Phx-Suns.Net

I do agree that it's easy enough to say in hindsight. I felt that GG got a raw deal of sorts because he thrived in a very specific role that was taken away from him, and that he pressed too hard outside of this role. I agree that this was predictable but at the end of 2013-2014, GG was super enthusiastic about being on the Suns. IMHO, he blows up playing next to Dragic next year.

GG's shot selection went even crazier in 14-15 and his TS% plummeted as a result. One more factor that made last season a clusterfuck.

Anyway, when I saw we acquired IT3, and after losing Frye for nothing, I felt the FO had to shop Ennis-Green hard (also, I was ok with sending GG and a pick for Ryan Anderson). I didn't want two microwaves off the bench.

Regardless, the Heat got a huge steal. Actually I am surprised Green's agent didn't manage to get his client a player option or a partial guarantee for the following season. I dig Dragic-Green-Winslow.

I liked Green, but if you play him a lot, you are basically at the mercy of whether he happens to have a "hot" game. I don't think that gets you very far. He had great athleticism and sometimes was white-hot in his shooting. But for better or worse, he'd just keep chucking up shots even if they weren't falling. I'll remember the dagger shots he hit more than the ones he clanked, and he won us several games almost single-handedly, but he probably also lost us a few.

When I think about any of these guys' value, I always think about what they would do vs. a team like the Spurs in a playoff series. I think San Antonio would just clamp him down with a good defender and be too smart for him, and he'd be completely ineffective. He'd shoot like 31% for the series and we'd get beat. So at the end of the day I just don't think you make a guy like that a part of your team's core.

I still like the dude and wish him every success in Miami. I would not have minded keeping him at such a cheap price, but maybe they figure he would have blocked other important young guys like Goodwin, Knight, etc. from getting needed minutes.

Don't really see Goodwin as an important piece when two of our guards are Bledsoe and Knight. He'd have to give us a lot of defense or really blow up with his penetration game to make up for his flaws.

However, I am eager to see Bogdanovic in a Suns uni, and we just drafted Booker to take GG's role this very season, or so I hope.

I'm more curious about Booker than Goodwin. This kid already has two years under his belt and very little development to show for it. He basically got a scholarship to learn basketball this past two years, and he spend it more complaining about playing time that developing a dependable game. So to me, he is an asset to package with Tucker or picks to get some value in return, with the future at the position belonging to Booker and Bogdanovic, after Knight makes Bledsoe expendable and takes his spot at PG.

I don't think it's quite time to give up on Goodwin yet. He's only 20 years old. He has complained a little, but I'd rather have a guy who wants to be out on the court than one who's passive. And his game isn't complete yet, but he has a real knack for getting to the hoop. He may yet be a useful player for us.

Getting to the free throw line is a rare skill. Harden lives at the line and owes a lot of his offensive numbers to the charity stripe.

Mori Chu wrote:I don't think it's quite time to give up on Goodwin yet. He's only 20 years old. He has complained a little, but I'd rather have a guy who wants to be out on the court than one who's passive. And his game isn't complete yet, but he has a real knack for getting to the hoop. He may yet be a useful player for us.

He's got the attitude, but not the discipline. I agree with your description on Archie, that's why he is still an asset, not a complete waste of space. Hopefully he can be packaged into a deal that bring us back a real contributor.

Aztec Sunsfan wrote:

Mori Chu wrote:I don't think it's quite time to give up on Goodwin yet. He's only 20 years old. He has complained a little, but I'd rather have a guy who wants to be out on the court than one who's passive. And his game isn't complete yet, but he has a real knack for getting to the hoop. He may yet be a useful player for us.

He's got the attitude, but not the discipline. I agree with your description on Archie, that's why he is still an asset, not a complete waste of space. Hopefully he can be packaged into a deal that bring us back a real contributor.

Agree. He's starting to pick up the right skills, just need to let the game slow down and come to him. IMHO, his ceiling is that of a Barbosa with much better defense, which would be a top-half starter in the NBA today given the dearth of quality 2-guards.

My main objection to Archie is the same as my objection to several of the guys on our roster: He's a tweener. I hate these guards who can't shoot well enough to be a SG but also can't pass well enough to be a PG. I hate these forwards who aren't fast/athletic/versatile enough to be a SF but also aren't big enough and can't rebound/defend well enough to be a PF. We have so many guys like that on this roster:

Eric Bledsoe (bad passing/shooting PG)
Brandon Knight (a bit more shooting, but still not elite passing PG)
Archie Goodwin (great at driving, not great floor general PG)
Markieff Morris (undersized bad rebounder PF)

I prefer guys who have a clear position/role, and/or an elite skill:

Booker (clear SG)
Chandler (clear C)
Len (clear C)
Warren (garbage man; athletic; clear SF)
Teletovic (great shooter; SF)

I thought that Teletovic was a PF

In2ition wrote:I thought that Teletovic was a PF

I thought he was more of a tweener (or stretch 4, in other words).

Mori Chu wrote:My main objection to Archie is the same as my objection to several of the guys on our roster: He's a tweener...

Eric Bledsoe (bad passing/shooting PG)
Brandon Knight (a bit more shooting, but still not elite passing PG)
Archie Goodwin (great at driving, not great floor general PG)
Markieff Morris (undersized bad rebounder PF)

To be fair:

Eric Bledsoe: turnover machine, low shooting percentage, maybe he becomes more effective with more shooters to bail him out

Brandon Knight: let's see how he does, I hope he doesn't shoot too much when he's playing PG

Archie Goodwin: will never be a true PG, prototypical SG if he can continue shooting better than he has and let the game slow down for him

Markieff Morris: prototypical PF, perhaps a tad undersized in terms of reach. His defensive rebounding is fine, which is more important than offensive rebounding IMHO.

virtual9mm wrote:

Mori Chu wrote:My main objection to Archie is the same as my objection to several of the guys on our roster: He's a tweener...

Eric Bledsoe (bad passing/shooting PG)
Brandon Knight (a bit more shooting, but still not elite passing PG)
Archie Goodwin (great at driving, not great floor general PG)
Markieff Morris (undersized bad rebounder PF)

To be fair:

Eric Bledsoe: turnover machine, low shooting percentage, maybe he becomes more effective with more shooters to bail him out

Brandon Knight: let's see how he does, I hope he doesn't shoot too much when he's playing PG

Archie Goodwin: will never be a true PG, prototypical SG if he can continue shooting better than he has and let the game slow down for him

Markieff Morris: prototypical PF, perhaps a tad undersized in terms of reach. His defensive rebounding is fine, which is more important than offensive rebounding IMHO.

I have a really hard time saying that good shooters can bail out our starting PG. He can't pass without looking directly at the guy to whom he is passing. It is atrocious. Even a great shooter can't help when he can't get the ball.

And as for Keef, he isn't a prototypical PF. Prototypical PFs get you 20/10 and are strong defensively. We don't get any of that. We get a very good shooting PF from 12-15 feet, but a guy that doesn't play defense well, and doesn't rebound well. We got a total of 5 games from him that were a prototypical PF. He wasn't in the top 20 in any rebounding category either. You would think that a prototypical PF would at least crack one of them.

Rant over.

Prototypical means asserting the typical qualities of something. 20/10 PFs that are strong defensively are decidedly NOT prototypical. They are the exception. They are hard to find. They also cost $$$. What you're describing is the qualities you desire in your starting PF. That's a vastly different thing.

Yeah, I should have said your desired prototype for a starting PF. He is very typical as is.

20/10 is pretty rare, period.

Last year these are the guys that averaged 20/10:

Cousins (24.1/12.7)
Aldridge (23.4/10.2)
Davis (24.4/10.2)

That's it! A couple others were close: Gasol (18.5/11.8), Vucevic (19.3/10.9)

Only 12 guys in the league averaged 10 boards or better.

Remember KJ? Now there was a helluva' point guard.
Bledsoe's got the ability to give up his body going to the hoop, and that's where the comparison ends.

I wish somebody would strap Bledsoe down, Clockwork Orange style, drop some 'cid in his eyes, and just replay one simple way KJ got himself open again and again, and that is that crafty jumpshot anywhere from 12-18 feet from the rim on the right side of the paint.

Here's good basketball theory; First of all, ya' gotta' make that shot consistently. I bet KJ hit that shot 80% of the time. Anything you hit over 50% of the time makes it more effective than any other shot on the court. This is a good place to start.

Secondly, KJ would draw the defense from the paint with that deadly shot, which would create room to penetrate, or would create an automatic double-team, which would leave a player open.

Lastly, you HAVE to develop some sense of VISION on the court. Dude's gotta' figure where players are gonna' be, and MUST learn how to get them the ball.

I can't tell you how many times I watched KJ create a double-team, then I would see a player become open, and instinctively KJ would hit that guy with a perfect pass.

And I can't tell you how many times I have seen Bledsoe chaotically create a double-team, get an open man, and for some goddamn reason have no clue about there being an easy, open shot somewhere on the court.

With KJ, I'd see the open man after the double-team, get excited with expectation, and more often than not with the team he had, they'd knock down the easy shot.

With Bledsoe, his teamates look like they want to cry when they get open, and so do I, because we all know they ain't gettin' the motherfucking rock! NOPE! Bledsoe is going to try and get to the hoop with three guys draped over him anyway, every fucking time.

Every game, I see one guy, two guys, sometimes even three guys get open, and I want to fucking scream. I hold my head in my hands and I shake my head dumbfounded.

I just wish he had some sort of clue! Some sense that, all that work you're doing to penetrate, THAT'S SO YOU CAN DRAW THE DOUBLE AND KICK OUT! Why can't he get it!?! If that ever sank in, maybe he could be great someday. He makes the game much harder than it needs to be.

Probably the worst court vision in the league, along with the worst handles in the league... It makes me sad. Just pisses me off.