Nash just sealed MVP #2 in my book.

[H Rock]

and since when does shaq make guys around him better.

Dwyane Wade.

[fgrep15]

Everyone he plays with (Joe Johnson, Quentin Richardson etc) looks like a superstar...then turns to poop when they leave. So they just bring in more guys (Raja Bell, James Jones, Boris Diaw) and Nash makes them all look incredible.

Huh? I can agree with Nash being a Top MVP candidate, but what is this rubbish.

Q-Rich's best season was the year before he came to Phoenix, on the Clippers. His PG's were House, Doug Overton, Jaric, and Keyon Dooling. He averaged more PPG, and basically the same percentages.

Q-Rich LAC: 17.2 PPG | 39.8% FG | 35.2% 3PT | 36.0 MPG
Q-Rich PHO: 14.9 PPG | 38.9% FG | 35.8% 3PT | 35.9 MPG

Less PPG, lower FG%, higher 3PT%, same MPG. Q-Rich was not unpolished and unproven in LAC, and he didn't become more proven as a Sun, just the same old jacker he was, and he also added playoff choking to his resume in Phoenix.

Joe Johnson is averaging 20 PPG and 6.5 APG with 46% FG and 35.5% 3PT, after moving from a fourth option to a first option, what in the world justifies him playing bad? Michael Redd after going from a 6th man and 4th option behind Cassell, Allen, Robinson, and 3rd option behind Cassell, Allen/Payton, to a first option had this progression:
4th option: 48.3% FG | 44.4% 3PT
3rd option: 46.9% FG | 43.8% 3PT
1st option: 44.0% FG | 35.0% 3PT

What in the world were people expecting Joe Johnson to shoot when he would be the playmaker, always have the best perimeter defender, and be the focus of opposing teams, the same percentages as when teams are focusing on Nash, Amare and Marion?

Outside of the first month of the season where he was adjusting to the new role, Joe Johnson has put up:

21.0 PPG | 3.9 RPG | 7.0 APG | 47.9% FG | 37.8% 3PT

I don't know how he has looked like poop. Joe Johnson and Q-Rich didn't even look like All-Stars, let alone superstars in Phoenix. Q-Rich is sucking because of the team he's playing on, where free jack is not allowed, and Joe Johnson is actually looking like a superstar right now. Where was Joe Johnson before Nash? A young player on the rise, he averaged 19-5-5 after Marbury left the team. What was Joe Johnson with Nash? The forgotten man in Phoenix. What is he after Nash? A guy people are actually saying can be a franchise player now? I don't see where his downfall comes into play.

Raja Bell PER minute is averaging less PPG than he did in Utah last season. The guy get's an increase of 10 MPG, and people are surprised that his PPG increased by 2.3 PPG?

PER 38.5 mins:
03-04: 17.5 PPG | 40.9% FG | 37.3% 3PT
04-05: 16.7 PPG | 45.4% FG | 40.3% 3PT
05-06: 14.6 PPG | 44.9% FG | 42.5% 3PT

So tell me why again we're so astounded by how Raja Bell is playing? What was he before Nash? The same player he is right now in Phoenix, can defend, shoot, and score, he's not doing anything new. Last season what did he have at point, Keith Mcleod for 53 games, than Lopez for 31? Add to that Kirilenko and Boozer playing 41 and 51 games respectively, and the Jazz not really being an fast paced offensive team, he hasn't advanced to any new heights.

Then their's James Jones, he actually has an increase in PPG, but his percentages have not gone anywhere. He's shooting relatively the same percentages, just that PER minute he's taking 3 more shots a game than last season, what's the surprise there? He had some big games too when everyone was suspended last season.

Eddie House, last season he shot 45.1% FG and 45.4% 3PT, he just didn't get free jack like D'Antoni gives to all his players. That's basically the difference between his numbers this year and last season. Eddie House was always a guy who came in and jacked shots, and with his quick scoring ability, could help or hurt you. He does the same thing now except he jacks even more.

Then their's Diaw, anyone that relates Diaw's play to Nash must not be watching the same games as I am. Diaw is assisted on 52% of his makes, that's the same as the league average. The Suns assist on 64% of their makes, the guy is not even assisted more than the regular Joe Shmoe. The guy got 16-9-9, 57% FG all over his season averages against the Spurs without Nash, and Barbosa. Did Nash help him to that from the bench? He was screaming pass to Marion now, he's open?

Does Nash elevate Diaw that little extra bit to get rebounds, does Nash go into Diaw's body and give him courtvision, and direct him where to pass the ball, does Nash teach Diaw how to guard C's and PF's, does Nash teach Diaw how to be athletic, does Nash teach Diaw how to do post moves, does Nash decide what position Diaw plays on the floor, like really, I don't get it? How in the world is Nash making Diaw rebound, defend, play multiple positions, pass, have courtvision, score by himself, this needs to be explained to me. Diaw before Nash had an all-round game and could defend, with Nash he's doing the same thing, but with more minutes, and with more confidence, which is due to the coach, and his play in the summer, and also his new positional placement.

Some people have also mentioned Marion, who before Nash came already averaged 21.2 PPG. I don't think Nash is what made him rebound better now is he, so that's not relative. Since Nash's arrival, he's also shot his poorest outside percentages since he learnt how to shoot NBA three's basically. Even worse than in 03-04 when he had a rookie foreing SG/PG manning the point for most of the year. This is not saying Nash made him worse, but people really need to get off Nash and stop acting like he makes players, he's just a very good PG in a nice situation, who does get players open shots, and is valuable to his team, that's all it is.

All these guys getting more shots is due to the system they play in, not Nash. Nash get's them more open shots, but a PPG increase that's not due to shooting better, just taking more shots or playing more minutes is not anything special. With a different coach, they wouldn't be allowed to take as many shots.

Dwyane Wade.

Very true, but Shaq's affect on Wade is not direct, as in it's not him passing Wade the ball, or getting him more open shots, it's just that when you have a post option, it allows you to be more selective in your shots. Wade doesn't have to force as much because he has the option of posting Shaq down low. Wade also makes his other teammates better with his drive and dish game, and also with his ability to get to the line and put pressure on the other team. Really most good players will make their teammates better.

[magius]

You really annoy me, did I ever tell you that? Everytime I read something you post I feel like 15 lbs of cow shit just appeared right beside me.

i think anytime you try to do anything 15 lbs of cow shit appear beside you.

be annoyed by me, i don't mind. in fact, i prefer it.

In no way did I say Kobe deserves MVP, at this point I believe he doesnt. Being a fan I would love that though but thats not the point.

really? lets reread what you wrote previous to that sad attempt of a flame:

Whenever the "without this guy this team would be worse" argument comes up then I immediately say Kobe or Nash is MVP in that instance (Kobe more since PHO has Marion,who is 10x better than Odom, and a returning Amare). I look at the teams roster, public expectancy, and I always come to the conclusion that LA would be battling for the worst record in the league instead of a playoff spot. Detroit on the other hand would still be one of the more solid contenders in the East and PHO would be where LA is currently.

look, i actually understood that you were basing what you said on a certain criteria, but you implied that if such were true kobe deserves the mvp more based on that criteria. i was replying to the criteria.... not to you. nowhere in my reply did i attack you.

I was posting based on a certain criteria but I guess when you have a walrus up your ass you seem to miss these things. Were you molested as a child?

i don't, i didn't, and i wasn't.

Which of the two is more valuable that person?

(a)A million dollar ring in the hands of a millionaire.
(b )a million dollar ring in the hands of a peasant.

is this supposed to be an analogy? i don't get it how it relates to anything here. i'm not trying to demean you, i just honestly don't get it how it has any relevance to anything being discussed.

okay, on to matt.

what in 99? totally diff team....only Duncan remains. With the way Duncan is playing this season, Spurs stand no chance of winning a championship w/o Parker. Same goes for Pistons & Suns.

thats true, but like i said, you can say that about just about any contender. take away a core part of any team and their chances dimnish greatly. do you actually think the spurs with parker and without duncan stand a better chance of winning then the spurs with duncan and without parker? the fact is that their championship hopes will always rest primarily in duncans hands, will he have help? yes, but he is the most important piece of the puzzle; he's not the only piece, but he's the most important.... even injured.

borderline all-star? he was already an All-Star before Nash. The other guys, playing time has also had a huge impact on their games. As for Q, we won't know what he is w/o Nash until he leaves NY. Playing with Larry Brown is not good for his game since he can't shoot 3's.

well, out of a 5 year career prior to nash, marion was only an all star once - 2003. by borderline i don't mean he's never been an all star, i just mean that he was often on the verge of being an all star and not being an all star. now, theres no question that he's an all star.

So how does Nash make Marion a better rebounder & overall defender?

he doesn't, at least not directly. the up tempo system phoenix plays leads to more shots both ways - and more rebounds. marion is a somewhat better defender because he conserves energy on the offensive side because nash makes the game easier in that area.

i say marions success is drawn directly from nash because nash has made phoenix a serious contender. i don't actually think any great player makes players 'more talented' per say, i just think playing with great players allows others to not only implement those talents more efficiently, but also to showcase the implementation of said talents. i'm not saying marion is more talented because of nash, i'm saying marion is recongnized because phoenix is winning and that i think nash is the main reason phoenix is winning (again, not the only reason, but the main reason).

excels is a relative term. KG is the only superstar that plays as hard on D as he does on O. I think your underrating Billups defence, sure he has trouble keeping the quick guys out of the lane but he's a big reason as to why Detroit have the L's best perimeter defense.

Nash is simply really really bad on defense and he can't even maintain a 3-1 TO ratio.

i think duncan and artest also play as hard on d as they do on o, and maybe kirilenko.

i don't think i'm underrating billup's defense. i think he's an average defender on a defensive oriented team, which in turn makes him a good defender, but not a great defender. i'd say he's either the 5th biggest reason or tied for 4th in terms of contributing to detroit having the L's best perimiter defense. the team would possibly detoriate swithout him on offense, but i think they'd be alright defensively. then again a good offense can be a good defense, so its basically heresay.

[EGarrett]

Whenever the "without this guy this team would be worse" argument comes up then I immediately say Kobe or Nash is MVP in that instance (Kobe more since PHO has Marion,who is 10x better than Odom, and a returning Amare).

Lamar Odom before Kobe:
17.1 ppg, 9.7 rpg, 4.1 apg

Shawn Marion before Nash:
19.0 ppg, 9.3 rebounds, 2.7 assists

LOL at the "Kobe Effect" vs. "The Nash Effect"

...And the aftermath of the Nash/Kobe affect.

Lamar Odom: 14.1 PPG, 9.3 RPG, 5.3 APG

Shawn Marion: 22.0 PPG, 12.3 RPG, 1.7 APG

I dont get what you are trying to say.

That the reason one player looks 10x better than the other has more to do with their situation...

How is this relevant to what I was saying.

I bolded the part I was responding to. You said Marion is 10x better than Odom.

I simply pointed out that, before they started playing with their respective stars, their numbers were very similar if not even. Now all of a sudden one looks like an MVP candidate and the other looks like garbage. Coincidence? I'll leave that to you to decide...

All I am saying is the Lakers would suck ass without Kobe and the Suns would be ok without Nash provided Nash and Amare were there.

They don't have Amare this year. And really, looking at the actual rosters this season, I don't think Nash has that much more help than Kobe.

[J@3]

And really, looking at the actual rosters this season, I don't think Nash has that much more help than Kobe.

That's... interesting, to say the least.

[EGarrett]

And really, looking at the actual rosters this season, I don't think Nash has that much more help than Kobe.

That's... interesting, to say the least.

James Jones
Raja Bell
Leandro Barbosa
Eddie House
Boris Diaw
Kurt Thomas's fossils
Tim Thomas

Are any of these guys REALLY legit NBA starters? Sure, they look good now, but think of them BEFORE they went to Phoenix. In fact, weren't House and Thomas kicked off their previous teams?

On the Lakers end...

Chris Mihm
Kwame Brown
Devean George
Brian Cook
Jim Jackson's fossils
Smush Parker
Aaron McKie

Two collections of junky spare parts. But the Laker guys can run the floor, rebound and hit spot-up threes just as well as the random Suns guys...one group is just getting used more than the other...

[Fenix]

#1 Boris Diaw would be better in the role of a triangle iniciator than Odom is.
#2 Barbosa does everything better than Smush Parker.
#3 Marion gives you more scoring than Odom and he doesn't even needs the ball in his ball to be effective, plus his D is on another level comparing to Odom's.
#4 Kurt Thomas is better than anything Lakers have upfront.
And House gives you scoring off the bench, Brian Grant is cheap depth and they have a recovering Amare. So, what are you talking about again?

[J@3]

James Jones
Raja Bell
Leandro Barbosa
Eddie House
Boris Diaw
Kurt Thomas
Tim Thomas

Are any of these guys REALLY legit NBA starters? Sure, they look good now, but think of them BEFORE they went to Phoenix. In fact, weren't house and Tim Thomas cut/bought-out from their previous team?

And remember, Kurt Thomas is 34-years-old...

I see where you're heading with that, but I'm not convinced the Lakers bench/role players are in the same region as the guys Phoenix has. I mean Eddie House for instance would probably be starting for LA.

[EGarrett]

#1 Boris Diaw would be better in the role of a triangle iniciator than Odom is.

Uh, no. Odom is a great passer and ballhandler, and at 6'10" he can go right in the post. He can do what Diaw can do plus hit the occassional spot-up three and take someone down low.

#2 Barbosa does everything better than Smush Parker.
#3 Marion gives you more scoring than Odom and he doesn't even needs the ball in his ball to be effective, plus his D is on another level comparing to Odom's.

Marion is the better player, but Odom gives you lots of things that Marion doesn't. Odom looks like sh-t this year, but he's definitely not.

#4 Kurt Thomas is better than anything Lakers have upfront.

Thomas = 8 points, 7 boards per
Chris Mihm = 10 points, 6 boards per

And who knows what Kwame would be playing with a real point guard...he could at least run the floor and get 10-12 points per...

And House gives you scoring off the bench, Brian Grant is cheap depth and they have a recovering Amare. So, what are you talking about again?

If House is so good, then why has he played for 6 teams in 4 years?

And...Grant is a fart, and Amare has played zero games this year, and as I originally said, we're looking at who they've actually been playing with. So what were YOU talking about?

[Matt]

Lakers role players are better defenders.....well individually they suck, but as a team Phil Jackson has them playing at a high level. They are offensively challenged however seeing as though none of them can create a shot for themselves except for Smush on the occasion.

[Fenix]

What the hell? Diaw is 6'9'', Odom is 6'10. They both generally go only left and their offensive repertoire is similar, although Odom has more post game and Diaw is still work-in-progress. But passing- and ballhandling-wise, they're both very similar, only that Diaw has better basketball IQ and is better as a point forward and a teams secondary (or even third) ballhandler than Odom is. That's a fact. He was ineffective in the Hawks system, becuase they were playing as a pure PG, but he excels when he's put in his current role. He was doing the same thing in the European Championship and he put 16/9/9 other day without Nash, so it's not like everything he does is because of Nash.

Eddie House is a energy guy off the bench and a undersized SG. That's why he was traded so many times. Suns system enables him to run&gun and he would be a nice backup for Bryant.

Kurt Thomas versus Chris Mihm? Give me Thomas any time of the day. Thomas wasn't a starter for the whole season, so obviously his stats are a bit deflated, he's a better defender and a superb midrange shooter, a perfect fit for the triangle. His midrange game would provide Bryant with another threat to pass to when double and triple teamed.

You're right, Odom does give you passing and ballhandling Marion can't. But you have Diaw to make up for that. And I would much, much rather have Marion over Odom on both sides of the court.

[EGarrett]

What the hell? Diaw is 6'9'', Odom is 6'10. They both generally go only left and their offensive repertoire is similar,

No, their offensive reportoire is most definitely not similar. Odom has a decent jumper and can post-up and finish with both hands. Diaw has no semblance of a jumper, can't post anyone up and can't finish. He's a good passer, but he passes mainly because he knows he has no business trying to score it.

Don't get me wrong, I LIKE Diaw, but he ain't Odom.

Eddie House is a energy guy off the bench and a undersized SG. That's why he was traded so many times.

6 teams...in 4 years...

Suns system enables him to run&gun and he would be a nice backup for Bryant.

And why do you think the Suns are able to play a run & gun?

[Fenix]

Good points. Diaw CAN finish, although he rarely uses his off hand, but neither does Odom. Diaw is still improving and is showing nice array of moves in the post and is more often driving and dishing than Odom. He's better on the defensive end and would be far better complement to Bryant than Odom is.

And of course, Nash is the one who runs run&gun, but he 'only' makes all the pieces fit together. House is effective either way, thing is, that he must be looked at as a SG. He was traded/relased from that many teams simply because
a.)as I said, they're afraid of small SGs without playmaking skills.
b.) they had to make room to develop players with more size and 'potential'. I remember I was thinking that when Charlotte, Bucks and Sacramento gave up on him.

C: Kurt Thomas
F: Boris Diaw
F: Shawn Marion
G: Kobe Bryant
G: Leandro Barbosa
Bench: James Jones, Tim Thomas, Eddie House, Brian Grant, Raja Bell
Coach: Phil Jackson

This would still be a primarily halfcourt team which runs the triangle offense, but with a lot of fast break opportunities. It appears a bit undersized up front, but Kurt Thomas showed that he can guard any of today's Cs (with exception of Shaq), while Diaw is around 6'8 1/2'' without his shoes on, with long arms to go with and he also proved that he's more than capable of guarding bigs. Marion and Diaw would be interchangeable at the PF position and Diaw would share role of an iniciator with Kobe and - to lesser extent - Barbosa. LB would also be able to play off the ball and do what he does the best - penetrate and spot up for jumshots. Eddie House would bring shooting and overall scoring punch off the bench, and so would Tim Thomas and Raja Bell, who you could use as your defensive stopper. Marion would be a guaranteeed 20 points per night without ballhoging, which is exactly what Lakers lack. Faster pace would mean more 1-on-1 situations for Kobe and while he wouldn't exactly creating scoring opportunities in the same manner as Nash does, he would be a constant offensive threat in both halfcourt and run&gun game and double&triple teams on him would make life easier for his teammates.

[EGarrett]

Good points. Diaw CAN finish, although he rarely uses his off hand, but neither does Odom. Diaw is still improving and is showing nice array of moves in the post and is more often driving and dishing than Odom. He's better on the defensive end and would be far better complement to Bryant than Odom is.

Diaw needs the ball in his hands to be effective. He's a good rebounder, but not as good as Odom and he can't hit open shots. How does he complement Kobe better?

House is effective either way, thing is, that he must be looked at as a SG. He was traded/relased from that many teams simply because
a.)as I said, they're afraid of small SGs without playmaking skills.
b.) they had to make room to develop players with more size and 'potential'. I remember I was thinking that when Charlotte, Bucks and Sacramento gave up on him.

I don't recall David Wesley, Juan Dixon or Ben Gordon playing musical teams...

And was House traded all six times, or was he CUT several times? BIG difference there...

C: Kurt Thomas
F: Boris Diaw
F: Shawn Marion
G: Kobe Bryant
G: Leandro Barbosa
Bench: James Jones, Tim Thomas, Eddie House, Brian Grant, Raja Bell
Coach: Phil Jackson

This would still be a primarily halfcourt team which runs the triangle offense, but with a lot of fast break opportunities.

How?

Who runs this hypothetical fast break?

Diaw is the best passer, but he's also the tallest player in the five, and thus isn't going to be able to leak out...

Kobe Bryant does NOT look for other people in the open floor. And Barbosa...well...he doesn't belong in a starting line-up...

It appears a bit undersized up front, but Kurt Thomas showed that he can guard any of today's Cs (with exception of Shaq), while Diaw is around 6'8 1/2'' without his shoes on, with long arms to go with and he also proved that he's more than capable of guarding bigs. Marion and Diaw would be interchangeable at the PF position and Diaw would share role of an iniciator with Kobe

If Odom can't share the initiator role with Kobe, what makes you think Diaw can? Diaw is Odom without the ability to spot-up when Kobe is double-teamed...

Here's what happens with Diaw and Kobe on the same-team...

Kobe gets ball, goes one-on-one, scores while Diaw stands around
Diaw gets ball, Kobe takes it from him (he does it to Odom), gets doubled, passes back, Diaw bricks jumper.
Kobe gets ball, gets doubled, forces two shots, makes one
Kobe gets ball, gets doubled, passes to Diaw, Diaw bricks jumper

Kobe yells at Diaw to "hit a damn shot!" Diaw stares at his sneakers the rest of the game, is promptly benched and people go post that Kobe has garbage for help...

and - to lesser extent - Barbosa. LB would also be able to play off the ball and do what he does the best - penetrate and spot up for jumshots.

He needs the ball in his hands to penetrate, and someone needs to be willing to give him the ball for him to spot-up.

Who's going to do this? You think Kobe will stand for giving the ball to Diaw and letting him pass to Barbosa and Thomas all-day? Again, he won't let Odom do it...

Eddie House would bring shooting and overall scoring punch off the bench,

Eddie House is NOT a good player outside of the run and gun system. That's why every team gets rid of him...

and so would Tim Thomas

I think you know that Thomas would QUICKLY become a locker-room cancer trying to play the triangle with Kobe...

And Devean George is probably better...

and Raja Bell, who you could use as your defensive stopper.

Would Raja play defense when he isn't getting the ball?

Marion would be a guaranteeed 20 points per night without ballhoging,

You think Marion could score 20 per without a fast break? He can't create his own shot, he can't spot-up for three. And do you think he'd hustle so much without getting set-up?

He'd be good, but everything falls apart without the MP3...

Faster pace would mean more 1-on-1 situations for Kobe

There's no such thing as "faster pace" 1-on-1 basketball...

1-on-1 means the other 4 guys stand around...no fast break, no ball movement etc...

and while he wouldn't exactly creating scoring opportunities in the same manner as Nash does, he would be a constant offensive threat in both halfcourt and run&gun game

Again, WHAT run & gun game?

and double&triple teams on him would make life easier for his teammates.

Who? Marion? Diaw? Bell?

They aren't exactly dead-eye shooters...

[fgrep15]

well, out of a 5 year career prior to nash, marion was only an all star once - 2003. by borderline i don't mean he's never been an all star, i just mean that he was often on the verge of being an all star and not being an all star. now, theres no question that he's an all star.

In the West as a F, being an All-Star is based on how well your team does because of how many good F's their are. Marion is an All-Star now because Phoenix is good, and also playing PF and a faster game which helps his rebounding numbers go up so he's getting constant double doubles as opposed to averaging 9 RPG doesn't hurt. People always like the 20-10, just looks nice to them.

No, their offensive reportoire is most definitely not similar. Odom has a decent jumper and can post-up and finish with both hands. Diaw has no semblance of a jumper, can't post anyone up and can't finish. He's a good passer, but he passes mainly because he knows he has no business trying to score it.

I'm not sure how much of Diaw you guys watch. Diaw's jumper really is not bad for one thing, he improved it, most noticeably in the summer while playing in Europe. Secondly, Diaw actually has a surprisngly nice post game, and is a very good finisher in the lane, I'd actually say he's a better finisher than Odom, just that he likes to finish finesse more than hard.

Diaw shoot's 40.5% eFG on jumpers, and is assisted on 60%
Odom shoots 38.1% eFG on jumpers and is assisted on 63%

Diaw shoots an inside percentage of 64.1%
Odom shoots an inside percentage of 59.9%

I didn't think he's shoot a better eFG percentage on jumpshots than Odom since Odom has more range and shoot's three's, but I guess he does. Odom is not that good a shooter, he has more range, but his jumpshot is only decent. I mean really, Odom shoots 68.1% from the FT line even.

I don't know if you guys missed the whole Diaw's post All-Star break numbers:
18.9 PPG | 9.1 RPG | 7.0 APG | 62.1% FG | 50% 3PT | 86.1% FT

About the comparison of the Suns and Lakers Roster, I don't see why their's anything to argue there. The Suns easily have better guys, they were better before the came to the Suns, or before Nash came to the Suns, and still are.

Raja Bell, Tim Thomas, Leandro Barbosa, and Kurt Thomas could all easily be starters on another team.

Raja Bell is as good as MoPete, an equal shooter, better ball handler, and a better defender. MoPete is a pretty good starter on a team, and would start on most teams in the league at either SG or SF unless they have a star guy at both. If MoPete can start on a team, so can Raja. Raja gives you the same thing as Iguodala except he's a better shooter and scorer and dunks less, he's better than Korver who was a starter, Trenton Hassell, Kirk Snyder, Deshawn Stevenson, Gordan Giricek, Kareem Rush etc etc all guys who are starters and Bell is easily better than.

Tim Thomas did not get PT in Chicago because he's not a Scott Skiles player. He's all offense, and minimal defense and rebounding. Skiles isn't going to take away minutes from his young guys like Deng, and his guys who have shown sucess last season playing together, to play a guy that just scores on a defensive team. He's still battling with Gordon to play more defense. Thomas just made it a bad situation for himself, his lack of minutes had nothing to do with talent . I think he was still trying to get big so he could fight Kenyon Martin.

Kurt Thomas equals better C than half the starting C's in the league, so that automatically makes him a starting C. He's only a little better than Mihm, Mihm really isn't bad, he just needs to rebound a little more. Mihm is also a bigger body and blocks more shots. Thomas obviously is the superior shooter, and could easily score as much if he was getting more shots.

Barbosa is a questionable one, he wouldn't start on some teams because he's a SG/PG, but talent wise he's capable of starting. Most coaches would probably use him as a 6th man scorer off the bench. He'd play a similar role to Mo Williams on the Bucks.

The Suns do have a more talented lineup though:
Raja Bell is much superior to Smush Parker, it isn't even close
Shawn Marion is better than Odom, even in Odom's best years, basically the one year in Miami, Marion was still better.
Boris Diaw is easily better than Kwame, I've supported Kwame a lot, but man he just can't get it done.
Kurt Thomas and Mihm are close, but Thomas is a little better

On the bench:
James Jones is about as good as Devean George, DG really hasn't done anything specal before. Jones is the better shooter, George is the better slasher, both can defend. I think about everyone would take Jones, who really knows what George gives you, it's sporadic.

Leandro Barbosa is better than anyone the Lakers have off the bench, so just put someone there, let's say Brian Cook who isn't bad though, and is the one guy that would be nice in a Suns type system. He's like a lesser version of Tim Thomas since offensively Tim Thomas is superior in putting the ball on the floor, and posting up. He's also more athletic than Cook.

Tim Thomas though he just came and hasn't been there the whole season is not also better than anyone the Lakers have on the bench which is really no one.

Eddie House is not really anything special, but he's better than Sasha, better than Profit was, and I'd say about as good as Walton because Walton can do some other things than just scoring.

Seriously, I don't see any comparison in the teams lineups. The Suns system depends on having shooters, and talented players. If the Suns had the Lakers players, D'Antoni would probably try to devise another method of playing, you definately couldn't play the same way because you wouldn't hit any shots

You think Marion could score 20 per without a fast break? He can't create his own shot, he can't spot-up for three. And do you think he'd hustle so much without getting set-up?

He'd be good, but everything falls apart without the MP3...

Marion is a guy that makes a team get fastbreak oppurtunities. I watched through the 03-04 season. Marion makes defensive plays and get's out on the break so fast that evn if you're not looking to fastbreak, you'll end up having to. Marion has hustled so much every year of his career, even when the team was losing, so he's already proven that he'd hustle so much without getting set up.

I don't recall David Wesley, Juan Dixon or Ben Gordon playing musical teams...

I think it's cause they're better players.

Eddie House can shoot and score, period. David Wesley is not a quick hit's scorer off the bench, he also can actually play PG, though he doesn't anymore, he used to before. Though undersized, he's a good defender, and he can play SG on both ends while House can't.

Same with BG, he can also play SG, he's also a far superior scorer to House, he's 6'2, and has a nice winspan, is more athletic, is bigger, and is in his second year, so obviously he wouldn't have bounced around, though I don't expect him to.

Juan Dixon really would've moved a little if he wasn't picked in the first round and had a guranteed contract with the Wizards. He's taller at 6'3, and had long arms, he's also not really just a shooter, he's more of a scorer. Eddie House is an interesting player. For his first three seasons he actually was on one team, and that was while being a second round pick, so Dixon hasn't fared better yet. I wouldn't be surprised if Dixon moved some more. Really House's movement all came last season where he was on Charlotte, Milwaukee, and Sacremento. It's doubtful if he will even remain in Phoenix after this season because he's not a guy that is truly hard to replace, and most teams want a backup PG that can actually run the offense.

Eddie House is not a good player when a team expects him to do more than just come in and jack shots. He's #5 in the league in FG attempts PER 48 minutes. Sacremento last season understood that, and they just used him when they'd get down, put him in and hope he catches fire and gives you a little offensive spark. If not, he goes back to sit. Eddie House is not a "good" player right now though, the guy on the Lakers he could be better than is who, Sasha? Smush is better than him, though if he was on the team he would probably have been starting over Smush.

[air gordon]

good to see fgrep back

I think it's a close race for MVP between Wade and Nash

[Fenix]

Diaw needs the ball in his hands to be effective. He's a good rebounder, but not as good as Odom and he can't hit open shots. How does he complement Kobe better?

Diaw DOES NOT need ball as much as Odom does. Watch some frikkin' games. Nash ballhogs as much as Bryant, but Diaw finds way to contribute as a 'playmaker'. And as fgrep said, he has a effective jumper (although Odom is better in this area).

Who runs this hypothetical fast break?

Diaw is the best passer, but he's also the tallest player in the five, and thus isn't going to be able to leak out...

Kobe Bryant does NOT look for other people in the open floor. And Barbosa...well...he doesn't belong in a starting line-up...

First of all, Barbosa is better than Parker. He's quicker, faster, just as tall (6'4) and long and better offensive player. He can push the ball, but he can't distribute although he is showing improvement in this particular area of his game. Here comes Diaw. I mean, Magic was 6'8, 6'9 and he could run the fastbreak, why couldn't Diaw who's faster and more athletic? I'm not saying Diaw is as good as MJ, I'm just saying big guys are also capable of runing fast paced game. OK, forget it. How the hell did the Bulls ever ran if their playmaker was 6'9 Pippen?

If Odom can't share the initiator role with Kobe, what makes you think Diaw can? Diaw is Odom without the ability to spot-up when Kobe is double-teamed...

Here's what happens with Diaw and Kobe on the same-team...

Kobe gets ball, goes one-on-one, scores while Diaw stands around
Diaw gets ball, Kobe takes it from him (he does it to Odom), gets doubled, passes back, Diaw bricks jumper.
Kobe gets ball, gets doubled, forces two shots, makes one
Kobe gets ball, gets doubled, passes to Diaw, Diaw bricks jumper

Kobe yells at Diaw to "hit a damn shot!" Diaw stares at his sneakers the rest of the game, is promptly benched and people go post that Kobe has garbage for help...

You should watch more games. Diaw can spot up and he can move off the ball, whereas Odom can't.

He [Barbosa] needs the ball in his hands to penetrate, and someone needs to be willing to give him the ball for him to spot-up.

Who's going to do this? You think Kobe will stand for giving the ball to Diaw and letting him pass to Barbosa and Thomas all-day? Again, he won't let Odom do it...

Kobe is not that much of a ballhog as you picture him to be. It's like you think Kobe is the sole ballhandler on that team. Barbosa's abillity to penetrate (and shoot jumpers) and Kurt's midrange game would make Kobe a bigger offensive threat, not smaller.

Would Raja play defense when he isn't getting the ball?

In Phila, Bell was primarily a defensive stopper. He started scoring in Utah and he still plays a superb D.

You think Marion could score 20 per without a fast break? He can't create his own shot, he can't spot-up for three. And do you think he'd hustle so much without getting set-up?

He'd be good, but everything falls apart without the MP3...

How the hell do you think Marion scored 20ppg BEFORE Nash came to Phoenix? Damn, he was scoring 20ppg with Marbury on the team.

There's no such thing as "faster pace" 1-on-1 basketball...

1-on-1 means the other 4 guys stand around...no fast break, no ball movement etc...

Erm, I don't think you know what you're talking about. 1-on-1 is not a type of a halfcourt game, it's a offensive situation which can happen both in halfcourt or on fast break opportunities. In fact, Kobe exels at 1-on-1 game on fast break. He usually scores AND gets and-1.

Who? Marion? Diaw? Bell?

They aren't exactly dead-eye shooters...

What the hell? Marion is a decent 3pt shooter, especially a post up one, Diaw is clearly improving and Bell is better than anyone Lakers have right now. He shot .403% in his last season with Jazz and is currently shooting .425% from behind the arc.

Edit: Yeah, I forgot James Jones, who's a superb shooter. He can also defend and rebound, but it looks like this is his year off.

[EGarrett]

Diaw DOES NOT need ball as much as Odom does. Watch some frikkin' games. Nash ballhogs as much as Bryant, but Diaw finds way to contribute as a 'playmaker'. And as fgrep said, he has a effective jumper (although Odom is better in this area).

That's due to the system. My point is that the system wouldn't exist without Nash...

First of all, Barbosa is better than Parker. He's quicker, faster, just as tall (6'4) and long and better offensive player. He can push the ball, but he can't distribute although he is showing improvement in this particular area of his game. Here comes Diaw. I mean, Magic was 6'8, 6'9 and he could run the fastbreak, why couldn't Diaw who's faster and more athletic? I'm not saying Diaw is as good as MJ, I'm just saying big guys are also capable of runing fast paced game. OK, forget it. How the hell did the Bulls ever ran if their playmaker was 6'9 Pippen?

Didn't you just tell me that Diaw failed in Atlanta because he couldn't perform that role?

You should watch more games. Diaw can spot up and he can move off the ball, whereas Odom can't.

Which role do you want him to perform?

Kobe is not that much of a ballhog as you picture him to be. It's like you think Kobe is the sole ballhandler on that team. Barbosa's abillity to penetrate (and shoot jumpers) and Kurt's midrange game would make Kobe a bigger offensive threat, not smaller.

Like Karl Malone's did?

How the hell do you think Marion scored 20ppg BEFORE Nash came to Phoenix? Damn, he was scoring 20ppg with Marbury on the team.

And Barbosa can set him up like Marbury? Marbury is a knuckle-head, but he at least can look for people in the open floor. He gets none of that with the Barbosa/Bryant backcourt...

Erm, I don't think you know what you're talking about. 1-on-1 is not a type of a halfcourt game, it's a offensive situation which can happen both in halfcourt or on fast break opportunities. In fact, Kobe exels at 1-on-1 game on fast break. He usually scores AND gets and-1.

That's called cherry-picking...not really a fast break...

And how does Kobe's excellent 1-on-1 fast break coincide with Marion?

What the hell? Marion is a decent 3pt shooter, especially a post up one, Diaw is clearly improving and Bell is better than anyone Lakers have right now. He shot .403% in his last season with Jazz and is currently shooting .425% from behind the arc.

Again, you tend to confuse the system with the player...Bell yes, but Diaw and Marion...not so much...

[magius]

n the West as a F, being an All-Star is based on how well your team does because of how many good F's their are. Marion is an All-Star now because Phoenix is good, and also playing PF and a faster game which helps his rebounding numbers go up so he's getting constant double doubles as opposed to averaging 9 RPG doesn't hurt. People always like the 20-10, just looks nice to them.

what i wrote earlier:

he doesn't, at least not directly. the up tempo system phoenix plays leads to more shots both ways - and more rebounds. marion is a somewhat better defender because he conserves energy on the offensive side because nash makes the game easier in that area.

i say marions success is drawn directly from nash because nash has made phoenix a serious contender. i don't actually think any great player makes players 'more talented' per say, i just think playing with great players allows others to not only implement those talents more efficiently, but also to showcase the implementation of said talents. i'm not saying marion is more talented because of nash, i'm saying marion is recongnized because phoenix is winning and that i think nash is the main reason phoenix is winning (again, not the only reason, but the main reason).

i think we're saying the same thing.

Diaw DOES NOT need ball as much as Odom does. Watch some frikkin' games. Nash ballhogs as much as Bryant, but Diaw finds way to contribute as a 'playmaker'. And as fgrep said, he has a effective jumper (although Odom is better in this area).

actually diaw does need the ball as much as odom does to be succesful. why do you think he was forgotten in atlanta? they are taking roughly equal shots, odom is rebounding better, and you can account diaw's assist numbers to the fact that 1. he is playing in a run and gun system with many options to screen and pop, and 2. he is actually given the ball on a more consistent basis then odom. the only reason people are in love with diaw is because everyone likes a feel good story, and he's young blood which is exciting.

no nash does not ballhog as much as bryant... take your own advice and watch some games. if you control the ball with your main priority to make a pass that is not ballhogging, if you control the ball in order to take a shot that is ballhogging. Not only that, but nash consistently makes the extra pass and differs to his teammates. How you can say that nash ballhogs as much as someone who takes, literally, at the very least (not including attempted fouled shots... which would make it closer to triple) double the shots (on a primarily half court team to boot) as he does baffles me. not to mention the fact that nash shoots at 50 fg% and 40 3pt %.....

as for the team comparisons. i do think phoenix is slightly better than the lakers, but i see where egarret is coming from. before nash, no one on that roster except odom was a legit starter on a good nba team.

bell may be similar to mopete, but mopete is a starter on one of the top 3 shit teams in the nba. thats the only situation bell would be a decent starter prior to the recognition he's getting this season because of nash. the guy couldn't even start consistently in utah(!)... where his competiton was giricek who was injured for more than half the season.

tim thomas is a player who can shoot. period. if it weren't for the fact everyone was trying to tap his 'potential' he'd be considered a 6th, 7th man akin to pat garrity off the bench. which, coincidentally, is what brian cook is. the only situation in which he should start, again, is on a bad team.

prior to this season did anyone even care about house? he is what he is, a 6th, 7th, 8th man off the bench, don't blow it out of proportion.

no one would know who james jones is if indiana had been healthy and unsuspended last year. is he a decent role player? yes, but under no circumstances should or would he be a starter on a good team... he wouldn't even be the 6th man. he'd be a rotation core player at the wing spots, asked to play decent d and hit the occasional shot. which, coincidentally, is what goerge is. the reason people would take jones over george is because of youth, not current talent level.

kurt thomas? he is a decent player, but personally, if i were looking for a starter, i would prefer the younger 7 foot mihm at this moment. considering thomas is 33, i would even be tempted to take kwame over him given his prior 10 and 7 year, which is basically, what kurt is over a career. of course, kwame is literally 10 and 7 in his prime (over his short not yet over career), but i would take him over kurt based on the same fact anyone would take jones over george. but if i were a contender, of course i'd pick kurt, just like if i were a contender i'd pick george (who has finals experience).

smush is really not that bad of a player. consider that this is basically his sophomore year, and that in his rookie year he produced almost identically to barbosa, and you see the classic case of a player hyped (barbosa) because he is young, on a good team that implements his talents, and with players who get lots of coverage which in turn gives him more coverage. as opposed to smush who, prior to kobe, in his very short career has never averaged more than 20 minutes per, and has never been a team where he's been given a legit chance to show off. that said, i would pick barbosa over smush, but neither of them should or would be starters on a classically good team.

again, i think phoenix is slightly better than la, but don't overestimate these players based on short term memory. all of them, save marion, are spare parts discarded by other teams. they are all journeymen 6th, 7th men.

would kobe's record be better with phoenix teammates? slightly. though i find it hard to believe that the guy who had a hard time sharing the ball with one of the greatest centres of all time would differ consistently to the likes of bell, jones, thomas, and barbosa. he would give them the ball out of rythm, and the team would play very chaotically.

[fgrep15]

as for the team comparisons. i do think phoenix is slightly better than the lakers, but i see where egarret is coming from. before nash, no one on that roster except odom was a legit starter on a good nba team.

Odom is not on the Suns, so I'm assuming you meant Marion. Before Nash Kurt Thomas was easily a starter on many teams in the league as a PF/C, I don't know how that can be disputed, the guy was a starter 5 years in a row. He was a starter on the NYK team that went to the finals. Oppurtunity is what makes guys play "better", if Joe Johnson had stayed, Raja would still not be a legit starter on a good NBA team, which really means little. Look at Hedo, he was a starter in SAS, and then came off the bench in Orlando even though he played more mins in Orlando.

bell may be similar to mopete, but mopete is a starter on one of the top 3 shit teams in the nba. thats the only situation bell would be a decent starter prior to the recognition he's getting this season because of nash. the guy couldn't even start consistently in utah(!)... where his competiton was giricek who was injured for more than half the season.

What regocnition, you're acting like these guys are now considered superstars, none of these guys have moved to new heights, they aren't even considered borderline All-Stars. I don't think Raja is better than he was before, because he's not, from how he played in 03-04, and 04-05 he would've started on a lot of teams because he also brings hard nose defense. When the Raptors played Utah in previous years, he's had some big games, and was an annoyance defensively, so I'm not mesmerized by him being able to score 2 more points than last season in 10 more minutes. I didn't know the difference between a legit starter and one who wasn't was 2 more points in 10 minutes, a lot of guys could do that. Sometimes it's not all about who starts, Raja played 8 more MPG than Giricek who somehow "missed half the season" by playing 81 games. Raja was the one who played 63 games last year, don't know where you got the idea of Giricek being injured.

lol, sadly I was expecting you to bring up the Raptors being a bad team argument for the MoPete comparison. Okay, so let's bring players from good teams that Raja is in their range of talent, as good or better than and this is while he was in Utah, not even this year .

David Wesley [started on a good Houston team last season]
Eddie Jones
Kyle Korver
Andre Iguodala
Shane Battier
Bruce Bowen
Adrian Griffin
Rubeun Patterson / DerMarr Johnson / Greg Buckner
Quinton Ross
Kevin Martin
Bobby Simmons
James Posey
Desmond Mason
Kirk Snyder
he was hardly worse than Josh Howard last season

Obviously I'm trying to keep it relative to his position because their's some big men who start and aren't really very good. He's also better than someone like Jared Jefferies, but Jefferies sucks anyways, and isn't starting anymore. When you just look at the SG's you have the Kobe's, Wade's etc, then you have the Joe Johnson, J-Rich etc, then you have the Cuttino Mobley's, Raja Bell's, Stephen Jackson's, Mike Miller's, MoPete's etc. The last group are not bench players, they're easily starters as long as they aren't on the same team as one of the All-Star guys.

Teams last season Raja Bell would start on: Miami at SF, Sacremento [KMart could get over him due to youth], Denver easily, New Orleans, Clippers at SF, Cleveland over Murray, Dallas over Griffin, Houston over Wesley.

About Kurt Thomas, we're comparing the rosters now, youth has nothing to do with it because potential is not factored into how good the team is right now. For one season if you wanted to win more games right now, you take Kurt Thomas over Mihm, and very very very easily over Kwame.

no one would know who james jones is if indiana had been healthy and unsuspended last year. is he a decent role player? yes, but under no circumstances should or would he be a starter on a good team... he wouldn't even be the 6th man. he'd be a rotation core player at the wing spots, asked to play decent d and hit the occasional shot. which, coincidentally, is what goerge is. the reason people would take jones over george is because of youth, not current talent level.

So what exactly is Jones on the Suns? He started 13 games, he's not a starter. He's barely averaging double digit points, and just hit's some three's. Again, he hasn't soared to any new heights, and I don't think I said he was an NBA starter, but he's doing what he did in Indiana, hit some jumpers, and use his length to play a little D, just with some more shots, and more minutes. He's not even shooting better. Devean George is no more of a starter on a good team than Jones is, but it always depends. If you have a team with Jason Williams, Wade, J.Jones, Haslem and Shaq, they're a good team and he's a starter. Obviously almost anyone can be a starter on a good team depending on the positional situation. Neither George or Jones is a starter, Jones you know can give you shooting and spread the floor, George, well he can do some things [shoot a little, rebound a little, defend a little], but nothing especially well, neither guy will advance you to greater heights.

Tim Thomas is a guy that through his career playing starter minutes would give you 14-17 PPG as a starter, and can shoot, drive, and post up. He's definately a far superior player to a scrub like Pat Garrity. Now obviously his on court time is affected by his inability to effectively guard SF's, him being a horrific rebounder, so you can't play him at PF, and his defense in general being much less than spectacular. Either way, it depends on what good team he's on. He obviously wouldn't start on the Spurs because Popovich doesn't want that, but New Jersey, Washington, Denver, Clippers [before Radmon], even Miami could all fit him in to their starting lineup and be content.

prior to this season did anyone even care about house? he is what he is, a 6th, 7th, 8th man off the bench, don't blow it out of proportion.

..and right now, does anyone care about House? Nope. It's not like he's a starter on the Suns. You think if the Suns were offered even anyone relatively better they would hesistate to get rid of House? Don't think so. Nothing is being blown out of proportion, House jacked shots before he came, and he's doing the same, but with more jacking freedom, and not even at the height of his efficiency. Still, how many teams would've picked Sasha Vujacic off of waivers outside of the fact that he's young? Maybe the Bobcats, but House went there too and averaged 11 PPG for a few games.

again, i think phoenix is slightly better than la, but don't overestimate these players based on short term memory. all of them, save marion, are spare parts discarded by other teams. they are all journeymen 6th, 7th men

Discarded is an interesting word. Kurt Thomas was traded because, well, their was a little problem with that Marbury guy over in NYK, and they were bringing younger guys in.

James Jones was an FA, and Phoenix signed him, end of story. Raja Bell was an FA, and Phoenix signed him, I was actually hoping the Clippers would sign him as the starting SG after Simmons left, but Mobley was picked up instead.

Being discarded, and deciding to go somewhere else are very different things. The only guy we could call a discard is Eddie House. Even Boris Diaw wasn't really a discard, but with ATL's genius plan of stockpiling swingman, he kind became redundant on that team along with Childress, Smith, Johnson, and Marvin. Obviously the prime thing for ATL would've been to get Johnson without losing anything, and Phoenix would've matched that gigantic contract even.

Now, with that done, what are Kobe's teammates? Kwame actually was a discard, Smush Parker played 16 games the previous season. None of the other guys on the team outside of Odom are even starters on the crappy NBA teams. Even Smush Parker wouldn't have been a starter on any crappy team that had another PG. Mihm could be a starter depending on the team, I can't really think of anyone that would start George, but their's always someone in need. The others, well...yea, Cook is the only possiblity, and again, it's situational.

I think Phoenix's team betterness is more than "slightly", they simply have more talented players. The guys were more talented even before they came to Phoenix, it's not like Kurt Thomas is having career high's too.

[Fenix]

Damnit! Diaw doesn not 'get the ball on more constant basis'. What have you been smoking? He's every bit as good as Odom is, and I'm fan of Odom's game. And he proved that he doesn't need to be teams primary ballhandler to be constantly effective. And running the triangle with KB is not the same as being a PG for Hawks.

[magius]

Odom is not on the Suns, so I'm assuming you meant Marion. Before Nash Kurt Thomas was easily a starter on many teams in the league as a PF/C, I don't know how that can be disputed, the guy was a starter 5 years in a row. He was a starter on the NYK team that went to the finals. Oppurtunity is what makes guys play "better", if Joe Johnson had stayed, Raja would still not be a legit starter on a good NBA team, which really means little. Look at Hedo, he was a starter in SAS, and then came off the bench in Orlando even though he played more mins in Orlando.

you're right kt was a starter before pheonix.

What regocnition, you're acting like these guys are now considered superstars, none of these guys have moved to new heights, they aren't even considered borderline All-Stars. I don't think Raja is better than he was before, because he's not, from how he played in 03-04, and 04-05 he would've started on a lot of teams because he also brings hard nose defense. When the Raptors played Utah in previous years, he's had some big games, and was an annoyance defensively, so I'm not mesmerized by him being able to score 2 more points than last season in 10 more minutes. I didn't know the difference between a legit starter and one who wasn't was 2 more points in 10 minutes, a lot of guys could do that. Sometimes it's not all about who starts, Raja played 8 more MPG than Giricek who somehow "missed half the season" by playing 81 games. Raja was the one who played 63 games last year, don't know where you got the idea of Giricek being injured.

how am i acting like these guys are being considered all stars now? i just think they are considered in a better light. do you really think that people noticed raja, house, or jones as much last year as they do this year?

like i said earlier i don't believe nash makes players better on a talent basis. I think that, generally, when you play with him your team is in a winning situation. being in a winning situation inevitably means you are considered better then you were (which you may be, but that is drawn from the fact that you are winning and generally people play better when it means something; either way your talent level doesn't rise, your work ethic does). using your example, hedo was hyped in a winning situation in sa, and a winning in situation in sac, but is forgotten in orlando. i don't think hedo's become less of a player, i think he is considered less of a player because he's not in a winning situation (which people would associate as to being his fault, which it may or may not be partially).

are you actually basing bell's defense on being annoying defensively against toronto? who exactly did he annoy? alvin williams?

look, the point i'm trying to make is exactly the point you're trying to make - bell, jones, diaw, everyone, are actually as good as they were prior to phoenix and prior to nash. the fact that people (in this case, not you) consider him better, to me, says something about nash. they're the same players they were, and they weren't considered very good players before; the fact that the lakers roster is considered far inferior to the suns is not a consequence of them actually being inferior, but a consequence of them not winning - and i would place the blame of not winning primarily (not fully, but primarily, theres a difference, don't bitch at me) on the said star of that team.

Obviously I'm trying to keep it relative to his position because their's some big men who start and aren't really very good. He's also better than someone like Jared Jefferies, but Jefferies sucks anyways, and isn't starting anymore. When you just look at the SG's you have the Kobe's, Wade's etc, then you have the Joe Johnson, J-Rich etc, then you have the Cuttino Mobley's, Raja Bell's, Stephen Jackson's, Mike Miller's, MoPete's etc. The last group are not bench players, they're easily starters as long as they aren't on the same team as one of the All-Star guys.

i wouldn't put raja on the same level as sj, mike miller, battier, iggy, cat, bowen, or even jones. i would put him on the wesley, lenard, desmond, mopete, snyder range (which is a tier below the fore mentioned). all of them could be starters, but realistically you'd prefer someone else; in an ideal situation, for any team, they'd be 6th men.

just because raja 'can' start on teams, doesn't mean he's starter material. just because, say, anthony johnson starts in indy, it doesn't mean he's starter material, just that some teams have less depth than others for whatever reason. does every team have starter material players starting at all 5 positions? no. but that doesn't change the fact, that again, in an ideal situation a certain player would and should not be starting.

as for giricek, i don't know where i got that from either. sorry.

lol, sadly I was expecting you to bring up the Raptors being a bad team argument for the MoPete comparison. Okay, so let's bring players from good teams that Raja is in their range of talent, as good or better than and this is while he was in Utah, not even this year

i was expecting you to expect me to.

So what exactly is Jones on the Suns? He started 13 games, he's not a starter. He's barely averaging double digit points, and just hit's some three's. Again, he hasn't soared to any new heights, and I don't think I said he was an NBA starter, but he's doing what he did in Indiana, hit some jumpers, and use his length to play a little D, just with some more shots, and more minutes. He's not even shooting better. Devean George is no more of a starter on a good team than Jones is, but it always depends. If you have a team with Jason Williams, Wade, J.Jones, Haslem and Shaq, they're a good team and he's a starter. Obviously almost anyone can be a starter on a good team depending on the positional situation. Neither George or Jones is a starter, Jones you know can give you shooting and spread the floor, George, well he can do some things [shoot a little, rebound a little, defend a little], but nothing especially well, neither guy will advance you to greater heights.

i never said jones was better, i think he's considered better. prior to this season, disregarding injuries, if you wanted to win right now, would you really take jones over george? last year it was slightly debatable (though not really considering george's playoff experience), this year pretty much anyone would take jones over george. is he a better player than he was? no, but he's considered in a better light.

Tim Thomas is a guy that through his career playing starter minutes would give you 14-17 PPG as a starter, and can shoot, drive, and post up. He's definately a far superior player to a scrub like Pat Garrity. Now obviously his on court time is affected by his inability to effectively guard SF's, him being a horrific rebounder, so you can't play him at PF, and his defense in general being much less than spectacular. Either way, it depends on what good team he's on. He obviously wouldn't start on the Spurs because Popovich doesn't want that, but New Jersey, Washington, Denver, Clippers [before Radmon], even Miami could all fit him in to their starting lineup and be content.

shareef over his career playing starter minutes is 20 and 9 guy. does that make him equal to marion as a starter? the only reason people gave thomas starter minutes over a 'scrub' like garrity is beyond me. garrity may bave been undervaluing him slightly, maybe turkoglu would be a better example. both players are borderline starters (who again, ideally, wouldnt and shouldnt start). i don't think miami would start thomas over posey (and if they would, then they'd start antoine instead of thomas), nj would only play him when rj or vc was injured, washington is better off with caron at the 3, denver? i don't think thomas is ideal at the 2 (and he might be behind demarr in the rotation... debatable), clippers he'd be behind magette at the 3 and i think behind radmon in the rotation.

..and right now, does anyone care about House? Nope. It's not like he's a starter on the Suns. You think if the Suns were offered even anyone relatively better they would hesistate to get rid of House? Don't think so. Nothing is being blown out of proportion, House jacked shots before he came, and he's doing the same, but with more jacking freedom, and not even at the height of his efficiency. Still, how many teams would've picked Sasha Vujacic off of waivers outside of the fact that he's young? Maybe the Bobcats, but House went there too and averaged 11 PPG for a few games.

thats exactly the point i'm trying to make. house is irrelevant, no team wants him, and yet nash somehow has a good lineup? this with 2 guys who shouldn't be starting starting, a guy who nobody really wants as the 6th, 7th man.

Discarded is an interesting word. Kurt Thomas was traded because, well, their was a little problem with that Marbury guy over in NYK, and they were bringing younger guys in.

James Jones was an FA, and Phoenix signed him, end of story. Raja Bell was an FA, and Phoenix signed him, I was actually hoping the Clippers would sign him as the starting SG after Simmons left, but Mobley was picked up instead.

Being discarded, and deciding to go somewhere else are very different things. The only guy we could call a discard is Eddie House. Even Boris Diaw wasn't really a discard, but with ATL's genius plan of stockpiling swingman, he kind became redundant on that team along with Childress, Smith, Johnson, and Marvin. Obviously the prime thing for ATL would've been to get Johnson without losing anything, and Phoenix would've matched that gigantic contract even.

Now, with that done, what are Kobe's teammates? Kwame actually was a discard, Smush Parker played 16 games the previous season. None of the other guys on the team outside of Odom are even starters on the crappy NBA teams. Even Smush Parker wouldn't have been a starter on any crappy team that had another PG. Mihm could be a starter depending on the team, I can't really think of anyone that would start George, but their's always someone in need. The others, well...yea, Cook is the only possiblity, and again, it's situational.

kurt thomas was traded because isiah wanted q. you're right though, kurt was not a discard no more than kwame was a discard....if kwame was a discard how did the washington manage to get someone of caron's talent level back? the fact that the lakers gamble hasn't paid off does not make kwame a discard.

diaw was a throwin with the 1st round picks, the way i see it he was a discard. i don't know how you can argue that he wasnt considering atlanta had so many players at the same position and his position and importance within the organization seemed to be drastically dropping from his rookie season.

is smush a discard? yes. though he did start 18 games for cleveland the previous year, btw so one could make a case that he is, in fact, someone who is not ideally a starter, but who could be a starter on a team with weak positional depth at the 1 or 2.

I think Phoenix's team betterness is more than "slightly", they simply have more talented players. The guys were more talented even before they came to Phoenix, it's not like Kurt Thomas is having career high's too.

i think you've changed my mind. i think the correct word would be somewhere between slightly and moderately. that said, them being more talented does not automatically mean phoenix should be a better team (and thus to think less of nash and more of bryant), because there have been many teams in nba history that, on paper, are more 'talented', but have not done as well as others.

amnit! Diaw doesn not 'get the ball on more constant basis'. What have you been smoking? He's every bit as good as Odom is, and I'm fan of Odom's game. And he proved that he doesn't need to be teams primary ballhandler to be constantly effective. And running the triangle with KB is not the same as being a PG for Hawks.

yes diaw does get the ball on a more consistent basis then odom. i'm not saying he gets it more, i'm saying he gets it consistenly. odom gets the ball in sporadic spurts... how do you expect him to do anything when he can rarely get into the flow of his game? i'm a great fan of diaw, but i don't think he's as good as odom.

[fgrep15]

are you actually basing bell's defense on being annoying defensively against toronto? who exactly did he annoy? alvin williams?

No lol, he always did a good job guarding Vince. Utah even put him on Vince over Kirilenko. Bell has always been a good defender. The reason I feel Bell is a starter on many teams is that teams are always looking for that guy who can defend aggresively and frustrate offensive players, but then also score on the other end, and especially shoot the ball. Bell is a guy that he's not as good as Bowen, Battier Artest defensively, but on the next level down. He's not a first, or second option on a team, but could be a third/fourth option scoring in the ~13-17 PPG range depending on what's needed. He's not a shooter in the sense of a Ray Allen etc, but is a guy that can consistently knock down the outisde shot, and shots from all over, and teams have to pay attention to or get burnt. Teams are always looking for a guy like that at either the 2 or 3 spot.

I do see what you're trying to say. Basically it's that winning makes you look better than you are, and it's true. It's just like when a guy has a good series in the playoffs, his value suddenly rises in the FA market. Perception is what it is really, when you're good on a bad team, people don't notice as much, but when you're on a good team, people will notice because you're obviously on TV more also.

i think you've changed my mind. i think the correct word would be somewhere between slightly and moderately. that said, them being more talented does not automatically mean phoenix should be a better team (and thus to think less of nash and more of bryant), because there have been many teams in nba history that, on paper, are more 'talented', but have not done as well as others.

I agree. Talent alone does not always make the team good, but how the talent fits together, and how they're coached is very important. I think people give too much credit to Nash in being the one that makes everyone work together. He's part of it because he's a very smart and skilled player, and follows the coaches philosophy precisely, but really it starts from the management and the coaching.

If you look at who Phoenix brings in, it's not just any random guy with skill, they look for the proper players that will fit. Now that's what most teams should do, but ask Isiah, not many GM's do that. You see that about every guy they bring in is a shooter, or athletic, if not, they serve some type of purpose. Pat Burke was brought in because they needed a big man. All their FA acquisitions were guys that could shoot. I mean they could've gotten Milt Palacio instead of Eddie House, but what in the world would he do positvely on Phoenix? Turnover the ball? You hear people say Nash can incorporate anyone into the offense, and it's true, but it starts from D'Antoni allowing everyone to be in a way "equal" in offensive oppurtnity. It's all about setting roles, and everyone knowing what they're on the floor to do. Another coach wouldn't have been too pleased with Andre Barrett shooting a lot against the Spurs, but D'Antoni isn't going to get at him because of it. No other coach would have started Diaw at C, about every coach but D'Antoni after KT got injured would've 1) Started Burke 2) Brought in some scrub C just because they're 6'10 or taller. The versatility, and ability to adapt that D'Antoni has is really the main factor in their success this year. Even with PT, not many other coaches would've given Diaw the same oppurtunity that D'Antoni did. Now, it's not all their fault. One of the reasons D'Antoni really understood Diaw's game and how to use him is because he has a lot of experience with the European scene.

The Lakers players don't really compliment each other. Odom's non-dominant personality allows him to take too much of a backseat when he needs to be a more aggressive scorer. Their bench outside of Cook is I don't know, interesting, and of course Kobe's idea of how to play most of the time isn't the most profitable in a team setting. I don't know if Phoenix's lineup would best compliment Kobe, now they would win more games than the current Lakers because they're easily a better defensive, scoring, and shooting team in terms of individual talent, but who knows, I'm really not sure what kind of lineup would best compliment Kobe.

If you look at Toronto compared to the Bulls, the Raptors have arguably as much talent as them, more offensively too, but the Raptors win less. On the Bulls, no one is allowed to slack on defense. Skiles' philoshopy is that you play defense, or you don't play at all. They have 5 guys crashing the boards, and players hardly leak out to get fastbreak oppurtunities. Scrubs play over better guys because the better player had a defensive lapse. This results in them being a good defensive team, though a poor offensive team, but also in more wins.

Look at Brand, you hear a guy like Barkley now calling him a Top 5 player in the world because he's winning. Now Brand also did improve his game from last season, in addition to getting better complimentary players, but winning changes a lot.

shareef over his career playing starter minutes is 20 and 9 guy. does that make him equal to marion as a starter? the only reason people gave thomas starter minutes over a 'scrub' like garrity is beyond me. garrity may bave been undervaluing him slightly, maybe turkoglu would be a better example. both players are borderline starters (who again, ideally, wouldnt and shouldnt start). i don't think miami would start thomas over posey (and if they would, then they'd start antoine instead of thomas), nj would only play him when rj or vc was injured, washington is better off with caron at the 3, denver? i don't think thomas is ideal at the 2 (and he might be behind demarr in the rotation... debatable), clippers he'd be behind magette at the 3 and i think behind radmon in the rotation.

No it doesn't make him equal, but not all starting caliber players are equal. Shareef can put up 20-9, but his impact every else isn't close to Marion's. Marion for his whole career has consistently been a guy who puts up big numbers, but does all those little things that role players do, and affects the game on the other end too.

About Miami, I agree, though with how Posey is playing right now, it's not out of the realm of possibility, but I forgot they got DA now too. Tim Thomas wouldn't start over RJ or VC, he would start at PF, and they'd move Krstic to C, and bring JC off the bench.

Denver right now is staring Carmelo at the 2, and Patterson at the 3. With them crying about outside shooting for a while, he would be a nice guy for them to put at the 3 and give them that shooting.

Yea, I said Clippers before Radman because they both have similar games really. Maggette had been injured all year, that's why I said Clippers before, obviously he wouldn't start over Maggette, that's not even feasible.

I can agree with borderline starter, he's a guy that becuase of his defense, can start on a team depending on what they need, but is not a guy that can start on most teams in the league, but would likely be a 6th man that get's minutes, just doesn't start.

[magius]

No lol, he always did a good job guarding Vince. Utah even put him on Vince over Kirilenko. Bell has always been a good defender. The reason I feel Bell is a starter on many teams is that teams are always looking for that guy who can defend aggresively and frustrate offensive players, but then also score on the other end, and especially shoot the ball. Bell is a guy that he's not as good as Bowen, Battier Artest defensively, but on the next level down. He's not a first, or second option on a team, but could be a third/fourth option scoring in the ~13-17 PPG range depending on what's needed. He's not a shooter in the sense of a Ray Allen etc, but is a guy that can consistently knock down the outisde shot, and shots from all over, and teams have to pay attention to or get burnt. Teams are always looking for a guy like that at either the 2 or 3 spot.

i don't think utah putting raja, or anyone, on a teams best offensive player rather than kirilenko is much of a surprise; after all, kirilenko is a great help/weakside defender, he's never been as great a man on man defender. other than that i can agree with everything else after you clarified; earlier you said raja was on the same tier as bowen, battier, etc., and i don't agee with that - i think he's a leesser version of either. either bowen or battier is a player teams would be content starting. i don't think most teams would be content with raja as a true starter.

I agree. Talent alone does not always make the team good, but how the talent fits together, and how they're coached is very important. I think people give too much credit to Nash in being the one that makes everyone work together. He's part of it because he's a very smart and skilled player, and follows the coaches philosophy precisely, but really it starts from the management and the coaching.

i can agree that management and coaching is a big part of a team, afterall, if not for them nash wouldn't even be there (chicken or the egg?) i don't think that the fact that d'antoni is a good coach for nash and phoenix's style of play should detract from nash though. after all, i never said nash was the only reason phoenix was winning. I understand their are other players, and their is the coach. but think about it this way, does anyone think less of mj and pip because they had pj as a coach? how about kobe and shaq? how about the showtime lakers? of course the coach is important, but i don't think quite as valuable as the key personnel.

the reason isiah can't build in ny, other than the popular opinion that he's dumb, is because he doesn't have a set and efficient system and star player to base that system around. Everything in phoenix starts with nash, and they build their way out. would they really be collecting all this talent (thomas, tsichstilvi, etc.,etc.) if they didn't have nash running the show? management has it easy because the game is simple and easy to define and I think nash is a main reason that is. just like in sa management knows what type of player fits well in a system build around td. just like in chicago. the list goes on and on. If management has a great player to build around, theoretically everything should fall into place (of course theirs minnesota.... which emphasizes the importance of good to competetent management - which i think minny has, but they has some bad luck and bad decisions). The fact is if you don't have a player to build around, you can't build. some stars are easier to build around then others ,but thats a story for another day.

oh and nelly might've started diaw at c. lol. maybe riley if in the same situation.

i can agree with thomas at the 4... but i would be tempted to maybe start cliff at times instead or jc.

i'm not sure the clips would start thomas over radmon if only because radmon is younger.

as for miami, if miami was willing to play start someone like thomas over posey, i don't see why they wouldn't start antoine instead.

other than that, good points.

[fgrep15]

The fact is if you don't have a player to build around, you can't build. some stars are easier to build around then others ,but thats a story for another day.

I agree, but I think the biggest part is the last part you said "some stars are easier to build around then others", I think that's the main thing with Phoenix. If you look at this season, their 2 stars are Nash and Marion, Nash is the unselfish guy that loves to pass, Marion is the other unselfish guy that doesn't need plays ran for him and doesn't need to dominate the ball on offense to be effective. Amare is their only other main guy that will at times need some isolations, but with his finishing ability, and also his jumpshot which started developing in 03-04, he also doesn't have to dominate the ball. When you have the guy that dominates the ball doing it to pass as opposed to just to shoot, it makes everything a whole lot better.