PSB's First Blargument

In case you weren't one of the five people who saw Brian and Patrick's initial "Re:" war, let me tell you that they went back and forth rebutting each other regarding Brian's trade machine post, wherein he proposed a 3-way trade that would send Shaq and Nash to Dallas, Kidd, Erick Dampier and Jameer Nelson to Phoenix and Jason Terry to Orlando. Well, I decided to condense their little sissyfight into one organized post. Incidentally, this sort of back-and-forth argument is something Patrick and I have wanted to start up for a while, so I figured I would start now. Based off of Brian's original post, I present to you, PSB's First Blargument!

Patrick

Dude, why in the world would the Suns make this trade? It would be a big, hearty "f-you" to the entire fan base, it would guarantee that they wouldn't contend for a title, and improves no part of the problems (inability to keep people out of the lane - Tony Parker killed them, not Duncan - and poor outside shooting) that led them to lose this year. For all my grousing about the Suns, they were Tim Duncan's only trey of the year away from being tied 2-2 going into game 5. A core of Nash (assuming he doesn't continue his regression, which is a big assumption), Amare, Shaq, Hill, Bell, Giricek, Diaw etc. is still good enough to compete out in the west. And, in regards to non-basketball performance issues, the ownership would have to be nuts to trade ticket and merchandise sellers Nash and Shaq for Jason "beats his wife with bricks" Kidd and Eric "man in a dress" Dampier. This trade turns the Suns into a 40, 45 win team, which in the ultra-competitive West may mean you're out of the dance. I'm not sold on Orlando making this trade either. Is 31 year old (when next year starts) Jason Terry at 9 million a year a better fit than 26 year old Jameer Nelson? The Magic just extended him, are they really going to trade him for a guy who could stagnate their entire offense and can't guard anybody? They have enough shooters (Turkoglu, Lewis). I enjoy the trade machine as much as the next guy, but Brian, enjoy it responsibly. Otherwise you're just that guy at the party who drinks half a bottle of Jameson's, breaks the stereo, gropes the co-eds and ends the night sleeping on the bathroom floor. And you don't want to be that guy. Trust me.

Read the headline. I said it "won't" happen. I agree the Suns don't make out well (though I figure there would be draft picks involved as well to sweeten the deal), but it's not totally ridiculous. Kidd's contract comes off the books a year before Shaq and Nash and Dampier is probably just as good as Shaq at this point. Yes they become less competitive, but the point is that they try to cut their losses and go for cap room and any decent young player they can get their hands on, rather than try in vain to compete for a title next year. After Kidd's contract is up, they'd have some cap room, or at least a big expiring contract to work with. Then they could rebuild around Stoudemire, Diaw, and Barbosa. I think Orlando makes the move as well. Whether or not they should is another story, since as you said, Nelson's a lot younger than Terry. But all they've done the last year or two is surround Dwight Howard with shooters, so I could see them adding Terry. If you've got a better way to improve the Suns, I'd like to hear it. I should at least get credit for trying. That's more than Steve Kerr will likely do, short of firing Mike D'Antoni, which would be a big mistake. I guess I'm saying that I'd rather be the guy who gropes co-eds in a drunken stupor than the guy who stands in the corner awkwardly and doesn't talk to anyone.

Brian

Patrick

Unfortunately, your response is so riddled with fallacies I simply couldn't let it go without further fisking. You: "I agree the Suns don't make out well (though I figure there would be draft picks involved as well to sweeten the deal), but it's not totally ridiculous." Me: Yes it is totally ridiculous. Jason Kidd, while a solid player, is simply not as good as Steve Nash. He is a better defender (though he, like Nash, has no chance against the PGs in the West) and a dramatically inferior offensive player. Nash averaged 17 ppg and 11 asst, shooting 50% from the floor, 47% from 3 and 90% from the line. Jason Kidd averaged 10 and 10, 82% from the line, 38% from 3 and 39% from the field. And that's just one piece: You: "...Dampier is probably just as good as Shaq at this point." Shaq this year (the worst of his career, where he played half the year fat, listless, and hurt): 13.6 ppg, 9.1 rbds, 1.4 blocks, 59% from the field. Erick "probably just as good as Shaq" Dampier: 6.1 ppg, 7.5 rbds, 1.5 blocks, 64% from the field (a mark significantly helped by the fact that he only touches the ball on the offensive end when he gets an offensive rebound). Let's extend that to the playoffs, where Shaq was, for long stretches, the best player on the floor for Phoenix: Shaq: 15.2 ppg, 9.2 boards, Dampier: 3.6 ppg, 4.2 boards. Come on. You: "Yes they become less competitive, but the point is that they try to cut their losses and go for cap room and any decent young player they can get their hands on." Me: Erick Dampier has three more years on his contract after this one, and in 2010-2011 will be making more than 13 million dollars. Steve Nash's contract is not guaranteed after next year, it is actually a team option for 2009-2010 at 13 million, and next year he brings in just over 12 million, or 9 million dollars less than Kidd. This trade will save the Suns 10 million in 2009-2010, yes, but in the process you're trading away two of the most popular players in the league, giving up on being competitive for the next three years, alienating a fan base and potentially a superstar. You: "If you've got a better way to improve the Suns, I'd like to hear it." Me: If things break right for the Suns, they are a title contender next year without doing anything. Your trade eliminates that possibility. If the Suns target a solid defensive guard with their exception, someone who can guard the opposing team's PG competently and shoot the three (Someone from Mickael Pietrus, Quinton "my first choice" Ross, Tony Allen, James Posey, Anthony Carter mold), and for once actually hold on to and use their own draft picks trade into the first round and target someone like Mario Chalmers (If only this team had actually used their own picks, imagine a team with Rondo backing up Nash and guarding the other teams best offensive guard), they'll be in great shape, as long as Nash holds up and Shaq continues playing motivated basketball. This team played stretches of excellent basketball last year, if they can sustain that into next season they're a definite contender. If they make that trade, they're an also-ran that isn't quite bad enough to get a high draft pick (which, knowing the owner, they'd just trade anyway). You are advocating illogical action under the false pretense that it's always better to do something than nothing. Extending our molestation metaphor far beyond its limits, you may rather be the drunken guy randomly groping co-eds, but in the morning you'll wake up with a hangover and a restraining order (see: no shot to win the title) and the guy in corner mustered up the guts to walk to visibly shaken molestee home and wind up with her number in the process. P.S. just to let you know, I started my initial rebuttal as a comment, the realized that A) it was getting too big and B) I should expose your ignorance as prominently as possible. And points for trying? What is this, the Chappaqua recreational basketball league for grades 4-6? Please.

There's an underlying point that should be made. Whether or not the trade I suggested is a viable option, what this comes down (or perhaps should come down to) is a debate over whether or not the Suns are a legitimate championship contender next year. You seem to think they are, but I'm curious as to what you're basing that logic on. Sure, if Duncan misses that three in Game 1 then it's a totally different series and maybe the Suns advance to the second round. But do you honestly think they were going all the way with this team? The Hornets would have flat out killed them in round two. They can't defend at all now that Marion is gone and it's only going to get worse. Nash is getting worse and Shaq is getting useless, and how much longer is Shaq even going to play? Not to mention they got a shockingly healthy season from Grant Hill... and they still finished with the 6 seed. Granted, the West was ridiculously competitive this year, but who is going to get worse besides the aging Suns? The Spurs might drop off a bit with old age, but people say that every year. The Mavs could get worse, but they finished below Phoenix anyway. The Hornets, Jazz, Rockets, and Lakers all stand to improve, and that's not even counting up-and-coming teams that missed the playoffs like the Blazers. And what do you mean "if things break right" the Suns are a title contender next year? "If things break right" doesn't mean anything. Maybe it works in college basketball or the NFL playoffs where it's single elimination and luck is a factor, but in seven game series, the best teams almost always win. The Suns can make excuses all they want that Duncan got lucky on his shot or whatever else, but if the Suns were so great, it wouldn't come down to that last shot. They would have maintained a lead. If you want to count on everything breaking right, then that's great, but odds are some things will break wrong in an average season. The Suns were exceptionally lucky this year and they still didn't get to the Finals. Not to mention they'll probably have a new coach next year because Steve Kerr needs somebody to take the fall after the Shaq trade. And you're right, it'd be just super if the Suns used their own draft picks, but they haven't and why would that change in the immediate future? And do you really think Mario Chalmers is the answer to anything but the trivia question "Name a black guy from Alaska besides Carlos Boozer?" If you want to believe that this Suns team can get it done, or that they're just a few pieces away, then that's a whole other story, but you need to back that up before telling me that my argument is that "it's better to do something than nothing." I'm not saying the Suns make my trade, I'm saying they need to make a trade and cut their losses, getting some value out of Nash and Shaq while they still can. And one more thing: I will not have you insulting the Chappaqua recreational basketball league for grades 4-6 (or CRBL as we call it). Just show some goddamn respect.

Brian

Patrick

Alright Brian, here's why I think the Suns have a shot (though I did already give some explanation of what meant when I said "if things break right" but clearly you can't be expected to read every sentence when you're too busy enjoying the scent of your own farts): Yes, the Suns were the 6 seed, as you so derogatorily pointed out earlier. They were also a 6 seed that finished 2 games back of the 1 seed and won 55 games, despite undergoing a huge transition in the middle of the season that changed everything about their style of play. Prior to the Shaq trade, against the 8 best teams in the west, they were a combined 5-10. After the trade, they were 7-8, but 6-3 in their last nine. Amare Stoudemire is still one of the most dynamic offensive weapons in the game (maybe he can develop some semblance of a 15 footer this offseason), and Steve Nash is still a top tier PG. Shaq, especially down the final stretch of the season, really took a liking to his new role, and gives the Suns a fantastic defensive rebounder and an above average defender in the low-post, as well as a guy you can throw the ball into in the half-court. They'll still have complementary weapons like Diaw, Barbosa, Hill, Bell, and a full season to accustom Gordon Giricek (an excellent shooter and underrated defender) to the offense. Adding a terrific perimeter defender like Quentin Ross would fill the team's one void and make them as dangerous as any team in the West. But fine, let's say you're right, and the Suns start off next year slow and out of it. Are you telling me the best the Suns can get for Steve Nash is Jason Kidd, Erick Dampier and Jameer Nelson? They should be shopping Nash to team on the brink of contention that's in desperate need of a PG. How about Nash to the Clippers for Shaun Livingston (they'll have to pick up his option), Corey Maggette and the Clips number 1 this year? Or, if it's a mid season pick, 2 number ones? Or Nash to Indiana for Mike Dunleavy Jr. and Danny Granger plus picks. Or Nash to Portland for Steve Blake, Travis Outlaw, Martell Webster and a pick. Or Nash to Toronto for Calderon (who would sign a new contract) and Bargnani. Or hell, why not Nash straight to Orlando for Nelson, Battie, Redick and a pick? Why help the Mavs? Any one of those trades gives the Suns a core of young players far superior to the trade you described. They should just let Shaq's contract run out, since, as you so presciently pointed out, Shaq's contract happens to end just in time for the Bosh, Melo, Wade, Lebron free agent class. Dampier's does not. The Suns clearly have the talent to make a run in the West next year, and while it's true that age may ravage them, they'd be better off trading Nash separately to a contender, holding onto Shaq and targeting one of the big 4 free agents after the 2009-2010 season. I'm sorry to have so thoroughly destroyed your on our well trafficked blog, but here at PSB, we value the truth above all else. Right Tom Selleck?

Always.

Tom Selleck

So there you have it, folks. Who won? I think it was mighty close, but, as always, Tom came out on top.