Any Way You Look

It occurred to me that maybe Dave Berri has some counterintuitive argument as to why the Shaq-Matrix trade makes sense for Phoenix. The answer is no. Instead, he has a counterintuitive argument that even if Shaq were to return to his 2004-2005 season level of production the trade still wouldn't help Phoenix. And, of course, that's not going to happen.

Meanwhile, an additional consideration here is that Shawn Marion is not only better, cheaper, and younger than Shaq, but he logs more minutes per game. Indeed, he plays more minutes per game than anyone else on the Phoenix roster. So expect to see more Brian Skinner and Boris Diaw in the future. The (rare) defenses of this trade, meanwhile, don't seem to grasp that just because Phoenix was relatively unlikely to win a championship pre-trade hardly justifies doing a deal that makes the team worse. The Wizards aren't going to win as presently constituted, either, but that doesn't mean Ernie Grunfeld should go do something ridiculous. Maybe if Phoenix hadn't sold those draft picks they could have struck gold. Anything but this.

Comments

are you really this hip or these posts on Shaq and basketball and the Wired are attempts by a geek to appear to be someone otherwise?

Posted by gregor | February 7, 2008 4:42 PM

There's one good thing to come of this trade. We get to hear classic Shaq lines like this one:

"You just don't really want to get me upset. When I'm upset, I'm known to do certain things -- like win championships."

One things for sure, if the Suns do win the championship, Kerr will look like a genius and all his critics will look like total idiots.

Posted by Mike | February 7, 2008 4:43 PM

As a Heat Fan, all I can say - - despite all efforts to get my mind around Phoenix's defenses of the trade (counterintuitive or otherwise, a la the When-Shaq-Gets-Mad, Shaq-Gets-Even theorem) - - is thank you Phoenix! You just let Riley (who was finally being subject to criticism in Miami) out of Cap Hell, & gave the Heat a chance to rebuild.

Posted by mofo | February 7, 2008 4:48 PM

As I said deep in the prior thread, I don't think this was a smart trade. (As many have pointed out, surely something like "Marion + fodder for Ben Wallace + your choice of Noah/Tyrus Thomas" would be a much fairer deal.)

But I don't think it's a catastrophic trade because if you're not going to win a championship under the current paradigm then the current paradigm should be blown up. The Wizards aren't in the same spot as the Suns; they can afford to keep drafting, look for clever trades, and see what they can build. Phoenix already had a core in Nash, Marion, and Stoudemire, that they almost certainly weren't going to improve upon while preserving the general idea of the team - that's three guys, all well paid, who are consensus top-5 talents at their positions! This was the Phoenix Suns, and if the GM and owner decide this is as far as you can go, there's no point in playing out the string.

The Suns have been weirdly managed over the last couple of years, and when you look at all their moves together it makes no sense, but I do think it's worth acknowledging that Kerr is the 3rd GM of the Nash era, and it's possible that Sarver himself has had a change of heart about what's important re: the team.

Posted by Quarterican | February 7, 2008 4:49 PM

I agree this trade is really dumb for the Suns. Shaq is washed up, really expensive and Marion is a better player for their style.

I disagree with your point that Phoenix did not have enough before the trade to win it all. Why not?

They were totally screwed in their series with the Spurs last season with Stoudamire being suspended for Game 5. The Spurs barely win game 5 against a shorthanded Suns team and then clinch the series at home.

The Spurs might have still won the series with the Suns having Amare but I think there at least would have been a Game 7. They deserved that opportunity.

Every NBA pundit agrees that Suns/Spurs series was the defacto NBA finals and the Spurs steam rolled the Jazz and Cavs afterwards. If the NBA would reseed after each round like the NFL playoffs, the series would have been the Western Conference Finals.

My point is that the Suns were not that far away from winning the NBA title and were one of top teams in the contention.

Plus, they had one of the top records in the NBA right now.

I think Marion was unhappy and wanted out, but Shaq? Total Joke.

Posted by Mac G | February 7, 2008 4:53 PM

I guess that the only defense I can think of is that Phoenix is rolling the dice, hoping somehow that adding Shaq will make them better even though it doesn't seem at all likely that it will.

Phoenix will be a lot less fun to watch.

Posted by blah | February 7, 2008 4:54 PM

If we were talking about True Prime Shaq (98-03), which was even better than the 04-05 version, I think you could argue that Steve Nash would use his Awesome Canadian Point Guard Powers to make the offense work, and the chemistry and style difference would push things into positive territory (I haven't heard anyone analyze the value of a team completely changing its strategy midseason after all of its opponents have gotten used to them playing a different way).

But we're not going to see True Prime Shaq, or even the 04-05 version. But maybe they really can use him 20-25 minutes a game and make it work. Probably not for 4 rounds of the playoffs, though.

Posted by doofman | February 7, 2008 5:04 PM

The best case I can make on Phoenix's behalf is: Shaq was on a bad team, he's going through an ugly divorce -- maybe a change of scenery will rejuvenate him. Hey, maybe the chance to go head to head against Kobe will rejuvenate him.

Oh hell, who I am kidding.

Posted by JBJ | February 7, 2008 5:05 PM

I think the obvious question is what in the hell is Kerr doing in the pictures that Riley has? Can it really be this bad?

Posted by crack | February 7, 2008 5:06 PM

"I disagree with your point that Phoenix did not have enough before the trade to win it all. Why not?"

Because we've repeatedly seen this group of Suns fail to even make the Finals. Exactly why should this group have been more successful, especially given the improvement to a Lakers team that nearly knocked them out of the playoffs two years in a row?

And again, the fact that Nash and Shaq's contracts expire the same year is a huge deal for the Suns. It gives them clarity about when the current run at a title will end and when they'll have to start rebuilding around Amare.

Mike

Posted by MBunge | February 7, 2008 5:18 PM

As a Suns fan, I was initially horrified at the idea of the trade but I've slowly warmed to it.

(1) The Lakers were stomping all over us before they got Gasol. How were we supposed to deal with 3 7-footers plus Kobe?

(2) We've sucked so far in games that counted. Maybe it was a little bit of Spurs-style regular season sand-bagging, but it had me worried. I think losing Kurt Thomas had something to do with it, but the combination of Brian Skinner and Grant Hill should have been enough to made up for it.

(3) The other trade optionsfor Marion (like AK47 or Ben Wallace) were either inferior versions of Marion or Shaq.

(4) We get a lot bigger. Everyone upgrades a size and we get to really take advantage of our athleticism. Amare at PF = awesome.

(5) Our trainers are great and hopefully Shaq may have been malingering a bit. Grant Hill and Steve Nash have been playing (mostly) healthy (knock wood) because of them.

(6) More rebounds = more fast break points. You don't need your center running on those plays.

(7) We played the Hornets to 2OT last night without Marion. Diaw's stats were just fine.

(8) You gotta take a gamble sometimes. Steve isn't getting any younger and the Suns were getting it done with group we had this year.

Now, we just need to get Leandro playing better point and we should be good to go.

Posted by ben | February 7, 2008 5:22 PM

At times like this, I am compelled to ask the question my people have asked themselves for centuries:

"Is it good for the Lakers?"

I think, in this case, the answer is: yes.

Posted by SoCalJustice | February 7, 2008 5:26 PM

Y'all should read Scoop Jackson over at ESPN:
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=jackson/080207

He's the first person to make a coherent case for Shaq + Suns. I was as dubious as the rest of ya, but Scoop's scenario is not entirely daft.

Posted by roop | February 7, 2008 5:31 PM

Quarterican, while I agree that "if you're not going to win a championship under the current paradigm then the current paradigm should be blown up", if your new paradigm is "acquire the worst contracts in the NBA", then you're probably better off with the old paradigm. The Heat picked up Shaq on the theory that they could squeeze at least one championship out of him before he turned into a pumpkin, and they were willing to put up with the inevitable cap misery that would ensue. Why would the Suns be willing to take the pain off of the Heat's hands after the payoff has already been cashed? Have they been taking classes at Isiah Thomas's GM training program?

Posted by OhioBoy | February 7, 2008 5:33 PM

It's worth noting that both Nash and Stoudemire OKed the trade and perhaps they even demanded it. Marion was a trouble maker and perhaps he was destroying the Suns in the locker room. The team was in any case not close to actually winning a title. Lower your mean, up the variance, why not? Marion is in my view a classic "supposedly underrated but now has been overrated for a long time" sort of player. He reminds me of Larry Hughes: "does a lot of things." We'll see how good he is now. If I owned the Suns, I would have pulled the trigger on this one. Shaq has a high elasticity of effort with regard to whether or not he gives a damn.

Posted by Tyler Cowen | February 7, 2008 5:37 PM

One last possible benefit: Shaq will sell tons more tickets and merch than Marion. This increased revenue may motivate Sarver to stop being such a tightwad and quit selling first-round draft picks.

Posted by ben | February 7, 2008 5:43 PM

Everyone acts like the Suns were this close to winning a title, but I'm not seeing it.
Lemme throw some out some numbers:
PHX vs. East: 20-2, and yet to play both BOS and DET.
PHX vs. Western non-playoff contenders: 8-4.
PHX vs. the other nine Western teams in postseason contention: 6-9
In short, the Suns fattened up on the bad teams yet struggled against the good ones. That's a title contender?

Posted by Gold Star for Robot Boy | February 7, 2008 5:54 PM

While Shaq looked like toast in Miami, I don't think Steve Kerr is a fool and believe that a properly motivated Shaq is a dangerous Shaq, and that while this doesn't by any means bring a championship for sure, it sure makes Phoenix better.

And I think all these commentators saying the opposite are gonna have to eat a lot of crow.

It's all about motivation with Shaq.

Posted by TheCarpetMuncher | February 7, 2008 5:57 PM

I posted my limited defense of the trade (from the PHX perspective) on the other threads. In short, my defense is: the problem with the Suns right now is interior defense and (especially) rebounding. They've improved in those areas and they hope that the drawbacks of Shaq can be worked through.

The problem I have with Berri's analysis is that he is not looking at the team as a team; instead, he's just looking at the team as an accumluation of players. Accordingly, to Berri, if Marion is better than Shaq, then any team with Marion is better than the same team with Shaq (in lieu of Marion). But that's not how basketball works: you need a real team, with players that have complementary parts. In Berri's analysis, if the 5 best players in the league were all point guards, then the best team in the league would a team with those 5 point guards - even though we all know that a team with 5 point guards isn't any good because you need someone to rebound and guard centers.

As I've said on the other threads, I would have stayed with the team as is. But if you are convinced that the team wasn't going to win as is, and that the problem is interior defense and rebounding, then the gamble may be worth it - even if Marion is a better player than Shaq (all else equal).

Posted by Al | February 7, 2008 6:07 PM

While everyone raves about Marion's defense (and rightly so), why do critics of the trade fail to mention Stoudemire's struggles against good big men?
The Lakers' Andrew Bynum: 14 points and 13 rebounds in the disaster that was Phoenix's home opener, followed by 28 and 12 on Christmas.
Orlando's Dwight Howard: 33 and 18, and he could've scored more if not for nine missed free throws.
Minnesota's Al Jefferson: 32-14 and 39-15, as the NBA's second-worst team upset Phoenix twice.
Toronto's Chris Bosh: A career-high 42 points.
New Orleans' Tyson Chandler: 14-18 and 19-11, both losses for the Suns against their closest pursuer for the conference lead.
Marion's stellar D doesn't mean anything if a playing-out-of-position Amare gives the points right back.

Posted by Gold Star for Robot Boy | February 7, 2008 6:13 PM

Defensively, if Shaq can help the Suns pull in more defensive rebounds, it will be huge. It was so demoralizing to see bad teams get an offensive rebound almost every possession and sometimes even 4-5 putbacks.

Posted by ben | February 7, 2008 6:13 PM

"we've repeatedly seen this group of Suns fail to even make the Finals"

"Repeatedly" here means "for the past three years." And one of those years was without Amare. In those three years, they were eliminated by the eventual conference champ every time. So, they were the 2nd-best team in the conference for the past three years (and, given the balance between conferences, either the 2nd or 3rd best team in the NBA). I just don't see how you can say that means they never would have made it. One of the best ways to win the conference is to make the conference finals every year.

I know the Suns probably think this trade improves their rebounding and defense, but I don't see how, since Marion is a better rebounder and defender than Shaq. Even guarding big guys, he's at least as good. This trade leaves the entire Suns roster with exactly one guard (Bell) and one big (Skinner) who you would call average or better on D. And that's supposed to help them beat the Lakers/Spurs/Mavs?

Posted by too many steves | February 7, 2008 6:16 PM

Defensively, if Shaq can help the Suns pull in more defensive rebounds, it will be huge. It was so demoralizing to see bad teams get an offensive rebound almost every possession and sometimes even 4-5 putbacks.

Yep. As I noted on the other thread, the Suns aren't just the worst rebounding team in the league. They are BOTH the worst offensive rebounding team in the league AND the worst defensive rebounding team in the league.

That's a pretty mean feat.

As Gold Star points out above, big men have been routinely killing the Suns.

Maybe it is true that Shaq will not cure the problem. But Berri's simplistic analysis (basically: Marion is better than Shaq, so the Suns with Marion are better than the Suns with Shaq) isn't very convincing. You've got to diagnose the problem, and then work to address it, even if you have to give up advantages in other areas.

Posted by Al | February 7, 2008 6:19 PM

It was so demoralizing to see bad teams get an offensive rebound almost every possession and sometimes even 4-5 putbacks.
Phoenix's opponent's eFG: 48.2%, 7th-best in the league...
BUT
Phoenix's defensive efficiency: 107.5 points per 100 poss., ranking 13th.
WHY?
Phoenix's opponents offensive rebound percentage: 30.7, dead last.

Posted by Gold Star for Robot Boy | February 7, 2008 6:21 PM

Good point, Gold Star, but Shaq is a defensive liability. And who's to say Amare won't get schooled playing the 4, too? I'm trying hard to envision him guarding Dirk 25 feet from the hoop, and I just don't see it.

Posted by too many steves | February 7, 2008 6:21 PM

since Marion is a better rebounder ... than Shaq

No, I don't think so. Shaq's rebound rate is 16.5. Marion's is 15.0. (Raw numbers per 40 minutes don't take into account pace.) And as recently as 2 years ago, Shaq's rebound rate was 17.6. Shaq is simply a better rebounder than Marion, even today. Not to mention that his presence should help Amare rebound too.

Posted by Al | February 7, 2008 6:26 PM

I'm trying hard to envision him guarding Dirk 25 feet from the hoop, and I just don't see it.
Well, Dirk is Dirk and I don't expect Amare to guard him very well, either.
But when Amare was guarding 5s, on average they played like... Amare, almost.
http://www.82games.com/0708/0708PHO5.HTM

Posted by Gold Star for Robot Boy | February 7, 2008 6:30 PM

I know the Suns probably think this trade improves their rebounding and defense, but I don't see how, since Marion is a better rebounder and defender than Shaq. Even guarding big guys, he's at least as good.

There is no way a motivated and healthy Shaq is not a better defender of a 5 than a moping Marion. Also, this shifts the whole roster downwards, allowing more players to play their true positions and dominate the matchups.

It may still fail catastrophically, but it may work out in the end.

Posted by ben | February 7, 2008 6:30 PM

It may still fail catastrophically, but it may work out in the end.
Which is why we play the games.
Shaq's first appearance in a Suns uniform may come a week from tonight, in a home TNT game against Dallas. That'll be something.

Posted by Gold Star for Robot Boy | February 7, 2008 6:35 PM

Damn, I just keep finding too many upsides to this. One of the big problems this season has been a lack of a real big home-field advantage. The crowd doesn't get into the game like it should. The arrival of Shaq may improve this a bit (unless/until he starts playing like Fat Shaq).

Posted by ben | February 7, 2008 6:39 PM

One of the big problems this season has been a lack of a real big home-field advantage. The crowd doesn't get into the game like it should.
Interesting point. By all accounts, the dominant emotion in Phoenix this season was anxiety. This will refocus the crowds, for sure.

Posted by Gold Star for Robot Boy | February 7, 2008 6:45 PM

What happened to Petey? I haven't seen him since John Edwards dropped out. Did he commit suppuku after that?

Or maybe Petey is John Edwards....

Posted by Freddie | February 7, 2008 6:50 PM

The fact that Shaq has a better per-minute rebounding rate than Marion only matters if you think Shaq is likely to average more than the 28 mpg he's at now. Otherwise, you're looking at Shaq's rebounding combined with 20 mpg of Skinner or Diaw as the other big man. Maybe Marion's not a better rebounder in some pure sense, but your team is better off in rebounding with Marion playing 40 mpg than with Shaq playing 30.

As dumb as this trade seems to me, I'll second the "let's play some games" sentiment. I'm curious to see who's right here, and I'm curious to see the Shaq Suns play, although I doubt they'll be as much fun to watch as the old Suns.

Posted by too many steves | February 7, 2008 6:53 PM

Maybe Marion's not a better rebounder in some pure sense

The rebounds that Marion gets are the ones that clank out about 10 feet or so, not the ones in the paint that get put back 4-5 times and kill us. Hopefully, Diaw and the guards can fill this role.

One area where Marion has really helped defensively is in steals (and Shaq won't replace those). Not only does he create a bunch of TO's, but he's usually the first one down the court for the alley oop.

I'll second the "let's play some games" sentiment.

Third! That said, a whole industry has developed around the entertainment value of sports analysis.

Posted by ben | February 7, 2008 7:01 PM

I'll second the "let's play some games" sentiment

Yeah. This is the most over-analyzed trade (including by myself) since... the AI trade last year.

Posted by Al | February 7, 2008 7:03 PM

Oh, OK, one more piece of analysis. Speaking of the AI trade... I think one thing that makes me a bit of a contrarian on this trade is how the AI trade turned out. The conventional wisdom was that the Nuggets made a great deal and that the Sixers made an awful deal. Turns out, it was a pretty good deal for the Sixers - the Sixers improved after the trade and the Nuggets declined after the trade (even after Melo returned from suspension). So if the conventional wisdom was wrong about that trade, it makes me skeptical that the conventional wisdom is correct now.

Posted by Al | February 7, 2008 7:08 PM

I doubt they'll be as much fun to watch as the old Suns.
That seems to be a common, if not dominant, sentiment from those who dislike the trade.
I've been a Suns fan for 30 years. You know what I don't find fun to watch? Other teams raising NBA championship banners to the rafters.
Phoenix has been playing this run-and-gun style for 3-1/2 seasons, and the national love it attracted is nice to see. But "fun to watch" does not always translate into "title contenders." It seems the good teams in the league have figured out how to beat the Suns. There is a reason Phoenix is far below .500 against WC playoff contenders.
Kerr had to do something, and he did. Was it a good move? I'm willing to wait before I decide.

Posted by Gold Star for Robot Boy | February 7, 2008 7:11 PM

I doubt they'll be as much fun to watch as the old Suns.

What GSoRB said. The Suns can't play like the Old Suns anymore because the other teams have figured them out. They end up playing in the half court a lot more and this puts them at a disadvantage. The Warriors are super exciting (arguably much more so than the Suns), but are doing substantially worse. Maybe it's a shift to the dark side, but I'd rather give up some excitement in exchange for some more winning.

And there's a nice D'Antoni quote on the death of small-ball. I can't find it now, in the sea of commentary, but he basically says that he was forced to develop the small ball game as a response to them not having a strong 5 and Quentin Richardson wanting to start. Also, the official story coming from the FO was that D'Antoni was on board before Kerr was.

Posted by ben | February 7, 2008 7:31 PM

I think the other teams figured out the Suns and Warriors like this:
How do we stop the fast break from killing us?
By making shots. Hard to run when you're inbounding the ball.
And how do we make those shots?
We turn their strengths (speed and perimeter shooting) into a weakness (no interior defense).

Posted by Gold Star for Robot Boy | February 7, 2008 7:35 PM

The Wizards aren't going to win as presently constituted, either, but that doesn't mean Ernie Grunfeld should go do something ridiculous.

That's not really the argument though Matt, unless you must oversimplify things for the sake of the blog. Of course you shouldn't just do trades to do them, because you're not going to win anyway, but there's more to this Phoenix trade than that.

Obviously, there is a huge risk, but the Suns are on the edge of winning a championship, and the Wizards are not, and what is holding the Suns back, especially with the arrival of Gasol and emergence of Bynum, along with the everpresent Tim Duncan, is size.

Shaq provides size, and the risk is whether he can stay healthy, play up to expectations and fit into the Suns offense. Yes, there is risk, but there are reasons why the Suns took it:

1. Nash is getting older, with the back issues, the Suns window is going to close in the next few years;

2. Marion was unhappy, would not have resigned with them, probably would have opted out, and currently is not a difference maker for them in the postseason;

3. Because Marion was unhappy, there were chemistry problems in Phoenix, in the locker room, and the Suns were also wasting talent in Boris Diaw who was stuck on the bench;

4. Suns already have very capable guys in Grant Hill and Diaw to man the 3 spot, but have a gaping hole at C, even though Amare plays alright there, so with this trade, what they lose in Marion will be more than made up for by Hill and Diaw taking over his spot, Amare being even more lethal playing at PF, and Shaq playing at C as long as he's healthy;

5. Diaw is more effective with more minutes, very effective actually, and will now be a full-time player at SF and PF;

6. Shaq will bring a huge amount of money into the organization, Marion was not bringing, in added interest, merchandising, mojo, attention, hype, etc. - this is a guaranteed financial winner for Phoenix regardless whether they win or lose as long as Shaq doesn't crumble.

So, as can be seen with the points just mentioned, there is much more to this than "well the Suns weren't going to win anyway", and there is no comparison to the Wizards in any way, shape or form, especially since the Suns are on the edge of a championship, while the Wizards are not.

Posted by Jimm | February 7, 2008 8:36 PM

I should add that it's really Amare taking over Marion's spot, at PF, with Grant Hill remaining the starter at SF, and Boris Diaw now becoming a full-time player at both SF and PF (and probably some C too depending on matchups).

Also, the Suns have been trying to dump Marcus Banks' contract for awhile, so that's another positive for them.

I'm the first to admit this could blow up in the Suns faces if Shaq lays an egg, but knowing Shaq and how his mind works, his motivations, I seriously doubt that's going to happen considering his new team's primary rival is the Lakers.

In the end, the Suns just weren't constructed all that great with Amare at C and Marion at PF. No team would probably ever win it all with Marion at PF, so rolling the dice and getting rid of him is probably a wise move, especially since it cleans up the chemistry and locker room issues and brings in a guaranteed revenue stream in Shaq.

There may have been other deals for Marion, like for Kirilenko, but this would again leave them with a PF who is probably not big enough to get it done at a championship level, so it's easy to question the Suns, especially if you're down on Shaq at the moment, but you have to believe they did their due diligence, and guys like D'Antoni, Nash and Amare know they're on the edge of a title, so wouldn't give the blessing for this unless they thought it was a good risk to take.

Posted by Jimm | February 7, 2008 8:46 PM

The best defense I can come up with for the trade is this (and it's not very good): they're not looking at value exchanged; they're looking at western conference match ups and reconfiguring their nucleus accordingly. N.O. has two good bigs and a great guard, L.A. has two good bigs and a great guard, now Phoenix has two good bigs and a great guard. And arguably, the Suns now have best three players of those three teams--N.O. isn't really in the conversation, I like Stoudamire over Gasol, and the other two match ups with the Lakers are basically pushes. Without Shaq, they can be eaten alive by the better front lines in the playoffs. Now they're daring the Lakers to beat them with Lamar Odom. And I'm not sure they necessarily lose a whole lot in rebounding or defensively making due with Diaw, and they gain speed if they get Barbosa more minutes. Also S.A. fixing themselves on their home floor last week seems to have been a trigger. They've basically re-configured themselves so that, if it's the Spurs in the playoffs, Ginobli or Parker will have to beat them instead of Duncan going off everytime. This entire line of reasoning give Shaq far more credit than he deserves as a defender these days, but I can strain very hard to see the logic on paper.

Posted by MSB | February 7, 2008 10:01 PM

I gotta say I like the deal, and not just because I'm a Heat fan. The beauty of Shaq is his massive frame. You can't go over him and you can't go through him. You must go around him. The skinny big men in the West are going to have a tough time dealing with him. With Shaq, the Suns will be able to attack any style of play and compete at every tempo. They can shoot and get to the rim; they can run or lock you down in the half court; they have Nash on the perimeter, Shaq in the lane, and Amare on the baseline. All Phoenix needs from Shaq is his passing and some running. I don't think he's too old for that. If Shaq can get to the lane by the time the Suns shoot the ball, he'll create rebounds for others.

My question is should Miami trade Matrix or Haslem? I have the feeling Haslem will be exposed without Shaq in the middle setting him up. On the other hand, I'm not too excited about a locker room cancer who comes in at only $3 mill under Shaq's number.

Posted by Just Karl | February 7, 2008 10:51 PM

The trade is going to bring the Suns a championship -yes, you read it here first. This is a great trade. What am I smoking, you ask? Let me explain:

Once you’ve constructed a top-tier NBA team like the Suns, complete with a two-time MVP, a budding superstar power forward and solid shooters and slashers, there is one thing that will keep it from taking home the O’Brien Trophy: chemistry. It is intangible and unquantifiable which means most people ignore its importance. But there are only twelve guys on a basketball team. One rotten apple can ruin everything. Shawn Marion was that apple.

As for Shaq screwing up the Suns high-octance offense, that is a just a bunch of crap. You can still run with four guys. And if nothing is there, then just wait for the big guy. More importantly, for the first time in his career Shaq will be playing with a great point guard (perhaps the best of all time, but that is another post). Nash will get Shaq the ball where he can do something with it rather than having to create shots on his own.

If you’re looking for a comparison, think early 1980s L.A. Lakers. The Showtime offense worked just fine with Kareem strolling up the court in case Magic couldn’t find a cutter for a dunk or a layup. Here is a breakdown

*Magic Johnson - Steve Nash (toss-up)
*James Worthy - Amare Stoudamire (toss-up)
*Byron Scott - Leandro Barbosa/Raja Bell (I would take Barbosa)
*Michael Copper - Grant Hill (Coop could shut down anyone, so sorry Grant)
*Kareem - Shaq (We’ll see)

Before the trade, the Suns would have gotten killed by either Worthy or Kareem -exactly what keeps happening to them against the Spurs. After the trade, the Suns match up well against one of the greatest teams of all time.

Posted by Murraymises | February 7, 2008 11:09 PM

If I wasn't totally convinced by the time I fell asleep last night - today's combination of Shaq's press conference, the above Scoop Jackson link and Gold Star for Robot Boy's dazzling number crunching (seriously, that guy should be a pollster; maybe he is) have now totally brought me around.

You go Shaq. Show them haters. Show them all.

One more thing: Marion is indeed a great, versatile player - but how is he going to perform offensively now that Nash is no longer feeding him the ball?

Posted by wu tang | February 8, 2008 1:27 AM

Marion is going to probably take a big offensive hit in Miami. He needs a good PG to feed him the ball (he has a hard time creating for himself) and he's not going to find that in Wade.

Posted by ben | February 8, 2008 3:13 AM

if dave berri hates this trade too, I might need to reevaluate my own position...

Posted by Pooh | February 8, 2008 4:35 AM

The more I think about this trade, the more I think maybe Steve Kerr isn't crazy. I think it's likely this was a disaster, but there's maybe a 20% chance it will work. Anyway, Steve Nash is awesome, but whoever said he's a toss-up with Magic Johnson is nuts. Also nuts: whoever said putting Diaw in for Marion won't hurt them much on defense and rebounding.

Defense is the main reason this trade scares me. Without Marion, the Suns have one player who's a competent on-ball defender: Raja Bell. They have no one who can guard a moderately mobile big man. Even in his prime, you never saw Shaq matched up with Duncan.

At least I was right about one thing: Chris Webber is a terrible fit for the Warriors. And I still hate his guts.

Posted by too many steves | February 8, 2008 11:35 AM

The main problems I can see with Berri's approach, now that I've a moment to go read it, and I do appreciate his analysis generally, is twofold:

1. Though I know he's aware of it, just not mentioning it in every post, Wins Produced today will not necessarily be Wins Produced tomorrow, or come playoffs time or Finals, and I've always believed that the Celtics would come back down to earth a little bit, especially with their limited depth (and I don't mean KG's injury, which I did not expect);

2. The Suns really aren't/weren't worried about matching up with the Celtics, who they would have matched up with fine with Marion on the team. Instead, they're worried about getting out of the West, and into the Finals, where anything can happen, and where Kendrick Perkins doesn't frighten anyone, so Amare matches up with KG, Skinner and Diaw match up with Perkins, Marion matches up with Pierce, Raja Bell and Barbosa match up with Ray Allen, and Nash matches up with Rondo.

Guess what? The Phoenix Suns probably kick the Celtics butt in that series, but unfortunately would likely never get there, since not being big enough to beat the Lakers or Spurs, possibly even the similarly big teams like Houston, Utah and Denver if they get healthy/hot come postseason.

Posted by Jimm | February 8, 2008 2:04 PM