Ya know, if you followed the NBA, you'd know that several rule changes have gone down since your two team's run and gun haydays...
These rules, which limit perimeter contact from defenders, has really opened the game up and allows for a more perimeter style of play to succeed.
I'm not saying it can win it all, because believe me, I know full well the limitations of smallball and am not a big fan. However, you talk and talk about the Suns style as if they have another option. This team playing isn't their team. Their starting frontcourt is in streetclothes. How many teams can sustain seasonending injuries to their starting frontcourts and still play a defensive/pound it down low style? I'd venture to say NONE.
They play this way because they have to. Will it work? Well, it shouldn't have, but has, so again, you have very little to back up your claims.
If the Mavs win, it's because their healthy team was better than the Suns healthy team. Not because the Mavs style is so much more condusive to le success than the Suns style.
jmark actually seems like a pretty reasonable guy.
this is surprising considering his illogical and elitist position on the importance of number of posts to whether or not someone is making a cogent argument.
just because you have had more time to sit around and post your thoughts online over a longer period of time does not mean that your logic is more sound than a newcomer.
"i wont talk to anyone with less than 100 posts."
your lucky not everyone is as big of a prick as you, or else you never would have gotten started.
your smug sense of superiority is unfounded...and if it is founded it is on basketball knowledge, not the fact that you have wasted a greater amount of your time indulging your masturbatory, self-agrandizing opinions online.
while I almost agree with you, I think we both have to admit that our run and gun teams of the past can't hold a candle to the run and gun team that is the Suns. they are more efficient than the Mavs ever were at this style of play. I read all the time on dallas boards about how crappy it is that the Suns get credit for this style of play when people never gave us credit. but let's face it, the reason the Suns get credit is because they are so damn good at it. and as jmark stated, they have done all of this without their starting frontcourt. do the kings of 00-03 accomplish this much without Peja and Webber? do the Mavs of 02-03 accomplish this much without Dirk and Finley or Nash? I don't think so. I think the Suns deserve all the credit in the world for getting where they are now without two of their top 3 or 4 guys.
this style of play won't get any credit until a team wins a championship playing it. but it is fun to watch and makes me miss watching the old Mavs/Kings series for a brief moment. then I appreciate Avery all the more for what he has done with the Mavs.
That's me! Reasonable, illogical and elitist! TO THE "T"!!!
Sorry, bucko, but you're a few posts late. Already addressed.
Now you're just making stuff up. Your "quote" of mine never was said.
listen man..
if you are going to continue to believe that you are correct for writing someone off for not having made a ton of posts in the past and that this is a coherent reason for dismissing the merits of what they are saying, than I cant convince you otherwise.
...but you have demonstrated yourself to having little allegiance to logic, and a great allegiance to personal ego.
I have a minimum post policy. In order to talk to me or about me, you must have 100 posts to your name.
Don't like it?
Well, you know the drill ---JMARK
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
you clearly have no point, whatsoever.
the suns played like this last year right/ they had a healthy front court last year but the problem was they couldnt get stops when it mattered, and they still cant. they can get to the western conference finals with this style but winning a le? no way
...if the Spurs were in the WCF the Suns would have lost in 4-5 in all likelihood and would have no reasonable chance of winning.
tim duncan of course would score at will in the low post.
the people of phoenix would see that their team and its final four appearance is a mirage, made possible by eaked out wins over suspect LA teams.
although the mavs are equal/slightly superior to the spurs, they lack the low post scoring typical of most other elite teams to really put these guys in their proper perspective.
if kwame ing brown kicked thier asses then what the would duncan do to them? his stat line would be 55 points, 20 rebounds and 6 blocks.
First off, that team wasn't completely healthy and had zero depth. That team I'll give you, had NO shot at a le and I'll bring posts from the site I mod to show you I always thought such.
This team isn't that team. This team, with Kurt Thomas and Amare wouldn't be as weak on the boards as they are now. Remember, these Suns hold their opponants to a low FG%, but can't get stops frequently enough because they allow 15-20 offensive rebounds a game. That's from rebounding, not defense. With Thomas in at center, the Suns were a very complete defensive team. Not that you paid any attention to the NBA until Ron Artest made your team relevant again and by that point, Thomas was already out.
Now you got it! That's the quote I made. I never said I wouldn't talk to them. Only that they couldn't talk to me.
Also, if you cared to read on, it was addressed. I figured him to be a Johnny Come Lately Mavs troll and I figured wrong. Again, I don't have such a rule. I merely threw that out to get a rise out of him. It didn't work. However, obviously you're supersensative... Or would you rather be called high-strung? It does sound a little less femanine, not that someone with a moniker of pussyface has a problem with coming across as such...
thier depth is good but even with kurt and amare do you honestly think they could play good defense? especially with steve nash as the point guard.he makes mike bibbys defense look decent.
As someone who watched this team before game 50 of the regular season, I can honestly tell you this:thier depth is good but even with kurt and amare do you honestly think they could play good defense? especially with steve nash as the point guard.
They do play defense and they work VERY hard at it. Nash is horrible. Thomas is bad. But everyone else runs their asses off to get to their rotation spot, to contest shots, to double, triple and even swarm the lane.
You see, they put a great deal of effort into their defense, but because of a lack of size, get very little out. Because they lack size, they MUST constantly swarm the low post. Otherwise a 7-foot, 240-pound Dirk would just eat up a 6-8, 225-pound Diaw or a 6-7, 220-pound Marion routinely. The open shots they give up stem from this swarm defense. If they had any real size or frontcourt depth, they could man-up or body-up on defense down low. However, they don't, so they swarm, thus they give up open shots and rebounding position as they scramble to cover the open guys/lanes. If they had Thomas and Amare, they would have two 6-9, 250-pound players who are used to playing down low and bodying up the opposition. They would have two solid rebounders in their frontcourt and wouldn't, A. need to swarm as much on defense, thus, B. would be in better rebounding position to thus, C. get more defensive rebounds on first-possession misses to thus, D. Get more first-possession stops.
Their inability isn't weakness and it's not from a lack of trying. They are mortal and can only play to a certain extent.
You can't consistantly ask a wing to muscle up a big. They have. Has it been because they wantred to? No. They went and they traded for a defensiveminded center. Is it because they have to? What other choice do they have? Grant and his two broken knees? Burke and his no-talent?
They are missing their starting frontcourt! You can only expect so much and so far, this team has far exceeded my expectations.
You really haven't a clue, do you?!
so because they tried hard on defense that made them good?how many points did they alow?
You really are a lost cause. There's absolutely no reason to even continue.so because they tried hard on defense that made them good?
If you knew anything about basketball, you'd realize the error in your continued point of view. However, asking you to understand something is about as useless as making me regret how big an ass I am.
Suns are very good at getting misses. They don't, however, get as many stops as they could because of rebounding.
But then, I've said this and you refuse to acknowledge, so I guess I'm left with "Go yourself"....
The points are based on number of possessions. As D'Antoni has often said, they only need to play good enough defense to score more than their opponents (i.e. if they score 110 per game, they only need to play good enough defense to give up 108). John Hollinger on ESPN has a formula that equalizes the number of possessions per game across the league and then he makes comparisons (kind of like the "per 48 minutes" stat). It's been a while since I read it, but he made a cool point earlier that stated that the Pistons were more offensively efficient than the Suns were, while the Suns had improved their defense considerably to be one of the top 5 defensive team with these "relative statistics." Of course, that was when Kurt Thomas was still in the line-up, but since he went down with an injury, their ppg allowed has increased considerably, as has their defensive efficiency (most like due to how many second-chance points they give up). If they kept allowing people to shoot 50-55%, then I would say their defense is horrendous, but they often can give up 100+ pts with 45% shooting, while shooting 48% or so themselves. Let me know if you have any more questions.so because they tried hard on defense that made them good?
I've already explained this to him. He was obviously ignorant of the NBA until the Kings acquired Artest and he made Sacramento relevant again. He has no idea about anything, except some faint notions in reguards to his Kings to the NBA teams he's seen NOW.
He won't accept what you say. He'll just dismiss it with his "rolling on the floor" emoticon and mock you for even trying.
Don't even bother. He's a troll and worse still, he's a troll who doesn't know he's a troll.
isn't this thread suppose to talk about "Dirk is MVP" ?
On a serious note, why isn't the MVP voting after the playoffs???
Oh no...Suns fans are morphing into Spurs fans....
Or how about the call on Terry before he got the technical?? If that was a foul, then it's impossible to defend a driving guard...
ronmexico= greatest screen name ever.
Where was the so-called MVP in game 4? OVER- RATED.
What, Tim's never had an off night? Nash is perfect all the time?
Dirk had an MVP moment last night... only time will tell if he's MVP of the Finals, the only MVP that really matters..
1 bad game in 16 playoff games and he's over-rated? Amazing...
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote