Phx-Suns.Net

virtual9mm wrote:Regarding the IT signing, the proper course of action would be to trade the asset you created ASAP before any real damage is done. Dec 15th would have been a good time...

Agreed. If I want to keep Dragic and make sure there is more room for him as PG, I trade IT3.

https://twitter.com/bbstats/status/559748321473232896 *womp womp*

Just to clarify as I have not been watching games, just checking box scores.

Other than the congestion created by IT3 in the line-up in terms of Dragic. Am I crazy -- but -- hasn't IT3 been pretty clutch brining us back from deficits and scoring en-masse? Everyone seems to be down on him , I suppose because of the Dragic situation or are his percentages just stupid / selfish ?

I'm pretty sure IT3 won't get traded unless Dragic makes some sort of commitment, even then our background will be expensive af.

-R

I like IT. IMO, IT @ $7m >>>>>> Dragic @ $15m. It's a no-brainer.

I think IT has been very effective on the offensive side of the ball. Actually, I think he is our most effective person there (based on PER). But he isn't even decent on the defensive side. And I think most of us here believe we need to do away with a 3 PG lineup, and if we do, my feeling from reading the board is that people prefer a Dragic/Bledsoe combination to #1/#3 or #2/#3.

IT's been playing somewhat better lately. But I still feel like when I watch him, he isn't primarily looking for other players; he's looking to score. Same with Gerald Green. Bledsoe sometimes doesn't see a pass he should make, but he's way better about it overall than IT. I think IT and Green's selfish play has a ripple effect on the rest of the team where guys who would normally pass more are not looking to pass now, because they know they'll never get the ball back.

Our team has so much talent, but I just don't like the mix right now. I think we are ripe for an "addition by subtraction" move. I'd really like to see IT and Tucker shipped out. I don't even care what we get for them; even losing them for nothing would improve the team I think, due to the effect it would have on other players. I would be fine with keeping Green, because he's an SG and his role is to shoot, so his chucking is sort of understandable. And he comes off the bench, so the effect is minimized a bit.

I'm really worried that going into this trade deadline and offseason, we will keep the players I want to get rid of, and get rid of the players I want to keep. I think Dragic is by a wide margin the best overall player on the Suns. When he has the ball, he's the ONLY guy out there who is actively looking for teammates, always analyzing passing angles and wanting to set up somebody for an easy shot. Bledsoe is okay but not nearly on the same level in this regard. I would much rather have a, say, Dragic + Green starting backcourt along with Len and Kieff at the 5/4 spots, and just completely abandon Bledsoe and IT. I'd trade any of our guys outside of Dragic, Len, Markieff for a stud SF who could start and round out our rotation. The two biggest problems I think we have on our roster are, in descending order of urgency:

- 1. ball-hog culture brought on by too many PGs and too many chuckers

- 2. A bunch of shitty SFs and no real high-impact player at that position

A consolidation trade that brought in a blue chipper SF who can score, defend, and also willing to share the ball, would be amazing. I'd love to see a guy like Tobias Harris here, or Hayward would have been great. I wonder if Terrence Ross is gettable from Toronto? ...

OE32 wrote: I don't think RPM is a magic stat.

Then why are you using it to justify such a drastic personnel decision? And FYI, that stat ranks Jared Dudley above Klay Thompson.

OE32 wrote:I like IT. IMO, IT @ $7m >>>>>> Dragic @ $15m. It's a no-brainer.

-1

Indy wrote:I think IT has been very effective on the offensive side of the ball. Actually, I think he is our most effective person there (based on PER). But he isn't even decent on the defensive side. And I think most of us here believe we need to do away with a 3 PG lineup, and if we do, my feeling from reading the board is that people prefer a Dragic/Bledsoe combination to #1/#3 or #2/#3.

+1

Mori Chu wrote:IT's been playing somewhat better lately. But I still feel like when I watch him, he isn't primarily looking for other players; he's looking to score. Same with Gerald Green. Bledsoe sometimes doesn't see a pass he should make, but he's way better about it overall than IT. I think IT and Green's selfish play has a ripple effect on the rest of the team where guys who would normally pass more are not looking to pass now, because they know they'll never get the ball back.

Yup. That's been my issue with him as well. That and his complete inability to properly run a pick-and-roll (in a P-n-R league) and pass to players on the interior.

The IT experience is much more palatable when you view him as a 2 guard. He's a terrific scorer, just not someone you want running your offense.

Speaking in general terms, I wanted to trade little for a bigman who could contribute and they did it in Wright.

Now I want a move that increases the collective bball IQ of the rotation. Green-PJ-IT3, again, come as the suspects to me, with a little of Plumlee.

I think the main issue with the team is that Dragic is not running point. It makes much more sense to let him excel at that spot and let Bled sort it out on his side. Having IT come off the bench and bomb with green , or instead of green next year makes sense to me. You can always use that player to come in and get hot. His contract is so good I can't imagine they will trade him. IMO the issue is a bit of unoriginality from the coaching staff. HOWEVER I have not been watching the games so I may be off.

I think Dragic needs the ball like Nash did to a degree to really make the most of him and get him up and at em.

Also - shouldn't the passing culture or ball hog mentality be 'coached out' so to speak? Not ripping Horny but just saying I feel like there are interesting parts here but they are not necessarily being used correctly for all situations.

- R

carey wrote:Welp, this will be fun: https://twitter.com/DaveKingNBA/status/559478466404298752

“I feel like home is Phoenix. They give me everything. They bring me into the league. I have a lot of friends here, a lot of family. But that doesn’t mean anything, because I need to look at my career. We’ll see what is going to happen.”

Prepare the vaseline. If you thought Rich Paul took Babby to the cleaners wait till Dragic's agent gets ahold of him.

INFORMER wrote:

OE32 wrote: I don't think RPM is a magic stat.

Then why are you using it to justify such a drastic personnel decision? And FYI, that stat ranks Jared Dudley above Klay Thompson.

It's one of a number of considerations. I know that Dragic is a below-average 2 defensively. I don't think he's truly a gunner from 3 - he's worked hard on it, but he's not a pure shooter. Then there's RPM. There's the age issue - not that he's old, but there's young talent developing behind him in Goodwin and Bogdan. There's my perception that a "lower caliber" 2 like Courtney Lee or Wes Matthews might help us win as many or more games. There's the fact that his "one man fast break" is likely to be duplicated and improved upon by TJ when he finally starts playing. But the real issue is the $$$. I don't want to tie up so much money in him. I think we have Bled and IT on good deals and can continue to leverage our flexibility. He's just too expensive for the number of wins he's likely to add. Ya feel me? Or would you pony up? You didn't like Bled at $14m per - what do you think of Dragic at $15? $16? $17?

And might I add that it's very possible he leaves us next offseason for any number of reasons - playing out of position, not making the playoffs, $$$. If we can get something of real value for him, that seems like something worth considering. If RPM indicated he were a top 5 shooting guard, a lot of other things might also be different - including our record, my willingness to pay for him, and his happiness.

Robot wrote:I think the main issue with the team is that Dragic is not running point. It makes much more sense to let him excel at that spot and let Bled sort it out on his side.

Asking Bledsoe to do that would be very counterproductive. I would love to allow Dragic to play the point, but he's a better at the 2 than Bledsoe. Bledsoe really doesn't have the skillset to thrive as a secondary ballhandler or play off the ball for the majority of the game.

ShelC wrote: He's somewhat marginalized due to Bledsoe, but you could say the same Bledsoe and IT3.

You really can't though. Bledsoe is getting to play his natural position. Could he go to a situation where he gets to dominate the ball and play 40 minutes a game, but his shooting percentages would fall, he would have even more turnovers, and the team record would be worse.

And Thomas is being optimized, not marginalized. Again, sure he could go to a team, start and average 20 ppg. But we saw that in Sacramento. That's probably not a winning formula.

OE32 wrote:He's just too expensive for the number of wins he's likely to add. Ya feel me? Or would you pony up? You didn't like Bled at $14m per - what do you think of Dragic at $15? $16? $17?

I can't feel ya because I'm fundamentally opposed to choosing Bledsoe over him. And I have no problem with paying Dragic $15 million a year.

INFORMER wrote:

Robot wrote:I think the main issue with the team is that Dragic is not running point. It makes much more sense to let him excel at that spot and let Bled sort it out on his side.

Asking Bledsoe to do that would be very counterproductive. I would love to allow Dragic to play the point, but he's a better at the 2 than Bledsoe. Bledsoe really doesn't have the skillset to thrive as a secondary ballhandler or play off the ball for the majority of the game.

Unless we had John Wall?

Bledsoe was very unproductive in his freshman year at Kentucky playing off the ball.

INFORMER wrote:Bledsoe was very unproductive in his freshman year at Kentucky playing off the ball.

And behind the Wall?