ImageImageImage

Why Not a Full Year Under Gentry?

Moderators: bwgood77, Qwigglez, lilfishi22

The Diesel
Veteran
Posts: 2,711
And1: 0
Joined: Aug 07, 2005

Why Not a Full Year Under Gentry? 

Post#1 » by The Diesel » Sat Jun 27, 2009 1:23 am

Even though this post is really old, I will just edit it because the more I think about their decision to trade Shaq, the more I agree with it.

The teams that were already better got better, so there was no point in keeping him.

I initially disagreed with the decision to trade him, but now I agree with it.
User avatar
rsavaj
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 24,863
And1: 2,767
Joined: May 09, 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona

Re: Why Not a Full Year Under Gentry? 

Post#2 » by rsavaj » Sat Jun 27, 2009 1:27 am

+1 man....keep this roster, add chandler and we're effing set
User avatar
Risensun
Pro Prospect
Posts: 752
And1: 26
Joined: Jun 26, 2009
Location: The Grave...

Re: Why Not a Full Year Under Gentry? 

Post#3 » by Risensun » Sat Jun 27, 2009 1:28 am

Because these changes put is in a spot where we're worse but therefore have a more valuable draft pick. Which Sarver can then sell for more money...
User avatar
MaryvalesFinest
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,326
And1: 3
Joined: Jul 23, 2008
Location: Back

Re: Why Not a Full Year Under Gentry? 

Post#4 » by MaryvalesFinest » Sat Jun 27, 2009 1:28 am

Image
hunterxaz
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,975
And1: 2
Joined: Apr 17, 2007
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Contact:

Re: Why Not a Full Year Under Gentry? 

Post#5 » by hunterxaz » Sat Jun 27, 2009 1:31 am

that big foam hand helps him keep a grip on the money leaving his pocket.
The Phoenix Suns - 54-28. Projected Record: 54-28 3rd Seed

The Phoenix Suns - 2010-2011 Projected Record: 30-52 3rd lottery pick.
The Diesel
Veteran
Posts: 2,711
And1: 0
Joined: Aug 07, 2005

Re: Why Not a Full Year Under Gentry? 

Post#6 » by The Diesel » Sat Jun 27, 2009 1:34 am

And I think Amare will have an MVP-type year next season because he'll want to show he is worth a max contract.

Are people forgetting how dominant he was under D'Antoni after Shaq came to Phoenix?

He averaged TWENTY EIGHT points per game after the trade!!

Amare is the most unstoppable big-man in the NBA who is only 26 years old. He is worth a max contract, in my opinion.

They should have kept this team together one more year.

I still think Ben Wallace will fail his physical and the trade will fall through...didn't he break his leg towards the end of the season?
User avatar
rsavaj
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 24,863
And1: 2,767
Joined: May 09, 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona

Re: Why Not a Full Year Under Gentry? 

Post#7 » by rsavaj » Sat Jun 27, 2009 1:36 am

diesel you can waive physicals man....the trade is DONE
The Diesel
Veteran
Posts: 2,711
And1: 0
Joined: Aug 07, 2005

Re: Why Not a Full Year Under Gentry? 

Post#8 » by The Diesel » Sat Jun 27, 2009 1:39 am

But the team needs Ben Wallace because of the lack of big-men on the roster.

Amare/Lopez/Amundson isn't enough...

Even though the Lakers just won the championship, I think the Suns match up very well with them...

Shaq/Amare are better than Gasol/Bynum

Hill is better than Ariza

Nash is better than Fisher

Kobe is better than Richardson

The Suns match-up very well with them and they beat the Lakers last season WITHOUT Nash/Amare and Shaq had 33 points in that game.
User avatar
Risensun
Pro Prospect
Posts: 752
And1: 26
Joined: Jun 26, 2009
Location: The Grave...

Re: Why Not a Full Year Under Gentry? 

Post#9 » by Risensun » Sat Jun 27, 2009 1:41 am

rsavaj wrote:+1 man....keep this roster, add chandler and we're effing set

Exactly... Go at it with Amare and Chandler that front court is 10 times better than any crap the warriors are offering...
The Diesel
Veteran
Posts: 2,711
And1: 0
Joined: Aug 07, 2005

Re: Why Not a Full Year Under Gentry? 

Post#10 » by The Diesel » Sat Jun 27, 2009 1:43 am

Just play Lopez more minutes next year so the Suns don't get killed on the pick and roll play all the time because Lopez is a very good pick and roll defender.

Reduce Shaq's minutes and touches, play Lopez more, go back to seven seconds or less, and the Suns will be VERY dangerous as long as they stay healthy.
jazzy_jeff
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,674
And1: 1
Joined: Nov 28, 2001

Re: Why Not a Full Year Under Gentry? 

Post#11 » by jazzy_jeff » Sat Jun 27, 2009 1:48 am

I would have liked to see this team get a full year under Gentry, but with all the dynamics at play here I fully understand why they've taken the approach they have. I don't like it though.
When I breeze past, breathe fast, on point like Steve Nash
DirtyDez
Suns Forum College Scout
Posts: 17,165
And1: 6,895
Joined: Jun 25, 2009
Location: the Arizona desert

Re: Why Not a Full Year Under Gentry? 

Post#12 » by DirtyDez » Sat Jun 27, 2009 2:44 am

The Diesel wrote:But the team needs Ben Wallace because of the lack of big-men on the roster.

Amare/Lopez/Amundson isn't enough...

Even though the Lakers just won the championship, I think the Suns match up very well with them...

Shaq/Amare are better than Gasol/Bynum

Hill is better than Ariza

Nash is better than Fisher

Kobe is better than Richardson

The Suns match-up very well with them and they beat the Lakers last season WITHOUT Nash/Amare and Shaq had 33 points in that game.

Hill better than Ariza? There's a reason Ariza will make about 10 times more $ than Grant Hill next year
fromthetop321 wrote:I got Lebron number 1, he is also leading defensive player of the year. Curry's game still reminds me of Jeremy Lin to much.
The Diesel
Veteran
Posts: 2,711
And1: 0
Joined: Aug 07, 2005

Re: Why Not a Full Year Under Gentry? 

Post#13 » by The Diesel » Sat Jun 27, 2009 2:53 am

The only thing Ariza does better than Hill is shoot 3 pointers.

Hill is a better player.
DirtyDez
Suns Forum College Scout
Posts: 17,165
And1: 6,895
Joined: Jun 25, 2009
Location: the Arizona desert

Re: Why Not a Full Year Under Gentry? 

Post#14 » by DirtyDez » Sat Jun 27, 2009 3:03 am

The Diesel wrote:The only thing Ariza does better than Hill is shoot 3 pointers.

Hill is a better player.

Hill is decent, Ariza is essential... Damn i wish we could get him, can you imagine having a lock-down defender like him on ur squad who can shut down 4 positions? Kinda like a poor-mans Marion with more upside
fromthetop321 wrote:I got Lebron number 1, he is also leading defensive player of the year. Curry's game still reminds me of Jeremy Lin to much.
BertMacklin
Freshman
Posts: 72
And1: 4
Joined: Feb 06, 2009

Re: Why Not a Full Year Under Gentry? 

Post#15 » by BertMacklin » Sat Jun 27, 2009 3:46 am

Yeah plus the addition of Earl Clark will help. I agree with TC.
garrick
Head Coach
Posts: 7,334
And1: 4,054
Joined: Dec 02, 2006
     

Re: Why Not a Full Year Under Gentry? 

Post#16 » by garrick » Sat Jun 27, 2009 4:39 am

It's not fair that last season's squad was not given another year to see if it would work.
Amare was out a big chunk of the season and Barbosa went down a bit too, take into account Porters ineptitude and I don't think we have really seen what this team could have done given a whole season.

I'm just waiting for Kerr to surprise me and show me that he is not a total moron but I doubt he will be able to reconstruct the glory days of the 7 seconds or less era.
User avatar
TXSun
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,953
And1: 0
Joined: Aug 03, 2008

Re: Why Not a Full Year Under Gentry? 

Post#17 » by TXSun » Sat Jun 27, 2009 5:12 am

i think there was way more to the shaq trade than just getting rid of his contract. we will never know.
"This is some bull $hit"
User avatar
KJ7
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 10,004
And1: 2
Joined: Aug 06, 2004

Re: Why Not a Full Year Under Gentry? 

Post#18 » by KJ7 » Sat Jun 27, 2009 12:30 pm

Personally I think we wouldve been a much-improved team but we wouldnt have gone past the Wester Conference Finals. Just too weak defensively on the PnR with Nash and Shaq at the end of the day.

You can't just say "reduce Shaq's mins". He's just too much of a personality to do that to. Like it or not he's just the type of player you have to keep happy on your team otherwise severely risk lockeroom mutiny.

When we had Kurt and Marion ... that's when we *shouldve* had the "just one more year" mentality IMO espec after how things played out in that SanAn series. While we got towelled up by some post-up players if we had single-cover (Kurt) at least it meant that they weren't getting their other players involved. Just so frustrating espec after selling the picks that he wouldn't stump up some lux tax just for one more year. I could handle selling the picks if it meant the money would be used for paying for the lux tax. But he sells the picks *and* makes that god-awful Kurt trade ...
Image
The Diesel
Veteran
Posts: 2,711
And1: 0
Joined: Aug 07, 2005

Re: Why Not a Full Year Under Gentry? 

Post#19 » by The Diesel » Sat Jun 27, 2009 1:00 pm

I think this team could put up with one more bad year and completely rebuild in 2010 when they have a lot of cap space.

It would have been better to keep this team together one more year.

They would have been competitive and would have had a lot of cap space in 2010 when Shaq/Amare/Nash's contracts expire.

I don't understand the timing of this deal.

I mean, what team can stop Shaq/Amare/Hill/Richardson/Nash/Barbosa when the Suns play up-tempo?

They would have been the highest scoring team in the NBA.
User avatar
KJ7
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 10,004
And1: 2
Joined: Aug 06, 2004

Re: Why Not a Full Year Under Gentry? 

Post#20 » by KJ7 » Sat Jun 27, 2009 1:17 pm

The problem wouldn't have been scoring. It wouldve been defending. Hill's the only player on that list whose a good defender at the end of the day. The rest have serious short-comings.
Image

Return to Phoenix Suns