This week in the NBA

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

I thought it was a bad move. TJ Ford is like poor man's Jason Kidd, while Villanueva is just a jump shooter who can get hot. The Bucks I think have made the playoffs 2 out of the last 3 years, and those were the seasons Ford played in. The only year he didn't play, they didn't make it.

 

I didn't say you thought it was a good move. In general, it was thought of as a good move by the basketball media. Bad trades are the ones that look bad on paper when they happen and turn out even worse in the long run (like an Isiah trade).

[Brett Favre 0]

Lol. Which Isiah trade?

[alfdogg 0]

I wouldn't say the Bucks underachieved last year. They did finish 8th in the East, but the 5-8 spots were at a dead heat, and the Bucks actually entered the second to last day of the season in the 5 spot. Unless people were expecting them to be better than Miami/NJ/Detroit/Cleveland, they probably did what most expected last year.

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

I wouldn't say the Bucks underachieved last year. They did finish 8th in the East, but the 5-8 spots were at a dead heat, and the Bucks actually entered the second to last day of the season in the 5 spot. Unless people were expecting them to be better than Miami/NJ/Detroit/Cleveland, they probably did what most expected last year.

 

They finished with a losing record. Their 3-6 skid down the stretch dropped them from 5th, where they might have won a series, to eighth where the got manhandled by Detroit. I think most people expected them to win 45+ games and be in contention in the east. They never really got the most out of their talent.

 

As for me, I don't blame Stotts. I blame the absolutely awful green and red uniforms.

[Ripper 0]

THe bucks real fuck up was firing Terry Porter. He was simply a better coach than Stots, who I don't mind as a coach(hell, I would gladly welcome him back over Mike Woodson right now). They were doomed from that. And I was in the "This is a really dumb trade for Milwalkee" camp.

 

My post after the trade:

 

That is a horrible trade for the Bucks. So they give up a guy that has allstar level potential at the point for another small forward....after they gave Bobby Simmons like a gazillion dollars the other year(unless they are going to play him at the 4).

 

Yes....look at the good predictions in case the Hawks don't make the playoffs...then ignore that one.

[Lt. Al Giardello 0]

The Mavs are going to put a beating on the Suns tonight.

[Corkscrew_Senton 0]

The Mavs are going to put a beating on the Suns tonight.

 

The Suns to me are telling of the NBA's current state. The Suns now are the Denver Nuggets in the '80s, the difference being the league was too good to let a team like Denver be more than first or second round playoff fonder back then.

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

The Mavs are going to put a beating on the Suns tonight.

 

The Suns to me are telling of the NBA's current state. The Suns now are the Denver Nuggets in the '80s, the difference being the league was too good to let a team like Denver be more than first or second round playoff fonder back then.

 

Those Nuggets team were all run and gun, with no semblance of defense or half court set offense. They aren't really comparable in any sense other than they score a lot of points.

 

By the way, those Nuggets teams made the playoffs every year from 1982 to 1990 and had appeared in the conference finals once and the semis three other times. They weren't exactly chumps in what was a pretty tough conference.

[Corkscrew_Senton 0]

The Mavs are going to put a beating on the Suns tonight.

 

The Suns to me are telling of the NBA's current state. The Suns now are the Denver Nuggets in the '80s, the difference being the league was too good to let a team like Denver be more than first or second round playoff fonder back then.

 

Those Nuggets team were all run and gun, with no semblance of defense or half court set offense. They aren't really comparable in any sense other than they score a lot of points.

 

By the way, those Nuggets teams made the playoffs every year from 1982 to 1990 and had appeared in the conference finals once and the semis three other times. They weren't exactly chumps in what was a pretty tough conference.

 

 

Didn't say they were chumps, said they were first or second round fodder for the Lakers and Rockets team...and those semis appearances would be second round.

 

The Suns may run a better halfcourt set, but with the exception of Marion and maybe Stoudemire, the Suns' defense is bad.

[Brett Favre 0]

Bell, Thomas, and James Jones aren't bad defenders either.

[Corkscrew_Senton 0]

Bell, Thomas, and James Jones aren't bad defenders either.

 

Ah yeah, Bell's a solid defender. Thomas, I dunno...he's not bad, but when he's one of your top three or four defenders on the roster, that's not a good sign. I just think when you've got San Antonio, the No. 1 overall defense and Dallas, the No. 3 overall looming in your conference, being ranked 25th in defense isn't a good sign of your postseason hopes.

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

By defensive effeciency, the Suns have been on the cusp of being a top 5 defense all year long. I don't really see anything in their perfomance that indicates they are a bad defensive team. Nash isn't the greatest defender in the world at the point, but the defense hardly crumbles around him. What makes you say they are bad defensively?

[Corkscrew_Senton 0]

By defensive effeciency, the Suns have been on the cusp of being a top 5 defense all year long. I don't really see anything in their perfomance that indicates they are a bad defensive team. Nash isn't the greatest defender in the world at the point, but the defense hardly crumbles around him. What makes you say they are bad defensively?

 

Well Nash by himself for sure, he gets torched by guy's like Terry and Parker anytime he faces them. They give up more PPG than all but 5 teams, and while that's indicative of their style of play, their opponent's FG percentage is middle-of-the-road. I think they rank like 12, which isn't that good.

 

I should have qualified my statement a little more -- they're defense is mediocre, which is bad for a supposed Finals contender.

[Guest]

Their defense is middle of the road. I wouldn't call it bad or good.

 

Defensive stats with run-n-gun teams can be a tad misleading going both ways...

[Corkscrew_Senton 0]

Their defense is middle of the road. I wouldn't call it bad or good.

 

Defensive stats with run-n-gun teams can be a tad misleading going both ways...

 

Very true. I should have said "bad for a considered contender." To me the most telling stats when it comes to Phoenix's defense are opponent field goal percentage, which ranks 12th (from lowest to highest) and rebounding. The Suns for all the up-and-down play only average 40 boards per, which ranks in the bottom third of the NBA.

[Guest Eagle Man]

It's their St. Patrick's Day spirit (and for the NBA to get a few extra bucks from jersey sales). The Knicks and Celtics did it last year as well, though in Boston's case, it actually makes sense.

It makes sense for New York and Chicago, too. They have huge Irish populations.

As for me, I don't blame Stotts. I blame the absolutely awful green and red uniforms.

No way, man. Green and red is the Bucks. What, you preferred purple and green?

[Ripper 0]

By defensive effeciency, the Suns have been on the cusp of being a top 5 defense all year long. I don't really see anything in their perfomance that indicates they are a bad defensive team. Nash isn't the greatest defender in the world at the point, but the defense hardly crumbles around him. What makes you say they are bad defensively?

 

Well Nash by himself for sure, he gets torched by guy's like Terry and Parker anytime he faces them. They give up more PPG than all but 5 teams, and while that's indicative of their style of play, their opponent's FG percentage is middle-of-the-road. I think they rank like 12, which isn't that good.

 

I should have qualified my statement a little more -- they're defense is mediocre, which is bad for a supposed Finals contender.

 

 

The problem with this statement is that Nash torches guys like Terry and Parker anytime he faces them. Tony Parker is a worse defensive player than Steve Nash(yes, I mean that seriously) and Jason Terry is not much better than parker. Defensively when it comes to being in the right position, taking charges and disrupting plays, steve is pretty good. He isn't great at keeping guys infront of them.

 

And once again, when people say SUPPOSED finals contender when injuries is what kept them out the finals two years straight. There is nothing supposed about that. Blah blah blah, they give up more ppg, but the average the most. PPG is always deciving. Point differential is what is most important. Yes, If I hold the ball until one second left on the shot clock on every trip down, I will probably hold a team to 75-80 points per game. But I won't score more than 75-80 points a game. The suns shoot the ball within 10 seconds of the shot clock most times. Teams can get up to twice as many chances at scoring against them than other teams.

 

But whatever. Nothing is going to stop people from incorrectly doubting them until the win the championship. But at the same time I don't understand why people are blowin Dallas so much. They haven't won one either. And this Dallas team is 1-1 in the playoffs against the suns. that was missing a VERY key part both times.

[Corkscrew_Senton 0]

The opponent PPG is deceiving, yes, but the mediocre opponent FG percentage and the awful rebounds per game stat aren't deceiving. Those are both rather telling of why Phoenix isn't all that viable a contender.

 

And there's no problem with this statement since the discussion was about Nash's defense, not his offense. He's a fantastic offensive player and no one would ever dispute that, but both Terry and Parker average considerably more PPG against Phoenix than they do the rest of the league, particularly in the postseason.

 

If you're going to talk about what Phoenix lacked in '05 (Joe Johnson) and in '06 (Stoudemire), then you also have to consider that in the regular season at full strength Phoenix has been owned by San Antonio the last three years and Dallas this year.

 

You're right to say Phoenix winning a title would erase doubt, but people are right to doubt them when they've come up short both in the regular season and postseason against the upper echelon teams. Maybe they'll win the title this year, but when your defense is so-so and your rebounding just plain sucks, observers are right to have doubts.

 

Maybe you can win a championship relying mainly on outgunning your opponent, but history would say otherwise, and Dallas' rise would reaffirm that.

[Ripper 0]

The opponent PPG is deceiving, yes, but the mediocre opponent FG percentage and the awful rebounds per game stat aren't deceiving. Those are both rather telling of why Phoenix isn't all that viable a contender.

 

And there's no problem with this statement since the discussion was about Nash's defense, not his offense. He's a fantastic offensive player and no one would ever dispute that, but both Terry and Parker average considerably more PPG against Phoenix than they do the rest of the league, particularly in the postseason.

 

If you're going to talk about what Phoenix lacked in '05 (Joe Johnson) and in '06 (Stoudemire), then you also have to consider that in the regular season at full strength Phoenix has been owned by San Antonio the last three years and Dallas this year.

 

You're right to say Phoenix winning a title would erase doubt, but people are right to doubt them when they've come up short both in the regular season and postseason against the upper echelon teams. Maybe they'll win the title this year, but when your defense is so-so and your rebounding just plain sucks, observers are right to have doubts.

 

Maybe you can win a championship relying mainly on outgunning your opponent, but history would say otherwise, and Dallas' rise would reaffirm that.

 

I had this discussion last week I think, San Antonio did not OWN the suns in the regular season in 05 or 06. In 05, they only beat the suns at full strengh once. In overtime. The other win, Nash didn't play and the Suns win, Duncan didn't play. Dallas has beaten the suns twice this year. Once because Raja Bell missed a freethrow to win it with no time on the clock and the suns lost in overtime and the second time off a Dirk jumpshot with .7 seconds left to win by one.

 

People throw around this "OWNZ" crap all the time, but how is a bunch of games that came down to one shot showing dominance by anyone.

 

The oppoents shoot 44.8 percent from the field and the suns oppents shoot 45.4 percent from the field. Are you going to really sit here and argue that .6 percentage point is the difference between good defense and bad defense?

 

The suns average more defensive rebounds per game than the Mavs, but the Mavs average 2 more offensive rebounds. The suns also happen to shoot 3 percent better than the Mavs. Meaning? The Mavs miss more shots thus get more offensive rebounds.

 

Everything you are trying to argue is...well...wrong. Unless you are arguing that dallas's rebounding plain sucks and they are a so-so defensive team.

And if you want to look up something else, the Suns average the exact same amount of rebounds per game as the SPurs, and defensively holds the other team to 45.4 as compared to the 44.2 that San Antonio does. So once again, either you are really really really wrong or the Spurs also are so so defensively and suck at rebounding.

[Precious Roy 0]

The Bucks have had injuries to Michael Redd, Maurice Williams and Charlie V. I've got a hard time knocking the Ford deal when Maurice Williams is having a better year than him, and while he's not the effortless playmaker that Ford is he is a much better shooter and defender.

 

And Villanueva is a really well rounded player. He's streaky and has been hurt off and on all season, but he's certainly more than just a jump shooter.

[Corkscrew_Senton 0]

You know what? Last place in the league and first place are only separated by a few rebounds per game, and the same goes for FG percentage. Those few boards and few FG percentage points really do mean a lot obviously since they're the difference between wins and losses. It doesn't matter how much you lose by, how much you get outrebounded, etc. Close isn't the same as getting it done, period. No one gets an award for being close. Call me wrong all you want, but the proof is in the pudding so to say.

[Ripper 0]

.6 percentage is the difference between a good d and a bad d? ANd once again, this means you are calling the Spurs and Mavs horrible rebounding teams. You can't argue that.,

 

The suns are quite literally number 3 in the league on the defensive boards and number 30 on the offensive. But they also shoot better than every other team in the league. Fun fact, if you make shots, there is no offensive rebound to get. So sure, the total rebound numbers look off with them at 18 in the league but they are quite literally not missing nearly as many shots as the other teams in the league. That is getting it done.

 

I personally think you thought you had a argument and the stats don't back it up at all. But thats okay. I understand why people would believe that with the comentators sqwaking about how bad of a defensive team the suns are but the numbers and the results say a completely different thing.

[Guest]

And if you take shots so fast and miss them, chances are that you don't have a guy down there to get the offensive rebound.

 

I think that part of his argument (rebounding), was shit by the way.

[alfdogg 0]

Question. I haven't seen this whole game, but I had been following the box score on Yahoo...when I checked midway through the second, James Jones had come in and made three straight 3's...and hasn't played since. Did he get hurt, or is this just a brainfart on D'Antoni's part?

[alfdogg 0]

Also, why can't home teams just stick to wearing white or yellow. Or at least make a "home" version of your secondary jersey.

[Guest Eagle Man]

Home teams can't wear yellow unless they're the Lakers. I don't get that rule.

[Corkscrew_Senton 0]

There's no disputing the Suns do very well against most all of the league with their style, but as they are proving right now they're not in league with Dallas or San Antonio.

 

What has Phoenix done to prove 1. it's a championship level team or 2. that it's good defensively? Ripper, you dispute that they're bad or even mediocre defensively, so I'm assuming you think they're a good defensive team. What have they done to prove that?

[Fökai 0]

Question. I haven't seen this whole game, but I had been following the box score on Yahoo...when I checked midway through the second, James Jones had come in and made three straight 3's...and hasn't played since. Did he get hurt, or is this just a brainfart on D'Antoni's part?

He's not matching up well with anyone on the court with Dallas. He played after the half, but he was being outclassed. Howard was crushing him in the third on mid-range shots, and Dampier was having his way with him on the offensive rebound.

[USC Wuz Robbed! 0]

People should know by now I think the Suns are overrated, but they are good enough of a defensive team and whatever they may lack on defense, they more than make up on offense.

[naiwf 0]

Mavs = Retards