Phx-Suns.Net

pickle wrote:I think we are playing Tucker to showcase him. If we really wanted to hang on to him for the whole year, then we really have 0 reason to play him that many minutes. I've seen a lot of anger towards the way that Watson has handled the rotation, even when a perfectly plausible and less upsetting explanation is right in front of us: that we are working the phones to get an asset back for Tucker. .

Split T wrote:

Ring_Wanted wrote:

Split T wrote:Probably going to have to add the Lakers to that list. For all the talk about what a great job Walton was doing in LA, the lakers have been terrible lately and although they have a higher winning percentage, are actually a half game behind us in the standings. But I agree that Dallas and Minny seem to be headed upwards. I'd watch out for Orlando and the Knicks out east. While they have a decent lead on us right now, if they decide to give up and start tanking, they could fall off quickly. I'd guess they keep trying to win games though. They probably wouldn't enter tank mode until late in the season.

I think we are safe from Orlando and NY, but yeah, the Lakers will be down there with us too. Their 'hot' start was a fluke. Have you seen Ingram? Hot garbage at the moment. Won't say it will remain like that the rest of his career but honestly I don't see the amount of potential people were giving him credit for. Having KD's body type without the explosion is some tough luck.

Ya I liked Ingram in the draft, but he's been very underwhelming as a pro. I wonder if he's just too weak right now. He's clearly not Durant or really even that close to Durant, but once he adds some strength he might become a useful player.

carey wrote:Btw, it isn't absolutely necessary to do it because the players on your roster just split a bonus check, but... if we send out Knight's $13M for only a draft pick, how are we going to hit the salary floor? Absorb a contract into our space at the deadline?

SDC wrote:if there's a legit chance to make it as an eight seed, you do it.

Split T wrote:

OE32 wrote:

Split T wrote:

pickle wrote:adding two more rookies to the 3 we got this year might not be the best idea. That's a lot of players to develop and to get minutes too.

pickle wrote:adding two more rookies to the 3 we got this year might not be the best idea. That's a lot of players to develop and to get minutes too.

Marty [Mori Chu] wrote:

pickle wrote:adding two more rookies to the 3 we got this year might not be the best idea. That's a lot of players to develop and to get minutes too.

You're going to give INF an aneurysm talking like that.

da_suns_fan wrote:What happened to Paul Coro?

pickle wrote:I'm pretty sure somebody got the nesting quotes mixed up. I was the one that advocated getting two more top picks if we can, and I think T was the one that disagreed... just for the record, any health problems Inf suffers is not at my hands.

SDC wrote:who is now the main suns reporter for the azcentral?

Marty [Mori Chu] wrote:Haller at ya boy!!

carey wrote:

pickle wrote:I think we are playing Tucker to showcase him. If we really wanted to hang on to him for the whole year, then we really have 0 reason to play him that many minutes. I've seen a lot of anger towards the way that Watson has handled the rotation, even when a perfectly plausible and less upsetting explanation is right in front of us: that we are working the phones to get an asset back for Tucker. .

I don't subscribe to this theory. I agree with others who have said you don't need to "showcase" Tucker at this point. It's well known what kind of player he is. A physical 3 & D wing that can really defend when he's locked in but generally succeeds on effort alone. He's available if someone wants him but the idea that we're playing him 35 minutes every night just so we can trade him by February doesn't track with me.

ShelC wrote:Maybe it was smokescreening but the article yesterday said we were open to re-signing him because we like his work with Booker. If we can't get anything of value, just let him walk at the end of the year.