Phoenix-Houston

[Jimcs50]

Phoenix is up 7 with 10 mins left.

Rockets are shooting 35%.

[Jimcs50]

Houston down 71-66 now, and Stoudemire just got his 5th foul.


Marion is red hot...just score again.

[Jimcs50]

Scott Padgett for threeeee!!!!

71-69

[Jimcs50]

Jim Jackson for 3

down 5 again.

[timvp]

Spurs need a Rockets win for any hope in getting the #1 seed.

[Jimcs50]

Spurs need a Rockets win for any hope in getting the #1 seed.


Agreed, Phoenix has only 2 more road games after tonight.

[xcoriate]

I've been watching this prett close c'mon Rockets

[Jimcs50]

look at that gap and those hips......used up whore. at such a young age.


WTF are you talking about?

[Jimcs50]

76-71

Mike James missed back to back shots

[Jimcs50]

Damn, Houston had 3 on 1 break and threw it out of bounds

[Jimcs50]

Houston can not hit any shots tonight.

Down 10 now

[boutons]

Like the Spurs @ Nuggets, shooting way under 40% ain't gonna get it done against somebody shooting 45%.

[Jimcs50]

Rockets are shooting 35%.....horrible.

[xcoriate]

Houston can only outplay the Suns in there style of game, but theres not enough time to close out the lead with that style.

This ones probably over :(

[Jimcs50]

Game over

Suns get #1 seed.

[T Park]

good for them.

Spurs can beat the Suns IN Phoenix.

[Jimcs50]

good for them.

Spurs can beat the Suns IN Phoenix.


TPark, this is Phoenix' 30th, countem 30th win on the road this year.

This team does not have to have HCA to win, unlike SA, who have been pretty average on the raod all year.

Imagine trying to beat Phoenix when they have HCA. They can win so easily on the road that you would have to beat them in Phoenix and then protect your home court against the best road team in the NBA.

This is quite disconcerting.

[Manu20]

Yeah, Suns will be a scary team come playoff time and there offense is simply unstopple.

But remember the spurs are pretty good at home (35-3).

[Jimcs50]

Yeah, Suns will be a scary team come playoff time and there offense is simply unstopple.

But remember the spurs are pretty good at home (35-3).

I think Dallas has a great chance to beat Phoenix in rd 2 anyway, thus making HCA with Phoenix a moot subject.

[boutons]

Suns offense is definiely more relentless and reliable than the Spurs' defense, home or away.

If Tim's injury means we lose HCA to Suns, it could be fatal. We'd have to split the first two @PHX, and then come back and take both @SBC to get in control of the series. Going back to PHX for the 5th game tied at 2-2 would be very scary.

The road weakness of the Spurs would make it very difficult to close out a Suns series in PHX.

[Rummpd]

Whose to say Spurs don't go in there and beat Suns first two games? Playoffs are another story and Spurs defense will be on the whole games if it get to that series.

I am betting that Suns go down first or second round anyway.

[SuBZer0]

They won't lose against Dallas...interesting matchup though with Nowitzki vs Nash

[SirChaz]

This was a slow down physical, playoff type game and the Suns were able to pull it out despite a 10 point 2nd quarter. Marion was huge with 18 boards and some timely 3rd qtr baskets. Jim Jackson had a big 4th qtr and kept the Suns afloat for a while. Amare had an off night offensively but is really improving his defense and passing.

Suns won the rebounding and bench scoring stats along with a 20-6 advantage in fastbreak points.


It sure helped that McGrady looked less than 100% healthy and shot 6-21 and 0-5 for 3.

[SuBZer0]

WTF are you talking about?

I believe he's talking about the cheerleader.

[boutons]

"Whose to say Spurs don't go in there and beat Suns first two games?"

Anybody can say anything about the future, but looking at the past, the Spurs' mediocre road record, esp against playoff teams, isn't encouraging (Spurs were weak last season on the road after 1 Jan, then get blown out 0 - 3 on the road in Lakers playoffs).

Predicting the Spurs will all of a sudden become a tougher road team in the playoffs is as valid as saying the Suns become a tougher home team in the playoffs.

[Im Here Huckleberry]

I believe he's talking about the cheerleader.

He's actually talking about Eva Longoria in the picture.

[kskonn]

The spurs gutting out some wins without tim will help them become a more mentally tough team, which will help them win on the road. I also feel that the west is unpredictable. It is very strong and there are a number of teams that can get hot and upset teams in the first round. However the spurs defense is more consistent than anyones offense. It has been all year. It will be better now that they have had to play without duncan. Once he comes back the defense will be in sane. assuming are bench ( Barry) continues its great play when duncan comes back, the spurs will be incredibly tough to beat, no matter where they are.

[SirChaz]

It took a shorthanded Suns team and a career game from Manu to beat the Suns at home last time.

I think it would be a close series.


Some Suns fans say they want the Suns on the road becuase they are "better" on the road. I don't buy that, the Suns want the HCA.

I would much rather have the Suns face the Spurs at AWA more than at SBC. The Spurs are just too good at home.

[picnroll]

Nash has yet to show he can play effectively against the Spurs this year.

It's safes to say that the Suns will be held to a half court game throught a Suns - Spurs series and there will be little to no Johnson and Q Richardson spot ups for threes. I doubt the Suns can win four half-court games against the Spurs which is what they'll have to do to win the series because Pop isn't going to allow a transtion type game in the playoffs against the Suns.

[Spurminator]

We won't play the Suns in the Playoffs.

So it is written, so it shall be.

[Jimcs50]

We won't play the Suns in the Playoffs.

So it is written, so it shall be.

Spurm, I would like to think that is true, but I have to disagree....I think it is destiny.

[SirChaz]

It's safes to say that the Suns will be held to a half court game throught a Suns - Spurs series and there will be little to no Johnson and Q Richardson spot ups for threes. I doubt the Suns can win four half-court games against the Spurs which is what they'll have to do to win the series because Pop isn't going to allow a transtion type game in the playoffs against the Suns.


Easier said than done. The Suns half court offense is not the problem. The Suns can play the half court style, they just don't like to.

Rebounding is the biggest problem the Suns have, especially against the Spurs. If they rebound they can run on anybody. They may not be able to run as much in the playoffs but they will not be stopped completely.

If they even play the Spurs, I guess we will find out.

[Jimcs50]

Spurs are 40-4 when the outrebound their opponent this year. Phoenix better reb or they will be in a shaort series with the Spurs

[picnroll]

Suns won't run much on the Spurs if they meet in the playoffs. You can book it now. Spurs will be very disciplined in their shot selection. They will not over commit to offensive rebounding, making sure the backcourt players get back on D, leaving rebounding to the bigs. Spurs have a long history of shutting down transition teams in the playoffs, i.e., Suns, Mavs, Nets of 2002. Spurs have also shown they can shut down Nash's half-court penetration game. In the meantime the Suns defense is a shadow of what it was in '02.

[Spurminator]

Easier said than done. The Suns half court offense is not the problem. The Suns can play the half court style, they just don't like to.

Rebounding is the biggest problem the Suns have, especially against the Spurs. If they rebound they can run on anybody. They may not be able to run as much in the playoffs but they will not be stopped completely.

If they even play the Spurs, I guess we will find out.

It's more than just rebounding. The Suns have allowed the Spurs to shoot very well against them... 48% this year and 56% for the starters. When you factor in the offensive rebounds and free throws, it can probably be assumed that the Spurs score on well over half of their posessions against the Suns. Thus, the Suns are forced to inbound more often than they can run.

Also, the Suns only force 11 turnovers per game against the Spurs (compared to 14 versus other opponents).

[SirChaz]

Suns won't run much on the Spurs if they meet in the playoffs. You can book it now. Spurs will be very disciplined in their shot selection. They will not over commit to offensive rebounding, making sure the backcourt players get back on D, leaving rebounding to the bigs. Spurs have a long history of shutting down transition teams in the playoffs, i.e., Suns, Mavs, Nets of 2002. Spurs have also shown they can shut down Nash's half-court penetration game. In the meantime the Suns defense is a shadow of what it was in '02.


Sure, you are completely safe.

Won't even be a contest I'm sure.

:blah

[bigbendbruisebrother]

Easier said than done. The Suns half court offense is not the problem. The Suns can play the half court style, they just don't like to.

Rebounding is the biggest problem the Suns have, especially against the Spurs. If they rebound they can run on anybody. They may not be able to run as much in the playoffs but they will not be stopped completely.

If they even play the Spurs, I guess we will find out.

2005 Suns = 2003 Mavs. Same result. If they meet in the playoffs, the Spurs will send them packing. I'm not trashing your boys, they're a blast to watch, but their style prevents solid defensive play. The Mavs have tried it for years, and it wins in the regular season, but fails come playoff time. The Suns are even more precariously perched in my opinion because of their total reliance on Steve Nash. The Mavs in 2003 had some savvy vets, Nash and Novitzky and the Spurs prevailed.

On the flipside, these Spurs have some issues of their own to overcome, primarily Tim's injury and their inconsistent perimiter play.

One way or another, I agree with Spurminator that it is unlikely that the two teams meet in the playoffs.

[picnroll]

Sure, you are completely safe.

Won't even be a contest I'm sure.

:blah
Sure it would be a contest and Suns are a good team but frankly there are teams that I think it are more difficult for the Spurs to beat in the West., namely Dallas and Memphis. Memphis always plays the Spurs tough, Manu in particular. Only reason we had such an easy time with the Grizz last year was because Parker went zone the entire series.

[SirChaz]

2005 Suns = 2003 Mavs. Same result. If they meet in the playoffs, the Spurs will send them packing. I'm not trashing your boys, they're a blast to watch, but their style prevents solid defensive play. The Mavs have tried it for years, and it wins in the regular season, but fails come playoff time. The Suns are even more precariously perched in my opinion because of their total reliance on Steve Nash. The Mavs in 2003 had some savvy vets, Nash and Novitzky and the Spurs prevailed.

On the flipside, these Spurs have some issues of their own to overcome, primarily Tim's injury and their inconsistent perimiter play.

One way or another, I agree with Spurminator that it is unlikely that the two teams meet in the playoffs.

Please repeat after me.

THE SUNS ARE NOT THE MAVRICKS.

They are a completely different team and this is a completely diffferent season.

I understand the comparisons but it is seriously flawed logic to say that.
Suns = Mavs and Spurs beat Mavs (in 2003) therefore Spurs beat Suns (in 2005).

There are some very good reasons to argue that the Spurs would beat the Suns this year, this is not one of them.


There is nothing about the Suns style that prevents them from playing defense. Defense is determined by personel and execution not the 'style' of play.

Because the refs swallow the whistles in the playoffs the better athletes are at a disadvantage on offense but that doesn't mean they can't play defense.

I guess you missed the last time Nash sat out and the Suns won anyway. I guess you also have missed the improved play of Nash's backup Barbosa. They are better with Nash, but they are not as bad without him as they were during the 6 game losing streak in January.

[Jimcs50]

Suns>>>>>Dallas of 04

I am not the one underestimating your Suns.....In fact I am then only one that predicted that they would win the Pac division in preseason.
That being said, if SA is healthy, I think SA will win that series in 6 games.

[Spurminator]

I think the comparison is the 2003 Mavs, Jim.

And I might give the advantage to the Mavs.

[Manu20]

if SA is healthy, I think SA will win that series in 6 games.

I won't be surprise if it goes 7 games SA winning of course.

[Jimcs50]

I think the comparison is the 2003 Mavs, Jim.

And I might give the advantage to the Mavs.

I meant 03-04 Mavs...not this year's Mavs obviously.

I think we should ask Nash which team is better.

:)

[Spurminator]

Right, but I think they're talking about 02-03... when we played them in the Playoffs. ;)

[SirChaz]

I think the comparison is the 2003 Mavs, Jim.

And I might give the advantage to the Mavs.


Would that be the 02-03 Mavs or the 03-04 Mavs?


The Suns have more athletes and they have an inside presense that the Mavs never had. The Suns are more capable of playing defense than the Mavs because of their athleticism. Nash has even said as much a few weeks ago.

The Suns defense so far has been average, not horrible.

[Jimcs50]

Right, but I think they're talking about 02-03... when we played them in the Playoffs. ;)

I think last years Mavs are better than the Mavs that we beat in the playoffs.

[bigbendbruisebrother]

Right, but I think they're talking about 02-03... when we played them in the Playoffs. ;)

Yes, that's exactly what I meant. And the 02-03 Mavs would beat these Suns (although, I'm not sure how Nash would guard himself; oh, wait Nash doesn't play D so that's not really a problem).

[bigbendbruisebrother]

Because the refs swallow the whistles in the playoffs the better athletes are at a disadvantage on offense but that doesn't mean they can't play defense.


Ah, blaming the refs in advance! What an interesting strategy!

[Jimcs50]

Ah, blaming the refs in advance! What an interesting strategy!


Pre-emptive strike.

:)

[bigbendbruisebrother]

The Suns defense so far has been average, not horrible.



In the two games in which both teams had their full starting lineups, the Suns gave up 243 points to a team (the Spurs) which averages 92 ppg (correct me if I'm wrong on that last stat; that was from memory).

Conversely, in their two losses to the Spurs this season, the Clippers gave up 178 points. Or how about the Grizzlies, which give the Spurs fits: 172 points.

You can call the way the Suns play defense a "choice" or a style. Pick one. Either way, they're going to pay for the way they play defense in the playoffs. (I can just hear the refs swallowing their whistles already.)

And by the way, I'd like to start a movement to get Nash a nickname; how about Canadian Bacon for the way that Tony Parker has smoked his ass for the last three years?

[Jimcs50]

And by the way, I'd like to start a movement to get Nash a nickname; how about Canadian Bacon for the way that Tony Parker has smoked his ass for the last three years?

How about MVP?

[Spurminator]

For comparison's sake....

2003 Mavs
FG% Allowed = .438
League Rank = 12th
League Avg = .442

PPS Allowed = 1.17
League Rank = 12th
League Avg = 1.18

Rebound % = .481
League Rank = 25th
League Avg = .500

TOs Forced = 15.3
League Rank = 5th
League Avg = 14.2


2005 Suns
FG% Allowed = .446
League Rank = 14th
League Avg = .447

PPS Allowed = 1.14
League Rank = T-2nd
League Avg = 1.21

Rebound % = .487
League Rank = 27th
League Avg = .500

TOs Forced = 13.5
League Rank = 20th
League Avg = 13.9


I think it can be said that the Suns are underrated defensively, which I also maintained about the Mavericks in 2003. Compared to the rest of the league, both teams are/were in the middle of the pack. The Suns' main flaws are that they do not force many turnovers and their rebounding is horrible. But they are near the top of the league in Opponent Points per Shot, which is probably due to the fact that they foul less than most teams (they are 2nd in Opponent FT attempts).

[bigbendbruisebrother]

How about MVP?

Touché.

I agree that he has as an individual had a huge impact on improving his team.

Which makes it all the more sweet that TP owns him.

[picnroll]

Not saying it couldn't happen but which was the last middle of the pack defensive team to win an NBA championship?

[SirChaz]

Ah, blaming the refs in advance! What an interesting strategy!


Do you not watch the playoffs?

This is not a big mystery or a controversial position. The referees allow more contact in the playoffs. Rick Barry was talking about this on NBA TV yesterday.

Everyone talks about the "physical nature" of the playoffs. Why do you suppose it is any different than the regular season?

Is there a separate rule book for the playoffs?

[bigbendbruisebrother]

Do you not watch the playoffs?

This is not a big mystery or a controversial position. The referees allow more contact in the playoffs. Rick Barry was talking about this on NBA TV yesterday.

Everyone talks about the "physical nature" of the playoffs. Why do you suppose it is any different than the regular season?

Is there a separate rule book for the playoffs?

Hey, I'm glad you have found a valid excuse in advance for what may happen to your team in the playoffs. You're a loyal Mavs fan, and I salute you for your dedication.

[SirChaz]

In the two games in which both teams had their full starting lineups, the Suns gave up 243 points to a team (the Spurs) which averages 92 ppg (correct me if I'm wrong on that last stat; that was from memory).



Solid statistical analysis. Judging a whole season on the result of two games.

Brilliant.


BTW the Suns were not at full strength in the OT game on Jan 21. So now we are down to 1 game and the Suns are not the same team they were in December.

In the first game the Suns folded. I like to think of it as a lesson learned.

[picnroll]

SirChaz which team do you see as the biggest obstacle to the Suns reaching the finals?

[SirChaz]

Hey, I'm glad you have found a valid excuse in advance for what may happen to your team in the playoffs. You're a loyal Mavs fan, and I salute you for your dedication.


There are no excuses.

Have I said anything that is not true?


OH boy you are on a roll. Comparing the Suns to the Mavs. :lol

Can't tell the difference huh? Not suprising.

[bigbendbruisebrother]

Solid statistical analysis. Judging a whole season on the result of two games.

Brilliant.


BTW the Suns were not at full strength in the OT game on Jan 21. So now we are down to 1 game and the Suns are not the same team they were in December.

In the first game the Suns folded. I like to think of it as a lesson learned.

Alright, then refute Spurminator's statistical comparison with the 02-03 Mavs.

The point was and is this: the Suns style (or we'll use your word "choice") predicates giving up big numbers which will hurt them in the playoffs. You blame the officiating. Whatever the reason, DEFENSE WINS CHAMPIONSHIPS and the Suns have some growing to do in that area. I'm not saying its not possible, but I am saying that if they run into a Duncan-led Spurs team in the playoffs playing the style of defense they've played so far, the Spurs will win (though I agree that it will be a tough series just as the 2002-2003 Western Conference Championship against the Mavericks was).

[bigbendbruisebrother]

Not saying it couldn't happen but which was the last middle of the pack defensive team to win an NBA championship?

That is an excellent question. Any stats folks out there that can give us an answer on that?

[SirChaz]

SirChaz which team do you see as the biggest obstacle to the Suns reaching the finals?


There are no easy roads to the finals in the West.

Teams with size will give the Suns problems on the boards.

Denver and San Antonio come to mind.



Frankly I am not even thinking about the Finals.

As far as the Suns in the playoffs goes it is a big question how they will perform considering their youth and inexperience.

[SirChaz]

Alright, then refute Spurminator's statistical comparison with the 02-03 Mavs.

The point was and is this: the Suns style (or we'll use your word "choice") predicates giving up big numbers which will hurt them in the playoffs. You blame the officiating. Whatever the reason, DEFENSE WINS CHAMPIONSHIPS and the Suns have some growing to do in that area. I'm not saying its not possible, but I am saying that if they run into a Duncan-led Spurs team in the playoffs playing the style of defense they've played so far, the Spurs will win (though I agree that it will be a tough series just as the 2002-2003 Western Conference Championship against the Mavericks was).


Now it is a moving target. :rolleyes


If the Suns don't win it is because they are not good enough, not because of their 'style'.
I have not blamed anybody for anything, I mearly pointed out the fact that they allow more contact in the playoffs. Do you deny that this is the case?

Before the Pistons there were a lot of offensive teams that won the championship. Lakers of the '80s come to mind as a championship team not known for defense.

There is no doubt that a team has to play good defense to win a championship but as long as your defense is good enough to get some stops down the stretch of games what difference does it make how many points are scored? As long as your teams scores at least one more point that the other team your defense was good enough.

[Spurminator]

Not saying it couldn't happen but which was the last middle of the pack defensive team to win an NBA championship?

I think I looked at this a year or two ago, and I believe it was the 1995 Rockets.

It's certainly rare... but on the other hand, the rules of the game have shifted somewhat this year to be more "kind" to offensive teams.

[Jimcs50]

I think I looked at this a year or two ago, and I believe it was the 1995 Rockets.

It's certainly rare... but on the other hand, the rules of the game have shifted somewhat this year to be more "kind" to offensive teams.


The 95 Rockets has some very good defensive players on that team.

Dream, Horry, Elie, Thorpe, Drexler, Cassell, Smith and Chuck Brown were all better defenders than most of the Suns players.

[SirChaz]

The 95 Rockets has some very good defensive players on that team.

Dream, Horry, Thorpe, Drexler, Cassell, Smith and Chuck Brown were all better defenders than most of the Suns players.

Very good defensive players?

Sam Cassell? Kenny Smith? Chucky Brown?

You almost had me convinced for a second. :)

[picnroll]

... and Elie too. The Dream alone erased a whole lot of mistakes.

[Jimcs50]

They were good at what they did on defense, they always turned their man to the baseline and led them to Dream. they worked as a team and they totally frustrated DRob and Elliott the whole series.

[Spurminator]

BasketballReference.com tracks Defensive Efficiency... Here is where every Championship team ranked the season they won (since the ABA/NBA merge).

2004 - Pistons - 2nd
2003 - Spurs - 3rd
2002 - Lakers - 2nd
2001 - Lakers - 2nd
2000 - Lakers - 1st
1999 - Spurs - 1st
1998 - Bulls - 3rd
1997 - Bulls - 4th
1996 - Bulls - 1st
1995 - Rockets - 12th
1994 - Rockets - 4th
1993 - Bulls - 8th
1992 - Bulls - 4th
1991 - Bulls - 6th
1990 - Pistons - 1st
1989 - Pistons - 3rd
1988 - Lakers - 11th
1987 - Lakers - 6th
1986 - Celtics - 2nd
1985 - Lakers - 6th
1984 - Celtics - 6th
1983 - 76ers - 5th
1982 - Lakers - 9th
1981 - Celtics - 4th
1980 - Lakers - 9th
1979 - Sonics - 1st
1978 - Bullets - 9th
1977 - Blazers - 9th

[picnroll]

Rockets had a bad start to their 1995 run. Be interesting to see their last couple of month performance that year on D.

[bigbendbruisebrother]

Now it is a moving target. :rolleyes


If the Suns don't win it is because they are not good enough, not because of their 'style'.
I have not blamed anybody for anything, I mearly pointed out the fact that they allow more contact in the playoffs. Do you deny that this is the case?

Before the Pistons there were a lot of offensive teams that won the championship. Lakers of the '80s come to mind as a championship team not known for defense.

There is no doubt that a team has to play good defense to win a championship but as long as your defense is good enough to get some stops down the stretch of games what difference does it make how many points are scored? As long as your teams scores at least one more point that the other team your defense was good enough.

The target is still where it was in my first reply to you. Defense wins championships SirChaz. The reason (whether refs allow more contact, teams clamp down or a combination of both) is not the issue. I'm not denying that the Suns have a chance. They're a very good team. What I'm saying is that they're going to have to play better defense if they're going to win a championship. Do you disagree with that? If not, then we don't really have an argument (aside from my ribbing you about your team, which I think is natural given that you are in a Spurs fan forum) and I can get back to yardwork before my wife kills me.

If you disagree and think that the Suns will not need to play better D, I must point you to the Mavs post season record. They have had and still have to some extent, whether you care to admit it or not, a similar offensive-minded scheme, and it just doesn't work versus teams that rebound and play excellent interior and transition defense. You can go back to the 80's Lakers if you want, but I don't think it reflects the reality of the teams the Suns will face in the playoffs.

[picnroll]

What's surprising to me is given how athletic Stoudamire is, how poor he is on the defnsive end. Somebody needs to kick that boy's butt.

[SirChaz]

The target is still where it was in my first reply to you. Defense wins championships SirChaz. The reason (whether refs allow more contact, teams clamp down or a combination of both) is not the issue. I'm not denying that the Suns have a chance. They're a very good team. What I'm saying is that they're going to have to play better defense if they're going to win a championship. Do you disagree with that? If not, then we don't really have an argument (aside from my ribbing you about your team, which I think is natural given that you are in a Spurs fan forum) and I can get back to yardwork before my wife kills me.

If you disagree and think that the Suns will not need to play better D, I must point you to the Mavs post season record. They have had and still have to some extent, whether you care to admit it or not, a similar offensive-minded scheme, and it just doesn't work versus teams that get rebound and play excellent interior and transition defense. You can go back to the 80's Lakers if you want, but I don't think it reflects the reality of the teams the Suns will face in the playoffs.



I don't deny the Suns have to play better defense to win a title.

The Suns themselves don't deny it. D'Antoni and Nash have said as much recently. But they are playing better defense lately. Like I said before the Suns biggest problem is rebounding. Playing great defense for 24 seconds don't mean a thing if you don't close it out with a rebound. Giving playoff teams second and third opportunities will get you beat.

The question is will they improve enough, soon enough to survive?

Nobody knows because this young team has never been to the playoffs.

[SirChaz]

What's surprising to me is given how athletic Stoudamire is, how poor he is on the defnsive end. Somebody needs to kick that boy's butt.


No argument here, but he is getting better.

Given his age and prior experience his improvement has been nothing short of remarkable.

Just last night he only scored 9 point but still impacted the game with 4 ast and 2 blocks and 14 rebounds.

The biggest complaint among Suns fans is with his ability this guy should have double digit rebounds every game.

[tempe85]

For comparison's sake....

2003 Mavs
FG% Allowed = .438
League Rank = 12th
League Avg = .442

PPS Allowed = 1.17
League Rank = 12th
League Avg = 1.18

Rebound % = .481
League Rank = 25th
League Avg = .500

TOs Forced = 15.3
League Rank = 5th
League Avg = 14.2


2005 Suns
FG% Allowed = .446
League Rank = 14th
League Avg = .447

PPS Allowed = 1.14
League Rank = T-2nd
League Avg = 1.21

Rebound % = .487
League Rank = 27th
League Avg = .500

TOs Forced = 13.5
League Rank = 20th
League Avg = 13.9


I think it can be said that the Suns are underrated defensively, which I also maintained about the Mavericks in 2003. Compared to the rest of the league, both teams are/were in the middle of the pack. The Suns' main flaws are that they do not force many turnovers and their rebounding is horrible. But they are near the top of the league in Opponent Points per Shot, which is probably due to the fact that they foul less than most teams (they are 2nd in Opponent FT attempts).

Let's just pretend the Suns are on the same level defensively as the 2003 Mavs. Well those Mavs came within two games of making the championship, without a post player like Stoudemire. The Suns also average 7.4 more PPG than those Mavs so maybe that will be enough to make up for those two games?

[tempe85]

BasketballReference.com tracks Defensive Efficiency... Here is where every Championship team ranked the season they won (since the ABA/NBA merge).

2004 - Pistons - 2nd
2003 - Spurs - 3rd
2002 - Lakers - 2nd
2001 - Lakers - 2nd
2000 - Lakers - 1st
1999 - Spurs - 1st
1998 - Bulls - 3rd
1997 - Bulls - 4th
1996 - Bulls - 1st
1995 - Rockets - 12th
1994 - Rockets - 4th
1993 - Bulls - 8th
1992 - Bulls - 4th
1991 - Bulls - 6th
1990 - Pistons - 1st
1989 - Pistons - 3rd
1988 - Lakers - 11th
1987 - Lakers - 6th
1986 - Celtics - 2nd
1985 - Lakers - 6th
1984 - Celtics - 6th
1983 - 76ers - 5th
1982 - Lakers - 9th
1981 - Celtics - 4th
1980 - Lakers - 9th
1979 - Sonics - 1st
1978 - Bullets - 9th
1977 - Blazers - 9th

Correction: The 2001 Lakers ranked 19th in the league in deffensive efficiency.

Check it for yourself: http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2001.html

It's ironic that you put the Lakers second because guess which team really finished second in the league that season? The Phoenix Suns... like I said it's ironic.

This shows that 8 times a team has been ranked 8th or below in defensive efficiency. Which means: A team can win without a great defense.

[Spurminator]

I think the quality of the Suns' eventual Playoff opponents will surpass the quality of the 2003 Mavs' opponents. That was a good Mavs team, and they may have very well made it to the WCF regardless, but they went to 7 games against a bruised Portland team and the Webber-less Kings. That's not a knock on the 2003 Mavs, just to say that I think Phoenix's opponents will be tougher.

I think a healthy Mavs team can knock off Phoenix, because they have the ability to run with them and they have the advantage in the half court set.

[Spurminator]

Correction: The 2001 Lakers ranked 19th in the league in deffensive efficiency.

Check it for yourself: http://www.basketball-reference.com...s/NBA_2001.html

Good catch. I must have looked at offensive efficiency for that one.

I have to be stealthy since I'm at work. ;)

[Spurminator]

This shows that 8 times a team has been ranked 8th or below in defensive efficiency. Which means: A team can win without a great defense.

Yes, but the "8" is sort of arbitrary, don't you think?

If this website (http://www.knickerblogger.net/stats/d_de.htm) is correct, Phoenix ranks 19th this season in Defensive Efficiency. If 8th is the cutoff for "great," then 19 borders on "poor," IMO.

[tempe85]

Yes, but the "8" is sort of arbitrary, don't you think?

If this website (http://www.knickerblogger.net/stats/d_de.htm) is correct, Phoenix ranks 19th this season in Defensive Efficiency. If 8th is the cutoff for "great," then 19 borders on "poor," IMO.

Like I just showed you... the Lakers did it in 2001 with a 19th ranked defense.

By the way I just noticed.... Look at the bottom of the page


Stats should include games ending on: 12/23/2004

That list was updated about 4 months ago. :rolleyes

[tempe85]

By the way I found the Suns current offensive efficiency is 114.

Do you want to know something....

All time officiency ratings:
1. 1987 Los Angeles Lakers (112.3)
tie 1992 Chicago Bulls (112.3)
2. 2005 Phoenix Suns (112.2)

Now I know their defensive efficiency is near the bottom of the league but when you have the greatest offensive effiency EVER it's a lot different than simply having the best for one year (which means it more than makes up for bad play on one side of the court).

[Spurminator]

Fair enough, here are the updated totals.

1 San Antonio 95.5
2 Chicago 98.4
3 Detroit 99.2
4 Houston 99.3
5 Memphis 100.3
6 Miami 100.9
7 Denver 101.0
8 New Jersey 101.2
9 Philadelphia 102.1
10 Dallas 102.2
11 Cleveland 102.4
12 Indiana 102.9
13 Boston 103.9
14 Orlando 104.0
15 Golden State 104.4
16 Phoenix 104.4
17 Washington 104.4
18 LA Clippers 104.4
19 Minnesota 104.6
20 Sacramento 105.3
21 Seattle 105.4
22 Portland 105.4
23 Charlotte 105.8
24 New Orleans 105.9
25 Toronto 106.3
26 Milwaukee 106.3
27 New York 106.5
28 LA Lakers 107.3
29 Utah 107.9
30 Atlanta 108.5


Like I said before... Middle of the pack. Only one team, the 2001 Lakers, has won a title with that poor a defense.

Can it be done? Sure. But it is very rare.

[Nikos]

Where did you get those updated totals?

And what are the Offensive Efficiency Ratings?

[Spurminator]

I calculated them...

DEFF = Opponent Points / (FGA + 0.44*FTA - ORebs + TOs)

[Spurminator]

Here's what I'm calculating for OEFF...

1 Phoenix 112.2
2 Miami 109.4
3 Seattle 109.4
4 Sacramento 107.3
5 Dallas 107.3
6 San Antonio 106.2
7 Toronto 105.5
8 LA Lakers 105.3
9 Boston 105.1
10 Minnesota 105.1
11 Cleveland 104.1
12 Washington 103.9
13 Milwaukee 103.8
14 LA Clippers 103.6
15 New York 103.4
16 Memphis 103.3
17 Denver 103.3
18 Detroit 103.3
19 Indiana 103.3
20 Orlando 103.0
21 Houston 102.6
22 Utah 102.4
23 Golden State 101.0
24 Philadelphia 100.6
25 Portland 100.4
26 Chicago 99.0
27 Charlotte 98.4
28 Atlanta 98.3
29 New Jersey 97.8
30 New Orleans 97.4

[tempe85]

At that Knicks site they calculate offensive efficiency as Points Per 100 Possesions.... I'm pretty confused... about the sytem you used. Where is a clear definition to this stat?

Thanks

[bigbendbruisebrother]

Badda bing, badda bump...


Please repeat after me.

THE SUNS ARE NOT THE MAVRICKS.

They are a completely different team and this is a completely diffferent season.

I understand the comparisons but it is seriously flawed logic to say that.
Suns = Mavs and Spurs beat Mavs (in 2003) therefore Spurs beat Suns (in 2005).

There are some very good reasons to argue that the Spurs would beat the Suns this year, this is not one of them.


There is nothing about the Suns style that prevents them from playing defense. Defense is determined by personel and execution not the 'style' of play.

Because the refs swallow the whistles in the playoffs the better athletes are at a disadvantage on offense but that doesn't mean they can't play defense.
I guess you missed the last time Nash sat out and the Suns won anyway. I guess you also have missed the improved play of Nash's backup Barbosa. They are better with Nash, but they are not as bad without him as they were during the 6 game losing streak in January.

SirChaz, any sign of that in game one? Did the refs mess up the Suns yesterday? Any thoughts on the Suns defensive "personel (sic) and execution"?

[SirChaz]

Badda bing, badda bump...



SirChaz, any sign of that in game one? Did the refs mess up the Suns yesterday? Any thoughts on the Suns defensive "personel (sic) and execution"?


Spurs played great and shot the ball very well yesterday.

The Suns will have to play better to win.

The Spurs made some tough shots. We'll see, it ain't over yet.

[bigbendbruisebrother]

Spurs played great and shot the ball very well yesterday.

The Suns will have to play better to win.

The Spurs made some tough shots. We'll see, it ain't over yet.

What about the officiating though as far as the Suns so far in the playoffs? I haven't watchted them much (it's been hard enough watching all the late games the Spurs have had so far). Earlier in the thread, you made a comment that indicated to me that you were concerned the that the Suns game would suffer because of what you consider physically more permissive officiating. The Suns swept the Grizz and handled the Mavs in 6. Yesterday happened as well.

In your opinion, has the officiating had any impact on the Suns in the postseason so far?

[SirChaz]

What about the officiating though as far as the Suns so far in the playoffs? I haven't watchted them much (it's been hard enough watching all the late games the Spurs have had so far). Earlier in the thread, you made a comment that indicated to me that you were concerned the that the Suns game would suffer because of what you consider physically more permissive officiating. The Suns swept the Grizz and handled the Mavs in 6. Yesterday happened as well.

In your opinion, has the officiating had any impact on the Suns in the postseason so far?


It has been pretty good so far. It has clearly been more physical but that is to be expected. As the intensity level goes up it is only natural that things get a little more physical. Of course both Memphis and Dallas fans have complained about the refs every time they lose. I think all anyone can hope for is consistancy from the refs, that is they call the same thing on both ends of the floor and for the whole game.

There have been some games that hurt the Suns the way they were called like game 4 against Dallas but it was not the reason they lost. In that game the Suns gave it up on the boards in the first half but couldn't get enough breaks to come back. On one play Amare was hacked by Dampier on a dunk attempt and then called for a little bump on Howard for a 5 point swing.

I saw some missed calls yesterday but overall it was called pretty well I thought.

The Spurs just shot the hell out of the ball yesterday and kudos to them.

In several situations both Memphis and Dallas beat themselves. The Spurs will not do the same and the Suns will have to play at thier best to beat them.