2005 Suns vs 2009 Suns

statisback · Post #1 » by **statisback** » Tue Sep 29, 2009 9:16 pm

Since the Suns are going back to a more run and gun style similar to the 2005 team, the comparisons should be made between this year's team and the 2005 team.

2005 Suns starters:
PG - Nash
SG - JJ
C - Amare
SF - Q
PF - Marion

2009 Suns starters:
PG -Nash
SG - J Rich
C - Channing
SF - Hill
PF - Amare

I would give the 2005 starters a slight edge. Certainly a 2005 Nash was better than a 2009 Nash given the age factor. 2005 Nash wins.

At SG, JJ and JRich could be closer than you think as long as JRich starts playing smarter. Both are great outside shooters and decent passers. Defensively JJ may be a little better. 2005 Suns win

Amare today vs Amare in 2005: The 2005 Amare was an athletic beast who was explosive but the 2009 Amare although not nearly as athletic, is a better shooter and better defender. Hopefully, the rebounding would be much better as well. I say this even.

Channing plus Hill vs Marion plus Q: As long as Channing can return to his rookie form he could be effective and depending on Hill's health he is a great finisher. Marion is the best of the four but Q is probably the worst of the four. I call this even.

However, the main difference is the bench.
2009 Bench: Dudley, Barbosa, Clark, Dragic, Lopez, Admunson
2005 Bench: Barbosa (only 2nd year), Jim Jackson, Steven Hunter, Casey Jacobsen

2009 Bench is way better
So there is some hope for this year

MaryvalesFinest · Post #2 » by **MaryvalesFinest** » Tue Sep 29, 2009 9:41 pm

2005 was overall the better team but 2009 is the better running team

Nando88 · Post #3 » by **Nando88** » Tue Sep 29, 2009 10:37 pm

2005 didn't have a deep bench... 2009 DOES!

aIvin adams · Post #4 » by **aIvin adams** » Tue Sep 29, 2009 10:49 pm

i think for consistency/parallelism you should say 2004 vs 2009. that lineup is 04-05

starters 5 years ago were way better. we could see amare being as good as he was 5 yrs ago if he steps up his game on defense (i didnt even type that conditional phrase i just hit 'paste' its a macro)

agree that our bench now is better but not sure how much better. the only edge they had 5 years ago was size off the bench w jake voskul and hunter but that is a pretty important advantage imo

DirtyDez · Post #5 » by **DirtyDez** » Tue Sep 29, 2009 11:32 pm

Amare was a beast in 05' before the knee injury. I remember Cuban saying he would take him over any other player in the league after we beat them in the playoffs.... Plus:

05' Nash>09' Nash
JJ>J-Rich
Hill>Q
Marion>Frye
05' Amare>09' Amare

09' bench>05' Bench...

Post #6 » by **Qwigglez** » Wed Sep 30, 2009 12:45 am

Actually I think the teams are pretty much even.
Nash today is better than he was in 2005. His numbers don't actually decline except for assist, but we can say thats because of Porter.
Joe Johnson wasn't the player he was in 2005 as he is today. He was still kind of raw. He played 39 minutes a game scoring 17 PPG as opposed to JRich last year playing 33 minutes scoring slightly under 17 PPG. While I would take JJ over J-Rich, I would say they are equal as of Joe Johnson2005 to Jason Richardson2009, statistically speaking.
I would say we are a better team overall this year than in 2005. But... The rest of the league has improved.

statisback · Post #7 » by **statisback** » Wed Sep 30, 2009 1:28 am

Well, I should change to slightly better to significantly better. The starting 5 back in 2004-2005 was more explosive and offensively much better. I would say that the 2009 team should be better defensively.

Post #8 » by **TASTIC** » Wed Sep 30, 2009 1:32 am

2005 would butcher 2009, and I don't think the bench would really come into it with Nash feeding Amare against Frye...

Frye trying to stop Prime Athletic Amare? Yikes.

Prime-ish Marion would give current Amare some fits with his quickness..

Joe J and Q would outmuscle and outshoot JRich and Hill

NashtyNas · Post #9 » by **NashtyNas** » Thu Oct 1, 2009 1:59 am

You guys fail to understand that in 2005, teams weren't nearly as good as they are now. Other than San An and Dallas and GSW in the West, there wasn't much competition. Even if the 09 Suns are better than 05 Suns, the competition has gotten much MUCH better than the competition in 05.

Nando88 · Post #10 » by **Nando88** » Thu Oct 1, 2009 2:56 am

sd1306 wrote:You guys fail to understand that in 2005, teams weren't nearly as good as they are now. Other than San An and Dallas and GSW in the West, there wasn't much competition. Even if the 09 Suns are better than 05 Suns, the competition has gotten much MUCH better than the competition in 05.

Golden State?

aIvin adams · Post #11 » by **aIvin adams** » Thu Oct 1, 2009 5:18 am

Nando88 wrote:
sd1306 wrote:You guys fail to understand that in 2005, teams weren't nearly as good as they are now. Other than San An and Dallas and GSW in the West, there wasn't much competition. Even if the 09 Suns are better than 05 Suns, the competition has gotten much MUCH better than the competition in 05.

Golden State?

its starting to drive me nuts.

if 2009 suns = nash, jrich, hill, amare, frye, bench

then 2005 suns = nash, blel, marion, diaw, thomas (kurt then tim)

and 2004 suns = nash, jj, qrich, marion, amare

JohnVancouver · Post #12 » by **JohnVancouver** » Fri Oct 2, 2009 3:22 pm

ok, resolved: 04-05 Suns > current linuep

next: A Lincoln vs. Leon Trotsky, Mexican strap match

Austin · Post #13 » by **Austin** » Fri Oct 2, 2009 10:31 pm

The problem here

2005 Lakers/Spurs vs. 2009 Lakers/Spurs. the Lakers and Spurs as well as MANY other teams are better than they were in 2005. We're basically the same or a little better overall when you factor in the bench. The West is just stronger than it was in 2005, that's why we owned everyone back then.

Post #14 » by **lilfishi22** » Sat Oct 3, 2009 4:09 am

That's true. Back in '05 our uptempo offense was pretty revolutionary and there hasn't been anything like it since the Showtime Lakers. Teams didn't know how to defend against us and many times they were caught up in our running game.

But it's 2009 and soon 2010, teams not only know how to defend us a lot better now, many of them even play our style. The very good Western teams of '05 got even better now with either a stacked bench or added youth.

We really can't go no where if we keep comparing our team with the '05 team and expect the same results. We're not the same team now, Nash is older, Amare's knees have a few more years of wear and tear since the MF surgeries, we don't have JJ anymore as a second secondary creator and back court defender, we don't have Marion grabbing lose boards that Amare so often misses, we have a 36 year old Hill guarding the best opposing wing men and we no longer have a solid defensive C who gets the front court defensive assignments.

This team is what it is, a good starting lineup made better by an uptempo system and a bench that should be deep enough to keep our starters fresh for the final stretch. It's no use comparing the two teams because the only real improve we've made since '05 is a deeper bench, so we should just take this team as it is: a very good team that despite being put down by almost every sports writer out there, should still surprise many.