Phx-Suns.Net

They also didn’t lose because of Luka and Kyrie (although I think Kyrie is a cancer). They lost because they did a horrible job assembling a roster around them and because Kidd was an awful coach.

I'm sorry, but I'm not buying into this Luka love. Individually, he seems like a great basketball player, but his NBA teams have always underperformed. His playstyle is selfish, and he is a terrible defender. I'm not convinced that Booker + Doncic would have been better than Booker + Ayton. Doncic is ball dominant and would have diminished Booker's impact, whereas Ayton's game compliments Booker.

The Mavs were mediocre with Doncic/ Carlisle, Doncic/ Kidd, Doncic /Porzingis, Doncic/Kyrie, Doncic/Brunson. Anyone see a trend? All of these teams should have performed better if Doncic was as great as people say he is. Maybe he and the Mavs will figure it out, but until they do, Doncic does not deserve the love he gets.

Booker + Doncic would have definitely been better than Booker + Ayton. The question is what the rest of the team would’ve been. This has been a Booker + CP3 and now a Booker + KD team. Ayton has never been the 2nd best player except for maybe in 18-20 and those teams weren’t good.

To be clear, I meant that the Suns as a team would be better with Booker/Ayton than with Booker/Doncic.

In any case, It's the definitive terms that I take issue with since we will never know.

Flagrant Fowl wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 10, 2023 11:29 pm

Equating Booker to Kyrie Irving is outright disrespectful to the work Booker has put into his game and the Suns franchise.

It was not a commentary on Booker. (And Kyrie Irving was an all-star starter, so I don't see how comparing them can be called disrespectful).

Kyrie was not the problem:

They gave up all their best defenders, that's why the Mavs stunk, they just can't guard anyone.

Devin Booker is a very good defender.