Reply With Quote
You live, you learn, you ignore, you repeat the same mistakes that got you into trouble last season... That's D'Antoni's vicious circle.
The bad thing about not playing Skinner much is that he will be expected to go 35-40 against Duncan, and he won't have the legs or endurance to do it.
You live, you learn, you ignore, you repeat the same mistakes that got you into trouble last season... That's D'Antoni's vicious circle.
Last year the Suns had a guy named Kurt Thomas who could guard Tim Duncan one-on-one. They got rid of him and got Grant Hill, who probably cannot guard Tim Duncan one-on-one.
So while they augmented their ability to run fast and play pretty in the regular season, they did nothing to increase their chances of getting by their nemesis. Instead, they went in the wrong direction.
They deserve to be mocked because their coach is so in love with himself and his "strategy" that he refuses to see the forest for the trees. The solution to every problem is "more scoring." That is why they won't win a le
Nobody in this, or any other Grant Hill thread has even suggested Hill will attempt to defend Duncan. I've never even heard D'Antoni mention it.
Someone may have said it in jest, but it wasn't to be taken seriously.
As exstatic has pointed out, they have brought in Skinner for thr 30-minute per game assignment of Duncan. While it's reasonable to think that going from Thomas to Skinner is a step backwards, and that going from Thomas at 15 mpg to Skinner at 11 mpg is not learning from from previous inadequate experience, I wouldn't parade around and state that Hill's acquisition hurts the Suns defense because Hill can't defend Duncan. That simply won't be the case.
There's not much here I can take exception to or disagree with. I think they, again, can contend with the Spurs, but do feel they've weakened their chances to defeat them, so unless they get some luck in the playoffs, I'd agree that D'Antoni stratery won't amount to a le as long as the Spurs are the Spurs.So while they augmented their ability to run fast and play pretty in the regular season, they did nothing to increase their chances of getting by their nemesis. Instead, they went in the wrong direction.
They deserve to be mocked because their coach is so in love with himself and his "strategy" that he refuses to see the forest for the trees. The solution to every problem is "more scoring." That is why they won't win a le
#23 Quentin Richardson | GF
YR TM G GS MIN FG FG% 3P 3P% FT FT% STL BLK TO PF OFF DEF TOT AST PTS
04-05 Pho 79 78 35.9 5.2-13.2 .389 2.9-8.0 .358 1.7-2.3 .739 1.2 0.3 1.3 2.5 1.2 4.9 6.1 2.0 14.9
I don't get what you're arguing here.
That players can tend to have very good seasons with the Suns? Not even Phoenix fans would argue against that.
That Hill is a product of the Phoenix system? Last season's averages are pretty much the same per-minute rate, only this seasons MPG is greater than last season's MPG, thus the slight increase in statistical production.
That if your good in Phoenix you'll fail elsewhere? Richardson certainly hasn't played well after Phoenix, but Joe Johnson has. Hunter certainly hasn't played any worse.
Again, I'm just not catching on to the line of thought for the post, is all...
I'm just responding to the original post. He's having more or less the same impact as Quentin Richardson, at least statistically. I haven't seen all but maybe one or two Suns games, so I won't argue whether he's actually making a bigger impact, but statistically, calling him an X-factor doesn't make sense.
And, as a seven-year statistician, I'll point to this as Exhibit A as to why statistics don't always tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
Hill's ballhandling, leadership and savvy have been critical. Overused thus far, yes, but still absolutely critical, so yes, I can see him as an X-factor in the wing. Problem is, while his particular skills were absolutely needed, so were things he doesn't bring, like size, strength, box-out rebounding, shot-blocking and low-post offense. I won't blame Hill for failing to address such, because such is not his game. If Phoenix can get such without trading too much of its core, then perhaps they'll have their last needed X-factor in place for a le run. Skinner has potential, but I don't see him being IT. Maybe part of IT, but not entirely IT.
Richardson and Hill may have similar ppg and rpg, but it's not always the destination, but the journey. I'll take Hill's journey to the similar end over Richardson's.
The other big argument advanced for signing Hill was that, because of his ball handling skills, he would take pressure and--more importantly--minutes off of Steve Nash's year.
Well, so far his MPG trend is:
05-06 35:23
06-07 35:17
07-08 33:47
So, maybe playing Hill so many minutes has allowed them to give Nash 1-2 minutes of rest a night. But it also would indicate that if they cut Hill back to a more reasonable level, Nash will be right back where he always was in MPG.
Bottom line: I think Mike D'Antoni is the Mike Martz of the NBA.
What they most need to get by the Spurs is a guy who can credibly guard Tim Duncan, so that he doesn't eat them alive, and so that Amare Stoudemire doesn't miss half the series in foul trouble. They had such a guy in Thomas, but because he doesn't make Dan Tony's bunghole feel all tingly running the floor, they ditched him. And what is their big offseason acquisition? Grant Hill! Whoopee! This would be like if the Spurs lost to Dallas this year, and responded by dumping Bruce Bowen and trading for Carlos Delfino.
The Hill acquisition is like responding to the fact that the roof leaks and the toilet is broken by buying spinner rims for the SUV.
When Steve Nash looks back at his career, he will realize that 2003 was his best shot at a championship, and that Mike D'Antoni rather than Tim Duncan was the wall he could not get past.
Point taken, and that's why I don't believe Hill's signing was a lateral move. My point was to the original post who was using stats to prove his greatness.
Maybe he'll rotate the minutes? In November Nash gets the slight break in minutes, Hill gets the increase, but then in December Nash gets more minutes and Hill gets the break? I don't think he's this smart.
I'd still rather see Nash and Hill's minutes around 32 per game and Banks in there for the 10 minutes trimmed off the pair. It can be early in the game, when the game isn't at risk of being lost. There's zero reason Banks and Tucker can't see 10 mpg early to give Nash and Hill a break, with Skinner netting 15-to-25 minutes at random, instead of the 5-to-15 minutes he gets at random now.
Hmmm...Bottom line: I think Mike D'Antoni is the Mike Martz of the NBA.
There is no proof I was ever in that thread.
That's not true. The Suns team desperately needed another wing ballhandler. DESPERATELY! Part of the Suns offensive issues with the Spurs has been San Antonio's ability to hastle Nash and force Amare to win the games. The Suns, even going back to 2004-05, have not had that healthy third ballhandler to take the pressure of Nash and Amare. Johnson could have been it in 2005, but his injury ed with his percentages. The Spurs have been able to better focus on Nash and Amare, knowing no other Phoenix wing had the ability to generate offense from the perimeter.
I, however, have nothing good to say in defense of D'Antoni, so I cannot, or rather, will not argue that he's the ball and chain around the ankles of the Suns.
Fair enough. I think I've commented on the initial post as well. It is certainly WAY too early to say whether Hill was a great signing (with sustained effort, production and health), good signing (reasonably sustained above), lateral signing (lack of effort due to injury/fatigue) or unfortunate bad signing (due to prolonged injury).
Stats can be effective, so I'm not saying your use wasn't, just that comparing Richardson to a player like Hill by statistical analysis will only ever tell you half the story because the latter does so many things that don't show up in the statistics.
Then it just speaks to my posts' impactThere is no proof I was ever in that thread.
Remember the playoffs are totally different where every shot counts and that every mistake is very costly, and where the season's wear shows on players....
Spurs fans can talk all the and mitigate Hill's presence all they want. I don't care.
Im just still in shock how he went from this old guy who couldn't hit a three to this unbelievably effective slasher/scorer/jump shooter in the span of about a week.
LMAO at anyone comparing him to Quentin Richardson. When someone makes an analogy like that, it makes you want to throw out anything and everything any Spurs fan will ever say because its so ridiculous.
Jealousy forum.
I'll keep my comments about Hill to myself until playoff time.
Why? Stat-wise, he's identical to Q. Unless I've made yet another mistake in my math, Grant's played the equivalent of less than three seasons so far this century. If anything, he's evidence that you guys will chuck him aside, blame him for failures and minimize his contributions by this time next year.
Not quite.Jealousy forum.
Yeah, when I heard the report that Grant picked the Suns because their practices were easier I sort of decided that we could do without him.
Yes we long for power rankings championships. They're better than the NBA championships.
Stat wise, he's identical to Q?
My God. This is what Im talking about.
Q averaged 14.9 pts on 35% shooting.
Grant Hill is averaging 15.2ponts on 47% shooting.
Q shot an AVERAGE of 8 three pointers a game.
Hill is shooting 2.7 three pointers a game.
Q shot free throws at a 73% rate.
Hill shoots 87% (and he gets to the line more).
Hill averages more assists.
Q averaged more rebounds.
Thats just statistics. Nevermind that Q was completely dependant on others for getting his shot off. He basicallly just camped out at the three point line. Hill is extremely effective at taking his man off the dribble and scoring off the fast break.
Hill is also light years ahead of Q defensively. He very effective at slapping balls away from big men when theyre down low.
I can't say enough good things about this guy. He's really impressed.
Better say them now, because thanks to D'Antoni there won't be much to say in April.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
