We need a STUD wing, not a PF!!!

JMac1 · Post #1 » by **JMac1** » Thu Dec 16, 2010 9:13 pm

You guys have to start admitting that Channing Frye is an okay baller. Sure, he isn't Gasol, but he does offer something only a few PF's in this league can offer. Frye is a floor stretching true PF. He isn't a defending, rebounding Oakley type but his skill set is unique and perfect for our style of play.

We have been talking about trades and shuffling our roster for a PF who can truly be Amare like, but maybe we have a PF that can allow the center to be Amare like. I think we need a center who can play defense, reb, and PnR spoon fed passes from our PG. Frye allows spacing for Nash and especially Goran to provide a more effective PnR play with someone not named Amare. A player who isn't as good as Warrick or Amare, but he appears to be because he (the center) has more operating room with Frye on the floor.

What I am saying is, we don't need DWight Howard if Frye continues to impress. Why not just kept Frye at the PF, instead of going after a AR? He hasn't been that bad at all against PF's as compared to larger centers. I think Frye provides us with a true NBA lineup, but in actuality, we are still a run and gun team.

If Frye starts putting the ball on the floor and driving to the hoop a little more, I think I would like to keep him at the PF position and search for a superstar Wing player and pray Lopez becomes effective enough on the offense and defense of side were we don't need a PF to score....The Bulls never had one(I know don't compare Bulls because of MJ). I think it would be easier to pick up a scoring wing (Mayo, Granger, JJ, James, Wade, Melo, Kobe, ect as compare to...what, Amare, Dirk , and Gasol?) and a TY Chandler (circa 2007) type Center (Thabeet if Lopez doesnt fit the bill) than would be trying to find a PF of Amare's calibur, what says you guys?

Imagine

Nash
JJ
Marion
Frye
Amare

We always lacked sized, because of the required personnel for SSOL to be effective, Frye I believe eleviates that!

YouTube · Post #2 » by **Kerrsed** » Thu Dec 16, 2010 9:19 pm

I said it before and i'll say it again. Frye sucks at C, but he is pretty decent at PF.

YFZblu · Post #3 » by **YFZblu** » Thu Dec 16, 2010 9:20 pm

There is already a Frye appreciation thread....Meaning we are giving him credit.

JMac1 · Post #4 » by **JMac1** » Thu Dec 16, 2010 9:26 pm

YFZblu wrote:There is already a Frye appreciation thread....Meaning we are giving him credit.

Maybe I should change title to Frye is our PF of tomorrow

JMac1 · Post #5 » by **JMac1** » Thu Dec 16, 2010 9:34 pm

YFZblu wrote:There is already a Frye appreciation thread....Meaning we are giving him credit.

Comment on the post :evil:

What do you think? Do you think our offense is effective enough with Frye and if we got someone who could create his own shot at a different position, i.e wing, then we would be okay?

Post #6 » by **Miklo** » Thu Dec 16, 2010 10:08 pm

Sorry but if it means Frye is our PF of tomorrow then no I'm not on board for this

JMac1 · Post #7 » by **JMac1** » Thu Dec 16, 2010 11:03 pm

Miklo wrote:Sorry but if it means Frye is our PF of tomorrow then no I'm not on board for this

It does and actually I think that is the way it is going to be since no team will trade us anything of value unless we give up Nash. If Lopez gets back to being Lopez of Spring 2010 you might start liking Frye as the PF of the future.

I know you did last night

BurningHeart · Post #8 » by **BurningHeart** » Thu Dec 16, 2010 11:08 pm

No, we need a power forward.

JMac1 · Post #9 » by **JMac1** » Thu Dec 16, 2010 11:56 pm

BurningHeart wrote:No, we need a power forward.

That's it? I thought our board was more articulate than this :-?

I elaborated on why it could work with Channing (in detail) and all I get in response is no!? Wow!

This is a discussion board with open-end response questions......try to take advantage of it

No because, you prefer a defending big to clog the lane alas Shaq, taking away scoring, but we won't need as much scoring because our defense will be better? Something along those lines.

Then I would say the problem with our defense is on the perimeter, not the interior now that Lopez is back.

No!!!!!!!!!! Not enough response information to stimulate/facilitate a discussion.

DBrimstone · Post #10 » by **DBrimstone** » Fri Dec 17, 2010 12:05 am

I want pf

JohnVancouver · Post #11 » by **JohnVancouver** » Fri Dec 17, 2010 12:06 am

If Frye is the PF, and that's where i believe he should play, then one other other front line has to be a bulldozer. Frye does a very good job of defending, pressuring and shot blocking, and boards decently. He's doing it because that's what we need and he is trying to help provide it - but he will never be a natural presence/enforcer under the rim. Just not who he is .

We need a big nasty person who regards the key as his personal domain on both ends

JohnVancouver · Post #12 » by **JohnVancouver** » Fri Dec 17, 2010 12:06 am

If Frye is the PF, and that's where i believe he should play, then one other other front line has to be a bulldozer. Frye does a very good job of defending, pressuring and shot blocking, and boards decently. He's doing it because that's what we need and he is trying to help provide it - but he will never be a natural presence/enforcer under the rim. Just not who he is .

We need a big nasty person who regards the key as his personal domain on both ends

BurningHeart · Post #13 » by **BurningHeart** » Fri Dec 17, 2010 12:09 am

JMac1 wrote:
BurningHeart wrote:No, we need a power forward.

That's it? I thought our board was more articulate than this I elaborated on why it could work with Channing (in detail) and all I get in response is no!? Wow!

This is a discussion board with open-end response questions......try to take advantage of it

No because, you prefer a defending big to clog the lane alas Shaq, taking away scoring, but we won't need as much scoring because our defense will be better? Something along those lines.

Then I would say the problem with our defense is on the perimeter, not the interior now that Lopez is back.

No!!!!!!!!!! Not enough response information to stimulate/facilitate a discussion.

I don't need to articulate it because it doesn't need to be. We need rebounding and inside scoring. We need a credible pick and roll threat for Nash, Turkoglu, and Dragic. We already have a wing who can score. Multiple wings that can score. What the hell do we need a "stud wing" for?

JMac1 · Post #14 » by **JMac1** » Fri Dec 17, 2010 12:18 am

BurningHeart wrote:
JMac1 wrote:
BurningHeart wrote:No, we need a power forward.

That's it? I thought our board was more articulate than this I elaborated on why it could work with Channing (in detail) and all I get in response is no!? Wow!

This is a discussion board with open-end response questions......try to take advantage of it

No because, you prefer a defending big to clog the lane alas Shaq, taking away scoring, but we won't need as much scoring because our defense will be better? Something along those lines.

Then I would say the problem with our defense is on the perimeter, not the interior now that Lopez is back.

No!!!!!!!!!! Not enough response information to stimulate/facilitate a discussion.

I don't need to articulate it because it doesn't need to be. We need rebounding and inside scoring. We need a credible pick and roll threat for Nash, Turkoglu, and Dragic. We already have a wing who can score. Multiple wings that can score. What the hell do we need a "stud wing" for?

I don't need to articulate it because it doesn't need to be.

WEAK!

We need rebounding and inside scoring.

Maybe we can get Gasol :lol:

We already have a wing who can score.

We do???? WHO?? We have not ONE wing that can creat his own shot.....NOT ONE. We have a bunch of marginal players at the wing!!

What the hell do we need a "stud wing" for

hum.....How about to close out games, create his own shot without relying on Nash, gt to the fre throw line, creat shots for others, but I guess you haven't notice that Nash is the only guy doing that :-?

Wow, too easy :lol:

DBrimstone · Post #15 » by **DBrimstone** » Fri Dec 17, 2010 12:27 am

Name 1 shooting guard J-Rich can't post up any day of the weak. His shot's been almost as good as Ray Allen's off of screens and dribble penetration. And when you have 3 facilitators on the roster, no, you don't need a stud 2 guard to create his own shot. Steve, Hedo and Goran will do it for him.

Yes, we need a nasty big with an attitude. Frye's been great, and I like Lopez, but that's as far as real depth goes. Hakim scores a bunch and does nothing else, or just does nothing else, and we don't have a real backup center. We most definitely need more front court depth if we want to do anything at all

RocPHX · Post #16 » by **RocPHX** » Fri Dec 17, 2010 12:34 am

We still need a consistent paint presence from a big. We are going to be bad until we get one.

Post #17 » by **lilfishi22** » Fri Dec 17, 2010 1:27 am

I like Frye and he does as well as you can expect from him at both positions up front but I really don't like him as our "PF of the future." He's a very unique player and he's probably one of the better bigs off the bench in the league because of that but we really need a guy who can come in, grab rebounds, defend adequately and just be a PnR guy. He doesn't need to be as good as Amare offensively, he just needs to make high % shots so he draws defenders and our shooters will do the rest. The issue we have right now is our rebounding. We aren't a terrible defensive team but because we are giving up rebounds we are also giving up high % buckets to the other team.

The last thing we need is another wing, even if it is a stud wing.

JasonDaPsycho · Post #18 » by **JasonDaPsycho** » Fri Dec 17, 2010 1:57 am

JMac1 wrote:You guys have to start admitting that Channing Frye is an okay baller. Sure, he isn't Gasol, but he does offer something only a few PF's in this league can offer. Frye is a floor stretching true PF. He isn't a defending, rebounding Oakley type but his skill set is unique and perfect for our style of play.

Yep, you're very right about Channing. He is indeed perfect for our style of play.

JMac1 wrote:We have been talking about trades and shuffling our roster for a PF who can truly be Amare like, but maybe we have a PF that can allow the center to be Amare like. I think we need a center who can play defense, reb, and PnR spoon fed passes from our PG. Frye allows spacing for Nash and especially Goran to provide a more effective PnR play with someone not named Amare. A player who isn't as good as Warrick or Amare, but he appears to be because he (the center) has more operating room with Frye on the floor.

What I am saying is, we don't need DWight Howard if Frye continues to impress. Why not just kept Frye at the PF, instead of going after a AR? He hasn't been that bad at all against PF's as compared to larger centers. I think Frye provides us with a true NBA lineup, but in actuality, we are still a run and gun team.

No, we don't necessarily mean a PF. We just mean a half way decent, legit, traditional post player (as in can rebound and defend).
Btw, are you implying that we should go after average talents instead of great talents/potentials? You know we don't welcome the Sarver kind around here, boy. :lol:

JMac1 wrote:If Frye starts putting the ball on the floor and driving to the hoop a little more, I think I would like to keep him at the PF position and search for a superstar Wing player and pray Lopez becomes effective enough on the offense and defense of side were we don't need a PF to score....The Bulls never had one(I know don't compare Bulls because of MJ). I think it would be easier to pick up a scoring wing (Mayo, Granger, JJ, James, Wade, Melo, Kobe, ect as compare to...what, Amare, Dirk , and Gasol?) and a TY Chandler (circa 2007) type Center (Thabeet if Lopez doesnt fit the bill) than would be trying to find a PF of Amare's calibur, what says you guys?

Frye sure is rolling a little more, but his finishing ability is still to be questioned. Steve is at his best playing with a finisher (a la Amar'e, Dwight, or even Hakim). You knew you shouldn't compare the Bulls "lack of" front court to any other team, 'cause apparently, Dennis Rodman is really a nobody when it comes to rebounding and defending. It's really unfair to the Bulls, you know.
The bottom line is, if we want to win, we need a decent role player in our bigs, if we're not getting a balling center/PF.
And I honestly can't believe you feel trading for Kobe is easier than trading for Amar'e/Dwight. Realistically, who are we gonna get at best? Luol Deng's contract? Hell I'd rather the Suns trade Nash and JRich to the Magic and take Rashard's bum a$$ in return because I want to see Nash not getting low-balled for the first time in his career.
Even assuming we get a 95-96 Jordan/ 09-10 Wade/ 08-09 Bryant in return, Robert Sarver is still going to surround the team with scrubs simply because of the logic "Steve Nash makes everyone an all-star".
Ever heard of a Chinese saying "It's difficult to clap with one hand."?

bigfoot · Post #19 » by **bigfoot** » Fri Dec 17, 2010 3:48 am

RocPHX wrote:We still need a consistent paint presence from a big. We are going to be bad until we get one.

I agree we need a stud PF or C. Hollinger player rankings (PER) show Nash, Hill, and Richardson are top 6 or better at their respectively positions. Last year Lopez was nearly a top 15 center and Amare was a top 5 PF. This year we have no big in the top 20. Unless Fropez improves on last years performance (and stays healthy) we will remain an average team. We know that Warrick, Hedo, Childress, and Baron are not starting quality bigs.

When we have played two real bigs over the past 7 games we have won or tied the rebounding battle 6 times. That's a combo of Frye/Baron or Frye/Lopez. Frye has shown improvements but I don't think he or Lopez will ever be a top 10 PF/C. The front offices needs to look at players like Marc Gasol, Zach Randolph, Josh Smith, or Nene.

JMac1 · Post #20 » by **JMac1** » Fri Dec 17, 2010 4:26 am

JohnVancouver wrote:If Frye is the PF, and that's where i believe he should play, then one other other front line has to be a bulldozer. Frye does a very good job of defending, pressuring and shot blocking, and boards decently. He's doing it because that's what we need and he is trying to help provide it - but he will never be a natural presence/enforcer under the rim. Just not who he is .

We need a big nasty person who regards the key as his personal domain on both ends

I totlly agree, good post IMO. That guy has to be Lopez or another Center. We only need one "banger." Ask for a bunch of bangers is just not us, and I like us. I just want that 2006-7 style team. Marion, Bell, and KT