Reply With Quote
Mavs will not see the Suns in the playoffs this season.
So it really does not matter
"You have to give Dallas their due," Suns television analyst Eddie Johnson said. "You have to say they're the best team. The fact that they've been healthy has helped, as it did the Suns two years ago when they won 62 games. Dallas has won pretty and ugly. They have been impressive. But if it gets to a seven-game season, the Suns are the better team based on that they have seven scorers and Dallas has three. But right now, Dallas has been unbelievable."
What a joke... homerism at its finest. I guess he forgot that Stackhouse and Harris come off our bench. And of course, being a Suns analyst... the team with the most offense is the better team. When will they ever learn...
And say what you will, but i'm just bringing this up because it struck me as amusing and i need something to and talk about.
Mavs will not see the Suns in the playoffs this season.
So it really does not matter
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2...ge=neel/070309
Quote:
The Dallas Mavericks are a great team. Fifty-one out of their last 56, a point differential of 8-plus a night, a 16-game win streak -- even without rings on their fingers (yet), I'm calling them great. Straight out. The regular season they're putting together ranks with some of the best we've ever seen. Barring a crippling injury or a brush with a norovirus, they're going to belong at the table with the 1996 Bulls, the 1986 Celtics, the 1983 Sixers and the 1972 Lakers as architects of a truly dominant 82-game run.
I just wish I cared. I wish they inspired me even a little. I have tremendous respect, but I wish I felt any kind of genuine enthusiasm for them at all. I wish I felt the love. I know this sounds petty (particularly if you're a Dallas diehard) but I can't shake the feeling. Or lack thereof. Those other elite clubs had strong iden ies, some juice, some compelling lightning something about them. Jordan made 72 a mission, a dare, and Rodman made every day an adventure in self-loathing rebounding genius. Bird defended the home turf like a frothing dog. Moses was Moses and Doc was Doc. The Lakers, with Wilt holding the block and West sniping from every kind of angle, over every kind of defender, looked supernatural. You didn't have to love them but you had to pay attention. In fact, you couldn't turn away.
The other day a friend said to me, "Hey, check out the Mavs," as if they were underdogs on a little hot streak, as if they were a penny on the sidewalk or a roadside attraction spotted through a car window, as if they weren't actually running roughshod over the league night in and night out. We should be trained on them, geeked, obsessed, awed, but we aren't. The Suns -- Steve's boys, the fuel-injected fun ball gang, a brotherhood forged in dedication to a philosophy, a dream -- are captivating. The Pistons -- a gangly, tough, scrap-heap collective straight out of "Kelly's Heroes," a bunch, even with a le in the bag, who are absolutely certain you don't believe in them -- inspire. The Mavs don't compete historically and they don't compete now.
Mark Cuban's part of the problem. He's smart, funny and insightful. He speaks truth to power and sometimes goes on entertaining, ridiculous rants (see the Dwyane Wade smackdown a couple weeks back) for all the world to see. I love him. But there's no denying that he overshadows the team on the floor. He's the maverick Maverick, the face of the franchise. Entertaining as he is, he's no pathway to connecting with the team or the game they play. I don't root for him. I don't root for them because of him. He's ownership. I want to give a damn about labor.
And even if I look past Cuban, all I see is Nowitzki. Which means all I see is accurate, somewhat wooden jump shots and hard-to-guard head-fake finishes. The guy is a superstar, probably the league MVP given what the team is doing. He gets banged on nightly and he wears the mantle of being The Man with seeming ease and determination. He's a fantastic player. I admire the out of him. But he's also, I'm sorry, boring to watch. No signature move. No defining moment (as of yet). No edge, no magic. Think of him next to the other top-tier players in the league right now. Play word association. Nash is Miraculous, Wade is Relentless, James is Terrifying, Arenas is Nutty and Garnett is Fierce. Nowitzki is, I don't know, Proficient?
Ditto the rest of the club, a collection of almost perfectly calibrated role players. Josh Howard is a formidable talent, but his skill set, spread out across the pallet like it is, and the fact that he must defer to Dirk in key moments, makes him near invisible. After him it's Terry, Stackhouse, Buckner, Harris, Dampier, Diop, John and Doe. Nothing to hang your hat or your heart on. And it's not just personnel, it's approach, too. Once upon a time the Mavs were a fairly freestyling bunch, prac ioners of a kind of lyrical ball movement. Now, under Avery Johnson's able direction and bulldog disposition, they're prone to win at a slower pace, with more isolations and jump shots. They have a method, but no style, nothing I can get behind, nothing that stands out.
And this is just the way they want it, I'm sure. They no doubt love the relative anonymity. It's good for team unity, and more importantly it fits with the shape-shifting, come-at-you-from-all-angles way they like to play, sometimes speeding it up to tax a team like the Spurs, and sometimes dialing it back to flummox a team like the Suns. Dirk, Avery, Josh, they're more than comfortable with their relative blandness, I'm sure. Couldn't care less. Never give it a thought. It's about wins and losses for them. (Actually, it's pretty much just about wins.) What they're doing, who they are, their super-smooth blend of talents, their always-flexible approach to style and strategy, it all works for them. They win with it. They win nine nights out of 10 with it. They win enough games to be in the All-Time Great conversation with it.
So what else do I want? Why aren't I satisfied? What's my problem? Why can't I get with the lunch-pail, measure-and-cut genius of this club? Why is it so hard for me to see, like my grandfather would have seen, that this team is so damned appealing precisely because there's nothing special, nothing flashy, about them?
I'm just selfish is what it is. It ain't right, I know, but I want more than the wins. I want to feel about them the way I felt about the Bulls, the Celtics, the Sixers, and (though I was quite young then) the Lakers, the way I feel about the Suns and Pistons now. Passionate. Mesmerized. I want talk of great teams to be animated by the inimitable and intriguing character of their core groups and their superstars, not just compelled by the gaudy evidence of their records. We're talking about the Mavs, when we remember to talk about them at all, because they've won a big ol' boatload of basketball games. End of story. Yes, they're a great team, but greatness isn't everything. The Bulls, the Celtics, the Sixers, the Lakers, they had magic, too, they had something that vibrates even now, something that captures my imagination even in recollection. The Suns make me want to find a run. The Pistons make me think defense is some sort of higher calling.
And maybe that's my strongest feeling for the Mavs. Maybe the way they make me appreciate those other teams all over again, and more intensely, is what excites me the most about them.
That's not bad, actually. That's pretty special. Heck, I could almost love them for that.
^^^ That piece deserved it own thread. To think of the trash I've put out there in comparison!
Mavs are hardly flying under the radar because they're boring, but I do agree with some of the writers' points. The reference to Dirk's jump shots being wooden was spot on, the lack of passion, yes. But still. Referring to green pastures to get the b-ball adreniline flowing? I guess I can relate: Kings fans have had to watch other teams to get the "that's how it's done" feeling. But the Mavs are on a roll to win the most games ever in regular season play. Wooden, boring, or not.
texas84 starts a thread led "I love homer analysts".
Are you the pot or the kettle? Mavs fans can't be both as much as they'd like to be, though.
Eddie Johnson is the single biggest homer among analysts in the NBA.
That's got to be the most shocking thing I've ever read.
He's a Suns color commentator. He pimps two things: his shooting and the Suns. Big f'n whoop.
I'm not bent out of shape about it. It was just a statement of incontrovertible fact.That's got to be the most shocking thing I've ever read.
He's a Suns color commentator. He pimps two things: his shooting and the Suns. Big f'n whoop.
No, I think Sean Elliot is the single biggest homer among analysts in the NBA.
According to the rules, you can only have five players on the court at the same time. But let's compare:
Amare - 20.6
Nash - 19.1
Matrix - 18.1
Barbosa - 17.2
Bell - 15
Diaw - 9.8
James Jones - 6.3
Dirk - 25.3
J-Ho - 19
Jet - 16.3
Stack - 11.1
Devin - 9.7
Damp - 7.6
George - 6.4
So Diaw and Jones are "scorers" but George, Dampier and Harris aren't? I'll concede that I've never thought of Dampier or George as "scorers" but if we go by PPG then neither are Diaw or Jones. Phoenix gets 106.1 a game from their top seven guys, who are basically their only 7 guys. Dallas gets 95.4 a game from its top seven, but we go ten deep. And like the Spurs, Dallas can force its opponents to play at its preferred pace. The Suns aren't going to be ringing up 130 a game against Seattle or Portland in the playoffs, so this is some pretty facile analysis.
Last edited by Findog; 03-11-2007 at 02:40 AM.
A) Am i an analyst??, and B) Quote me saying something of a "homer" nature.texas84 starts a thread led "I love homer analysts".
Are you the pot or the kettle? Mavs fans can't be both as much as they'd like to be, though.
Are Suns fans as a whole this ignorant? I thought it was just their analysts. Guess i was wrong...
It's fine if we wants the love of the Suns and their fans. But outside of Arizona, stupid crap like what he said just makes him look like an ignorant fool wearing rose-colored (or Sun-colored?) glasses.
THAT is very true... except he's only a homer for whatever team he's the color guy for: he'd be a homer for the Warriors if they paid him.No, I think Sean Elliot is the single biggest homer among analysts in the NBA.
Let's get back on topic - I've listed to my share of Mavs home broadcasts on League Pass and they have quite their share of homerism out there. I'd say it's the Blazers' commentators and Bucks commentators that take the cake, though.
Let me get this straight: The Suns get 106 out of their 110.5 PPG from their top 7 guys (which you call the "only seven"), while Dallas gets 95 out of their 100 PPG from 7 guys and that makes them "10 deep"? I think it's time you admit Dallas has at least a seven-player scoring rotation, even if they might put a few others like Buckner out there to take up some space.
Every team's home crew is going to be a little homerish.
If you listen to Elliott though more than once or twice you will also hear that he is one of the Spurs harshest critics.
As you can guess, I don't listen to him much more than that by choice. I can only hear "gravy" so much...
True but you are going to hear "gravy" from anyone's home announcers. Sean can serve the gravy with the best of them.
There are only seven guys that get significant minutes for Phoenix. If Kurt Thomas is healthy, he cuts into whatever scraps James Jones might get. Dallas, on the other hand, gets useful contributions from Buckner, Diop and Croshere. The Suns can't say the same with Banks, Piatkowski or the Joneses. We have better role players and a more well-rounded TEAM. There's no question Phoenix has more offensive firepower than anybody else, but Kurt Thomas is the only useful "role" player you guys have. And something will give in the playoffs, and that something is Phoenix failing to drop 125 a game on Dallas. We are the new Spurs: you will play at the pace WE dictate.
Our depth means we can survive anybody besides Dirk being out for a significant period of time. If Phoenix loses even one of their top seven, they're ed.
This guy is claiming Raja Bell is a "scorer" and Jerry Stackhouse isnt? hahaha.
You want the biggest homers listen to a Heat game one time. According to thier analysts the Heat are the best at everything. They even think that Walker is good player.
WGAF forum.
Lame attempt to cover your original post. Banks and Piatkowski can fill roles and points when needed (but only when Nash is on the floor). With Steve out, the Suns subs are worthless...
Considering he starts on a regular basis, I find it hard to believe that he's out there just to "take up some space."
With Steve out, the entire team is worthless.
Yeah I don't get why people are so shocked that a Suns color guy would be a homer...it's like that everywhere. Followill and Ortegal are both massive homers in Dallas. For local broadcasts, it's more important to be a homer than to be a good game analyst.True but you are going to hear "gravy" from anyone's home announcers. Sean can serve the gravy with the best of them.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
