Debating D'Antoni's Suns

[cabbageboy 0]

While it's a bit early yet to put Steve Kerr in the worst ever category, what he's done to the Suns the past couple of seasons has been wretched. Running D'Antoni out of town, trading for Shaq with no thought as to how he fits, hiring Terry Porter to implement a slow down system that doesn't work with the personnel. Stoudamire hasn't been traded yet, but who knows.

[Guest Czech please!]

Meh. The Suns still weren't any damn good before they attempted playing defense. Kerr almost did us a favor by busting up that overhyped ball of sub-excellence. How the Mike D'Antoni Phoenix Suns never cracked the list at Stuff White People Like, itself an overhyped ball of sub-excellence, still boggles me to this day.

[alfdogg 0]

The Phoenix Suns debacle goes on the players first and foremost. They could have worked under Terry Porter, but they didn't because they're all a bunch of crybabies who refuse to put forth any effort on defense or towards anything that "isn't fun". That was the first thing Boris Diaw said after being dealt to Charlotte, complaining about how it wasn't fun anymore. Shawn Marion did the same thing after leaving Miami, saying he was glad he didn't have to play with those "boring set plays" anymore, or something to that effect. That's why I've always argued that the Suns' rise to prominence did more bad for the game than it did good, because everyone just wants to play their style now, and teams like the Spurs and Pistons, who were doing all the right things to win titles, were written off as "boring."

[Guest Czech please!]

On the money, alf. The Suns were a colossal waste of time and weren't even that entertaining. Just a stupid gimmick that couldn't hang with legit squads. Do you think Steve Nash might be the worst multi-time MVP in league history? That puts him in a group with Michael Jordan, Kareem-Abdul Jabbar, Magic Johnson, and Bill Russell. Steve Nash is not in a group with Michael Jordan, Kareem-Abdul Jabbar, Magic Johnson, and Bill Russell.

 

Regarding the Spurs/Pistons, as I've said millions of times, people don't know what they want. Everyone loved the 2004 Pistons because they knocked off the collapsing star of the Shaq/Kobe Lakers with solid shutdown team defense, and that was finally what basketball ought to be, but when the Spurs do the same, it's the worst thing to happen to the NBA. The difference is probably that the Pistons were kind of cool, whereas the Lakers and Spurs are insufferable (in different ways, of course).

[PUT THAT DICK IN MY MOUTH! 0]

On the money, alf. The Suns were a colossal waste of time and weren't even that entertaining. Just a stupid gimmick that couldn't hang with legit squads.

 

You seem to be ignoring the fact that they went to the Western Conference Finals twice in four years, and were it not for some hilariously awful luck (Joe Johnson's broken eye-socket, Amar'e missing a whole year, Nash's nose exploding, the Stoudemire/Diaw suspensions) they would have had a legit shot at making the Finals and winning a championship (they probably could have beaten Detroit in '05 and definitely could have beaten Cleveland in '07). To completely write off a team that averaged 58 wins a season over four years as some kind of colossal failure is kinda silly.

 

When taken to the extreme D'Antonin's system probably isn't a model for sustainable success, but its influence is pretty undeniable. Scoring is up everywhere (11 teams, including five of the six division leaders, are averaging over 100 ppg right now. In comparison, only five teams averaged 100+ in 05-06) and teams like the Lakers, Cavs and Magic are proving that potent offense and solid defense aren't mutually exclusive. The league as a whole seems to be reaching some kind of dialectical synthesis and it's a beautiful thing.

 

I will agree that Nash probably didn't deserve two MVPs, mainly because Kobe deserved in in '06.

[naiwf 0]

On the money, alf. The Suns were a colossal waste of time and weren't even that entertaining. Just a stupid gimmick that couldn't hang with legit squads. Do you think Steve Nash might be the worst multi-time MVP in league history? That puts him in a group with Michael Jordan, Kareem-Abdul Jabbar, Magic Johnson, and Bill Russell. Steve Nash is not in a group with Michael Jordan, Kareem-Abdul Jabbar, Magic Johnson, and Bill Russell.

 

Regarding the Spurs/Pistons, as I've said millions of times, people don't know what they want. Everyone loved the 2004 Pistons because they knocked off the collapsing star of the Shaq/Kobe Lakers with solid shutdown team defense, and that was finally what basketball ought to be, but when the Spurs do the same, it's the worst thing to happen to the NBA. The difference is probably that the Pistons were kind of cool, whereas the Lakers and Spurs are insufferable (in different ways, of course).

 

I don't want to dig through the posts in this folder to find it but I'm pretty sure that I said something to the effect of Nash being the worst multiple time winner of an MVP award in North American pro sports history and still stand by that. I know there were multiple arguments with me about the topic because I was of the belief that the voters were giving Nash their vote for different reasons in back to back seasons which pretty much meant they couldn't keep their stories straight. He won the first because he improved the team more than Shaq improved Miami, even though Dallas ALSO improved after he left. How could Nash be the most valuable player in the league when a playoff team actually got better without him? The second one he was given because he "improved on an MVP performance" or some bullshit along those lines. People were blinded by the style because Rileyball "killed" the NBA in the '90s.

 

I feel good now because I was one of the few people here who hated the Suns and everything they were doing. Had they won a championship it would have made the NBA even harder to watch than it is already. My favorite part of the whole Suns' run was Nash flopping like a bitch along the sideboards and getting his teammates suspended costing them a series. If he just takes his hit like a man, gets up and sinks the free throws the Suns probably win the title that year. Old habits die hard I guess.

[PUT THAT DICK IN MY MOUTH! 0]

I feel good now because I was one of the few people here who hated the Suns and everything they were doing. Had they won a championship it would have made the NBA even harder to watch than it is already.

 

I know, I fucking hate high energy games and slam dunks. Give me Tim Duncan backing down in the post for 8 seconds and then either banking it off the glass or passing out to a shitty roleplayer for a corner three. Yeah, that's the good stuff.

[naiwf 0]

I feel good now because I was one of the few people here who hated the Suns and everything they were doing. Had they won a championship it would have made the NBA even harder to watch than it is already.

 

I know, I fucking hate high energy games and slam dunks. Give me Tim Duncan backing down in the post for 8 seconds and then either banking it off the glass or passing out to a shitty roleplayer for a corner three. Yeah, that's the good stuff.

 

If you want to watch a high energy game, lots of slam dunks and absolutely no semblance of defense there's always the And1 Mixtape Tour.

[Guest Czech please!]

I just got supremely irritated with this notion that the Phoenix Suns reinvented basketball. No they didn't. They just stopped playing defense. The rainbow Nuggets did the same thing in the 1980s and similarly have nothing to show for it.

 

Yeah, here are your multi-time NBA MVPs. Kareem with 6; Michael and Russell with 5; Wilt with 4; Moses Malone, Magic, and Bird with 3; Karl Malone, Tim Duncan, Bob Pettit, and Steve Nash with 2. Somebody has crashed the paahhhh-ty.

[A Happy Medium 0]

The Suns played defense, guys. They just weren't very good at it. Raja Bell, and Kurt Thomas were brought in for defensive purposes and did well, except for how Kurt Thomas missed some time. Shawn Marrion was very underrated as a defender, as he could guard twos, threes, and fours. When he guarded fours, it just made him more dangerous on the offensive end. Steve Nash has never been a good defender, and as his injuries piled up, he became a liability.

 

Also, Nash should not have won two straight MVP's. I have to say this.

[YourKock'sReallyGreat 0]

Plus the Suns were a couple of bad calls/suspensions away from going to the Finals.

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

I don't see how D'Antoni's Suns were any different from the Kings and Mavs of the early to mid oughts. All of them had a certain degree of success playing an uptempo system, but ultimately failed against better, more balanced teams. It seems a little ironic that there seems to be a backlash now against that team as I know I was shot down on several occasions in the past when I said they weren't good enough to win the title.

 

As for Nash's two MVPs, I don't have any qualms. Inevitably that discussion will turn into a Most Outstanding versus Most Valuable argument, which I'm not interested in. The way I look at it is Nash ran the most successful regular season team for two consecutive years. He had as much as a case anyone, even if historically he'll fall short of the other two-time winners.

[Brett Favre 0]

The Suns weren't a horrible defensive team. They were about league average. Steve Nash was basically the only acquisition other than Quentin Richardson that helped turn a team around about 30 games. That's an MVP.

 

I don't understand the Phoenix Suns hate when people HATED the way the Knicks and Heat played in the 90s. And the way the Suns play isn't any different than a shitload of teams in the 80s, 70s, etc. They all played a high paced style. The year the Lakers won the title in '87 they averaged 117 points a game. But now it's frowned upon? Fuck that.

[Guest Vitamin X]

The Suns were just the 00's version of the 80's Nuggets. It's over and done with. Next.

[Guest Czech please!]

I like fast-paced basketball. I didn't care for the Suns because I always felt like they were a paper tiger and my time was being wasted.

[Brett Favre 0]

No one gets more out of their players, at least offensively, than Mike D'Antoni. Nothing OMG THIS SUCKS about that.

[Lt. Al Giardello 0]

I will agree that Nash probably didn't deserve two MVPs, mainly because Kobe deserved in in '06.

 

And Shaq deserved it in 2005...

 

I also thought Dirk deserved it in 2006.

[Brett Favre 0]

How did Shaq deserve it in 2005 when he had Wade on his team? Same team that made it to the 2nd round the year before.

 

In 2006, Steve Nash led an Amare-less Phoenix Suns team to 50+ win season. Their playoff run was a pretty gutsy one.

[cabbageboy 0]

I don't really buy the Suns being the 00s version of the Denver Nuggets. The Nuggets were never a real threat to a team like the Lakers, never had a 1 seed, really just had 2 years of even winning 50 games in the decade (52 wins in 1985, 54 in 1988).

 

The main problem the Suns had is that guys kept getting injured or simply had bad luck. Joe Johnson missed some of the 2005 Spurs series, Stoudamire was gone for the 2006 playoffs or they may well have beaten the Mavs, and we all know what happened to them in the 07 Spurs series with the suspensions.

[alfdogg 0]

The 2007 series. The Suns, at best, played the Spurs equally through the first four games. Who knows what would have happened without the suspensions, but I am so sick of hearing THE SUNS WOULD TOTALLY HAVE WON IT ALL IF NOT FOR THAT. And we're also forgetting about a pending matchup with Utah, who matched up great with the Suns and beat them 3 out of 4 during the season.

 

And no team had more luck in the '06 playoffs than the Suns. Remember Tim Thomas's three against the Lakers, and Raja Bell's against the Clippers? There's a pretty good chance they lose both those series if those shots don't fall.

 

Back to the Spurs briefly, though. Aren't Ginobili and Parker fun to watch? It's not all just Duncan and his boring fundamentals. And I still think it's hypocritical to rip on the Spurs for flopping and complaining to officials, and come into this thread and praise the Suns, who are worse offenders of those things (especially the latter), but get a free pass because they're exciting to watch. We hear about all the Suns' injuries/misfortunes ad nauseum, what about Ginobili's injured ankle against the Lakers last year? No one ever seems to bring that up.

 

All that said, though, I never really had a problem with either of Nash's MVPs, although I thought Dirk was more deserving in '06.

[Guest Czech please!]

I still think it's hypocritical to rip on the Spurs for flopping and complaining to officials, and come into this thread and praise the Suns, who are worse offenders of those things (especially the latter), but get a free pass because they're exciting to watch.

You just don't get it, alfman. The Phoenix Suns transcend criticism. They were a movement, man. What was cooler than rooting for the Suns from 2004-2008? Nothin'. Not that I know of, at least.

 

EDIT: I guess the answer is "rooting for the Mavericks from 2001-2004." Duh. Even I'm g.a.c. on that one.

[Mr. S£im Citrus 0]

I don't see how D'Antoni's Suns were any different from the Kings and Mavs of the early to mid oughts...

The year that Sacramento "would have won it all," had Webber not blown out his knee, blah, blah, blah, the Kings were #2 in the league in point differential, #1 in Opponent's FG%, and #1 in Opponent's 3FG% (the latter two of which are generally acknowledged as reliable indicators of true defensive effort). They were also #2 in the league in Defensive Rating, according to basketball-reference.com, which is a measure of points allowed per 100 possessions.

 

The year that the Suns "would have won it all," were it not for the suspensions, blah, blah, blah, they were ranked #2, #17, #9, and #13 in those same categories, respectively.

 

The Kings played defense, the Suns didn't; I'll thank you kindly not to compare the two.

[Just John 0]

While the Suns were never a championship threat, they were consistently good and definitely had nice little niche carved out that a lot of people enjoyed. Maybe not everyone here, but there's no denying there's a large audience for that kind of basketball.

 

I think the blame for their demise falls on everyone. The players are a bunch of whiners who didn't care about defense as much as making cool offensive plays (and when the leaders are Steve Nash and Amare Stoudemire, can you really be surprised?). Terry Porter couldn't get the team to buy into his system, which is something a good coach can do. Steve Kerr is a horrible GM who made some stupid deals and left the team with no identity. Say what you will about the 04-07 Suns, but they had chemistry, played well up to the second round or so of the playoffs, and people enjoyed watching them. None of those things apply to the team's present incarnation.

[The Niggardly King 0]

Remember Tim Thomas's three against the Lakers, and Raja Bell's against the Clippers? There's a pretty good chance they lose both those series if those shots don't fall.

 

Oh man please don't remind me of that. When the Bell three hit I think I nearly had a heart attack as I knew I wouldn't be seeing the Clippers in the playoffs until I'm in my early 30s.

[Star Ocean 3 0]

I wanted that Hallway Series between the Lakes and Clips to happen. Screw the selfish Suns for stopping that.