Game 42 : Sacramento Kings @ Phoenix Suns, Tuesday, January 8th, 7:00PM MST

[AtheJ415]

Yeah that would be an incorrect representation of what I've said n a chief reason why I'm not going to debate with you. Also, I have not been off, n I'm also willing to make predictions, which most won't for fear of being wrong so they could be held positionless later (sound familiar). I'm not, n when I am, I'm more than willing to admit it. It's all part of the fun.

Rich.

Hollywood: "I have not been off".

Me: About which predictions?

Hollywood: "I'm not telling", followed by "I'm willing to make predictions."


LMFAO.

Also, if you actually think I'm somebody who is "positionless" on this board then you couldn't be more wrong. I have very strong opinions and takes on players and the team. Anybody who has posted on here over the past 2+ years can vouche for that. What exactly is "familiar" here?

I don't think anyone accused you of having a perforated ass - hollywood was just saying he ain't hep to the snark, as is the case with most civil folk, truth be told.

[handsome salary]

Out of the house so I did not join until almost midway through the 3rd. At that point I watched as exciting a basketball game as I have seen all season. That was so fun and why I enjoy being a fan.

I'm sure this team will give me more pains in my stomach than cheers the rest of the season so for today the sun is out.

[hollywood6964]

Sorry, but I don't participate in most game threads, certainly not as they are happening. But many of your points I've seen are supposition, not shown whatsoever in the basic or advanced data that evaluates impact, and largely faulty. I see a lot of longing for Oubre and Jackson, diminishing Warren and Bridges and Melton, and even Booker. And frankly it is nonsense. I understand why you wouldn't want to debate it. Because on the season and over their careers, the numbers speak for themselves.

Yeah that would be an incorrect representation of what I've said n a chief reason why I'm not going to debate with you. Also, I have not been off, n I'm also willing to make predictions, which most won't for fear of being wrong so they could be held positionless later (sound familiar). I'm not, n when I am, I'm more than willing to admit it. It's all part of the fun.

Rich.

Hollywood: "I have not been off".

Me: About which predictions?

Hollywood: "I'm not telling", followed by "I'm willing to make predictions."


LMFAO.

Also, if you actually think I'm somebody who is "positionless" on this board then you couldn't be more wrong. I have very strong opinions and takes on players and the team. Anybody who has posted on here over the past 2+ years can vouche for that. What exactly is "familiar" here?

This is such a disingenuous comment I had to laugh. Come on man, you do this stuff so much I don't think anybody would fall for this silly nonsense anymore. Nice try though haha. Moving on.

[Fo-Real]

All this talk of trading Booker is way premature lol. We scraped out a win against the Kings. Kelly Oubre had the best game of his career, Melton played one of his best games, and Jackson is finally starting to play better recently. We’re a better team with him on the floor and we can’t count on these games from our bench every game.

Nice to get a win after a tough stretch though. Be nice to get another one in Dallas tomorrow.

This is really still down to us needing a floor general Pg. We need a real threat to pass or shoot pg who actually runs the offense and Booker to be second or third fiddle shooter secondary passer type threat and sometimes go get his, more like Klay Thompson.

[MathiasPW]

its a bit of an issue, but igor just needs to play like he does. play like tonight with just plugging him in. even if you're not maximizing him offensively, you're able to maximize others. And the synergy that causes can't be understated.

but then you are reducing your $158million man to a role player, which would look really bad for us. it's certainly a difficult situation we're in.

How so? I can't believe there are so many suggesting Book is the problem, or that we somehow played all that much better without him. We didn't. We were down a huge amount just like we have been through most of the year. Just like most of the year, we had a dramatic rally in the 2nd half when our defensive intensity went up. It wasn't because our offense suddenly became noticeably better. It was because we got a ton of stops and got out in transition. Having Booker on the court does not somehow ruin our offense. That is insanity. He is the literal #1 SG in real OPM.

Well, with Booker in the lineup our offense becomes more predictable, as it's mainly him running a pick and roll - which he is just not very efficient at running yet.

A lack of a star has that positive effect of spreading the offensive load to everyone else, and with good sets and ball movement your offense becomes more efficient because defenses have a harder time to figure out where the damage will come from. And all that despite having less talent on average.

Wizards without Wall and OKC without Westbrook are good examples of teams were this happened.

Now, if the same thing happened WITH Booker in the lineup, it would be the best scenario, but that takes some maturity from him and his teammates. We are not there yet.

[MathiasPW]

Also, trading Booker is stupidity. You don't trade your best player because your team hasn't figured out how to play at it's best with him yet.

You would only limit the teams overall potential by doing that, even if it means better (very) short term results

[jcsunsfan]

Also, trading Booker is stupidity. You don't trade your best player because your team hasn't figured out how to play at it's best with him yet.

You would only limit the teams overall potential by doing that, even if it means better (very) short term results

Trading their best player is how the 1987 Suns turned everything around. Larry Nance for KJ, Corbin, West, and the pick that would become Dan Majerle. I am not saying that is what we should do now, but it is wrong to say it is completely out of the question.

[MathiasPW]

Also, trading Booker is stupidity. You don't trade your best player because your team hasn't figured out how to play at it's best with him yet.

You would only limit the teams overall potential by doing that, even if it means better (very) short term results

Trading their best player is how the 1987 Suns turned everything around. Larry Nance for KJ, Corbin, West, and the pick that would become Dan Majerle. I am not saying that is what we should do now, but it is wrong to say it is completely out of the question.

True. But in that case you are kicking the rebuild can another many years down the road. And I am not too sure Booker has that much value given his new contract and unproven record.

[Archx]

Also, trading Booker is stupidity. You don't trade your best player because your team hasn't figured out how to play at it's best with him yet.

You would only limit the teams overall potential by doing that, even if it means better (very) short term results

Trading their best player is how the 1987 Suns turned everything around. Larry Nance for KJ, Corbin, West, and the pick that would become Dan Majerle. I am not saying that is what we should do now, but it is wrong to say it is completely out of the question.

True. But in that case you are kicking the rebuild can another many years down the road. And I am not too sure Booker has that much value given his new contract and unproven record.

Also, Booker is starting to look really fragile. Who would be willing to risk giving you something good in return for an injury prone player? Best thing to do is to just see how he turns out for a season or two if he can stay healthy. Because he is a tremendous scorer who can carry your offense at the end of the game. You simply don't trade away player like Book for peanuts.

[bigfoot]

Expecting Oubre to make Shaqtin-a-fool this week. Caught up on this season's episodes 1-9 ... the graphics they've added are a riot.

[bwgood77]

Also, trading Booker is stupidity. You don't trade your best player because your team hasn't figured out how to play at it's best with him yet.

You would only limit the teams overall potential by doing that, even if it means better (very) short term results

I agree it's stupid just to do it for the sake of it. But I imagine people who want to trade him would expect equal value back, whatever that is.

That being said, I doubt he has as high as trade value as people would expect. We've seen returns for superstars, so his would likely be even less (despite longer control), so it wouldn't likely be prudent to trade him.

[bwgood77]

Also, trading Booker is stupidity. You don't trade your best player because your team hasn't figured out how to play at it's best with him yet.

You would only limit the teams overall potential by doing that, even if it means better (very) short term results

Trading their best player is how the 1987 Suns turned everything around. Larry Nance for KJ, Corbin, West, and the pick that would become Dan Majerle. I am not saying that is what we should do now, but it is wrong to say it is completely out of the question.

True. But in that case you are kicking the rebuild can another many years down the road. And I am not too sure Booker has that much value given his new contract and unproven record.

Well in the Suns case then they immediately turned it around the next year, going from like 28 to 55 wins. That was a crazy scenario....I can't think of any second year player being capable of turning around a franchise that just traded it's best player for them now. It would be like us trading Booker for Fox and suddenly being a 50+ game winner, second round playoff team....and the following year a conference finalist.

[AtheJ415]

but then you are reducing your $158million man to a role player, which would look really bad for us. it's certainly a difficult situation we're in.

How so? I can't believe there are so many suggesting Book is the problem, or that we somehow played all that much better without him. We didn't. We were down a huge amount just like we have been through most of the year. Just like most of the year, we had a dramatic rally in the 2nd half when our defensive intensity went up. It wasn't because our offense suddenly became noticeably better. It was because we got a ton of stops and got out in transition. Having Booker on the court does not somehow ruin our offense. That is insanity. He is the literal #1 SG in real OPM.

Well, with Booker in the lineup our offense becomes more predictable, as it's mainly him running a pick and roll - which he is just not very efficient at running yet.

A lack of a star has that positive effect of spreading the offensive load to everyone else, and with good sets and ball movement your offense becomes more efficient because defenses have a harder time to figure out where the damage will come from. And all that despite having less talent on average.

Wizards without Wall and OKC without Westbrook are good examples of teams were this happened.

Now, if the same thing happened WITH Booker in the lineup, it would be the best scenario, but that takes some maturity from him and his teammates. We are not there yet.

True, but it still remains true that the Suns, despite being more "predictable" with Booker in the lineup, still perform much better with him in it on the offensive end. The offense may be more balanced with Booker out, but at the end of the day the goal is to score as many points per possession as possible. The Suns clearly do more of that with Booker than without. Booker is 22, and I think it is obvious he doesn't trust his teammates, but it's not like hero ball was always a problem for him (say rookie year or year 2 Booker). I think it's reasonable to assume he will adjust his game with his teammates improving.

[AtheJ415]

Also, trading Booker is stupidity. You don't trade your best player because your team hasn't figured out how to play at it's best with him yet.

You would only limit the teams overall potential by doing that, even if it means better (very) short term results

To add to this, it would be particularly stupid when the team makeup without him is not solidifed. You build around your stars. We are a rebuilding team, and it would essentially be saying you'd rather have 0 stars than 1, or 1 than 2 if you feel Ayton is nearly there.

[Jarlaxle0204]

Booker's quote on the slow stars

Kinda funny we pull Booker out of the starting line up and we were competitive and won a game hahaha

We were down 21 at one point. We came on strong in the second half as we have been doing with almost every game lately. We just got over the hump tonight.....probably because Sacremento isn't as good as the competition we've been playing recently.