Phx-Suns.Net

Hope you feel the same way when they ditch Dragic next year to continue building around Eric....

Why would you hope I feel that way? I'm unsure of what that even means.

If someone doesn't fit his mold or vision and isn't a believer, he should get rid of them. Dragic is the last of the old players, and with all the guards on the roster, we very well could let him go and build around Bledsoe. It very well could happen. Are you still going to be so supportive, then?

Saying that I understand the motivation behind the moves already made is not saying I agree with the decisions.

And I never said that it made sense for him to get rid of everybody from the last regime. I said if they don't fit his vision he should. They are not the same thing. And although it may happen, I see Goran as the best guard we have, period.

I think the take of "Suns are struggling because they didn't keep Frye" is way oversimplified. That's what I am hearing from people like Bill Simmons who aren't really watching the team and are just looking for a quick reason to pin our struggles on. Frye hasn't exactly been tearing it up in Orlando; he got injured right away and doesn't look like the same player. He probably would have been similarly mediocre for us.

We aren't bad because of the lack of Channing Frye. It goes deeper than that.

Mori Chu wrote:I think the take of "Suns are struggling because they didn't keep Frye" is way oversimplified. That's what I am hearing from people like Bill Simmons who aren't really watching the team and are just looking for a quick reason to pin our struggles on. Frye hasn't exactly been tearing it up in Orlando; he got injured right away and doesn't look like the same player. He probably would have been similarly mediocre for us.

We aren't bad because of the lack of Channing Frye. It goes deeper than that.

Mori, I know it's a oversimplification, but that altered the team spacing a lot.

I wish we had a good stretch 4. If we had Ryan Anderson, I wouldn't mind losing Frye.
But is clear the offense is not what it should be.

Furlanfufi wrote:

Mori Chu wrote:I think the take of "Suns are struggling because they didn't keep Frye" is way oversimplified. That's what I am hearing from people like Bill Simmons who aren't really watching the team and are just looking for a quick reason to pin our struggles on. Frye hasn't exactly been tearing it up in Orlando; he got injured right away and doesn't look like the same player. He probably would have been similarly mediocre for us.

We aren't bad because of the lack of Channing Frye. It goes deeper than that.

Mori, I know it's a oversimplification, but that altered the team spacing a lot.

I wish we had a good stretch 4. If we had Ryan Anderson, I wouldn't mind losing Frye.
But is clear the offense is not what it should be.

THIS

I would love to see us actively shopping for Ryan Anderson, Tolliver was supposed to be the answer, but good lord, the guy looks lost out there for us, like he was always just stepping out of the plane.

I spoke in favor of the rumored Green+#27 for Anderson trade, but I don't think the Pelis would even consider moving him during this season, at least for Green and a non high value asset. The opportunity, if it's true that it was there, is gone I believe.

As for Frye, Mori, yyou might want to watch an Orlando game if you haven't and also take a look at his numbers (43% from 3pt, 5+ attempts per game). He looks thicker but is doing his thing just fine. No franchise savior, but I think it is safe to say that his role, if properly executed, can make a difference for a guard heavy offense.

And our problem is not just removing Frye, as if he was some kind of superstar. I believe the issue is the combination of doing so while adding yet another PG with heavy usage on O (actually, the highest usage on our roster so far). Defense and rebounding wise, we are who we thought we were, but beyond that basically every player is dealing with his share of specific issues, from TOs to shot selection to inconsistent accuracy, and the change of Frye for Thomas has had a significant impact on how things are (or are not) working so far. It is undeniable that IT3 has won us some games already, but I think it is fair to start wondering what's the cost of the biggest switch made from las year to this season.

Ring_Wanted wrote:I spoke in favor of the rumored Green+#27 for Anderson trade, but I don't think the Pelis would even consider moving him during this season, at least for Green and a non high value asset. The opportunity, if it's true that it was there, is gone I believe.

As for Frye, Mori, yyou might want to watch an Orlando game if you haven't and also take a look at his numbers (43% from 3pt, 5+ attempts per game). He looks thicker but is doing his thing just fine. No franchise savior, but I think it is safe to say that his role, if properly executed, can make a difference for a guard heavy offense.

And our problem is not just removing Frye, as if he was some kind of superstar. I believe the issue is the combination of doing so while adding yet another PG with heavy usage on O (actually, the highest usage on our roster so far). Defense and rebounding wise, we are who we thought we were, but beyond that basically every player is dealing with his share of specific issues, from TOs to shot selection to inconsistent accuracy, and the change of Frye for Thomas has had a significant impact on how things are (or are not) working so far. It is undeniable that IT3 has won us some games already, but I think it is fair to start wondering what's the cost of the biggest switch made from las year to this season.

I think this is a great simplification (concise summation is probably a better term) of what is going on. And considering our starting lineup is a net -9 this year so far, when IT comes into the game, we are down and have to mount a come back. It usually works out well for IT because we are looking for instant offense, but we need to focus on not getting in those holes so often.

The starting line-up needs offense. We can't depend on our guards to generate it. Bled's not a creator. Goran is undersized for the 2 spot and it affects his play. The Morrises are solid mid-range guys, and Kieff is okay facing up one-on-one. But nine teams out of ten have better options on offense to start.

I really do think we'd be a better team right now with TJ Warren in the starting line-up. But I also think Coach would have to be forced into that position to make his vets ride the pine.

The other half of that equation is - even if we fixed the offense, our starting line-up also isn't full of defensive stalwarts. It's just very, very mediocre.

I still think Bled will be fine, but he's not a guy to build an offense around. He's a 3&D, go to the rack kind of PG, not a creator.

The starting line-up needs offense. We can't depend on our guards to generate it. Bled's not a creator. Goran is undersized for the 2 spot and it affects his play. The Morrises are solid mid-range guys, and Kieff is okay facing up one-on-one. But nine teams out of ten have better options on offense to start.

You really think we are in the bottom 3 teams in the league on offense from our starters? It doesn't feel that way to me yet, but I haven't looked it up.

When you type "Eric Bledsoe" into google, the first suggested search is "Erick Bledsoe Lakers"

Indy wrote:

The starting line-up needs offense. We can't depend on our guards to generate it. Bled's not a creator. Goran is undersized for the 2 spot and it affects his play. The Morrises are solid mid-range guys, and Kieff is okay facing up one-on-one. But nine teams out of ten have better options on offense to start.

You really think we are in the bottom 3 teams in the league on offense from our starters? It doesn't feel that way to me yet, but I haven't looked it up.

I'm glad you point that out, but I'm not really saying that. I think we have a bevy of options, many of which are solid and the sum total of which make us an average offensive team, but that we don't really have a great primary option on offense. The Goran/Kieff P&R isn't exactly devastating.

The Goran/Kieff P&R isn't exactly devastating.

Or even average...

OE32 wrote:

Indy wrote:

The starting line-up needs offense. We can't depend on our guards to generate it. Bled's not a creator. Goran is undersized for the 2 spot and it affects his play. The Morrises are solid mid-range guys, and Kieff is okay facing up one-on-one. But nine teams out of ten have better options on offense to start.

You really think we are in the bottom 3 teams in the league on offense from our starters? It doesn't feel that way to me yet, but I haven't looked it up.

I'm glad you point that out, but I'm not really saying that. I think we have a bevy of options, many of which are solid and the sum total of which make us an average offensive team, but that we don't really have a great primary option on offense. The Goran/Kieff P&R isn't exactly devastating.

Got it. I just read that wrong. I think I am doing a lot of that lately.

test

Aw, shit. I didn't study.

Cap wrote:Aw, shit. I didn't study.

Talk about a pop quiz!

OE32 wrote: I still think Bled will be fine, but he's not a guy to build an offense around. He's a 3&D, go to the rack kind of PG, not a creator.

You better hope you're not right.

I don't think that's true. I just wonder if he's a leader who can rally the troops. Dragic seems to be that guy and proved it last year. Now, he may feel a bit marginalized with Bledsoe's contract and his overall standing with the team?