of who else they have.
> 
> The suns lost their best player, their best 3 point shooter, and a guy who had almost a 3rd of their 3 point shots. Regardless of whether or not you want to agree to this, the Suns aren't going to be near what they were last year, even WITH Amare healthy all year.


You're right, I do disagree with that. Suns problem in the playoffs last year was a lack of depth. This year, they have some depth. They also have better rebounding and toughness inside, something that would have helped them in the playoffs. They were going to be a better playoff team. This is with Amare all year.


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

dkap said:


> Can there be any question that the Suns: a) lost a large percentage of their outside shooting, b) lost the bulk of their athleticism, and c) lost their primary matchup advantages that caused everyone so many headaches? Those are all undebatable points, in my opinion.
> 
> Marion is a great athlete and finisher, but not much on his own. Nash is individually great in flashes, but prefers to play off others for long stretches, sometimes entire games. His history tells us he won't last the season if relied on too heavily. His brilliance comes from being lethally effective when you can't cheat off the other players on the floor, and with Amare, JJ, and Q gone, the Suns no longer have that luxury. They look to be an extremely easy team to match up with now.
> 
> ...


No, there is no question in either of those. Those are undebatable points, which is why we weren't debating them. To see what we were debating, you would need to read through the thread.


----------



## dkap (May 13, 2003)

> No, there is no question in either of those. Those are undebatable points, which is why we weren't debating them. To see what we were debating, you would need to read through the thread.


Sorry, but that's pure nonsense. If you don't deny any of those points, then there's no reasonable conclusion other than the Suns will be significantly worse, which is precisely what you are denying/debating.

And yes, I've followed the thread.

Dan


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

dkap said:


> Sorry, but that's pure nonsense. If you don't deny any of those points, then there's no reasonable conclusion other than the Suns will be significantly worse, which is precisely what you are denying/debating.
> 
> And yes, I've followed the thread.
> 
> Dan


I argue points. If you ever bothered to ask me and not jump to conclusions I would tell you that I am not optimistic about this year, and in another thread I said the Sonics would win more games than the Suns this year. The irony here is that I've been told I am a pessimist about next year. Haha, go figure. When someone says "OMG look at the three point totals, they're going to suck this year", I don't think that's the reason they will struggle. Therefore I argue it. When people say losing JJ and Q, and then ignoring the acquisitions the Suns have made, I argue that. When someone says "all they have to do is stay at home on their shooters", I challenge that. I have argued with your point A, even in this thread. Lost but also somewhat replaced. Someone argued that the Suns should start Grant and Thomas at the same time because their offense is already mediocre. That made me almost cringe...hehe, so I argued it. I think they will struggle for a variety of reasons, but those I don't believe will affect them as much....I argue. For instance, I offered that the Suns biggest struggle will be getting to the free throw line. They will launch threes like crazy this year, and with their style getting them open shots (even without Amare), they will hit them. I don't believe that will be much of an issue. Instead of anyone responding to why I think they'll struggle, I get the finger pointed at me talking "pure nonsense". But hey, it's all good on my end. 

EDIT: The reason I began to talk in here is because I want to debate with people who are not homers, in case you wondered.

Chris


----------



## dkap (May 13, 2003)

> When people say losing JJ and Q, and then ignoring the acquisitions the Suns have made, I argue that.


No one has ignored those acquisitions. To the contrary, it's been repeatedly stated how those acquisitions are vastly inferior to the players lost. In short, you're arguing simply for the sake of arguing, which quickly grows very tiresome, at least to me.

Dan


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

This is a basketball message board, where people are supposed to...ya know...talk about basketball and stuff. My bad for...talking about basketball. I'll try to keep that to a minimum next time.


----------

