Was Steve Kerr Right?

A lot of proponents of the Shaq deal are now claiming vindication, but while the trade's certainly worked out better for Phoenix than I expected, I'm not at all certain they're right. Obviously, having a healthy Shaq playing right now is better than having an injured Shawn Marion not playing. But if you think, as most people do, that the Matrix could play fine were the Heat not tanking then I still don't really see it. In March, Shaq offered Phoenix 13.5 points and 10.4 rebounds whereas Marion offered Miami 13.6 points and 13.0 rebounds. Shaq turned it over more than Marion did. And if the trade helped Phoenix's interior defense, it's hurt them on the perimeter.

So, Yglesias, how do you explain the Suns' success since the trade? Well part of the answer is recalling that at the time of the trade Phoenix was sitting atop the Western Conference with a 34-14 record. It was always a really good team. But since the trade Amare's started taking more shots and so he's now scoring somewhat more points and the team's doing no better than it was previously. So while there doesn't seem to be a blunder here, once you consider the cap implications it still doesn't look so hot to me. When you consider the fact that if Phoenix's ownership had been willing to spend like this just a little while back, they could have resigned Kurt Thomas and not sold their draft picks, and they'd be in even better shape today.

Comments

it's all about the rebounds, matt. marion could grab as many rebounds as shaq, but he can't create the space and hold the big man so other guys can get boards like shaq can. that's been the main change in the suns, and it's the one they needed most. hill, diaw, barbosa, and that new white guy they signed all collectively do what marion used to do.

Posted by tnk | April 11, 2008 12:27 PM

I tend to agree with you, but remember the Suns have beaten the Spurs twice now since the Shaq trade, and seem to match up with them much better. Given that it didn't seem like the Marion Suns could beat the Spurs, the juice may be worth the squeeze.

Posted by jamie | April 11, 2008 12:28 PM

.700-ish before the trade, .633ish after. It's not clear to me that they're as good as they were before. They're just better suited to beat the Spurs. But I do seem to always be learning anew how important space-eating is. The trade looks less awful than it did at the time, but I still think it was a bad trade.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | April 11, 2008 12:31 PM

Stathead.

Posted by es | April 11, 2008 12:32 PM

You obviously didn't watch Suns v. Spurs the other night. Shaq absolutely shut down Timmy. He draws more defenders, which is a large part of why Amare gets to the basket more.

Plus, you have to consider that Marion's stats may be a distortion - he's playing on a team with no other interior presence, so he gets more chances at rebounds.

Hate to break this to you, but stat geekism completely misapprehends the nature of basketball. Some things transcend stats, and Shaq is one of those things. For what its worth, I felt the same way as you, until I saw him in action the other night. He dominated that game, even on plays where he didn't touch the ball.

Posted by C | April 11, 2008 12:36 PM

I think it's a waste of time to judge this trade before we know the outcome of the playoffs. This trade was made with only the playoffs in mind, not something as (relatively) insignificant as regular season winning percentage. Factors: Are the Spurs as good as they were last year? How do the new-look Suns match up with the new-look Lakers?

Posted by Jimmy | April 11, 2008 12:39 PM

The only thing that will hurt the Suns will be their lack of skilled coaching. D'Antoni hasn't learned a thing from his past failures in the playoffs and is still overplaying his players and failing to handle end-of-game situations. He left most of his starters in the Spurs game even though the outcome was already decided and the Spurs had pulled all their starters.

Posted by Mike | April 11, 2008 12:44 PM

Well I thought it was a bad trade at the time, but I didn't count on Shaq's resurgence. I suppose it really shouldn't have surprised everyone that Shaq could play much better on the Suns than on the Heat, but I was actually thinking back to last year's playoff loss to the Bulls when he already looked too old.

But yeah, if the Suns were willing to take on this kind of salary in years past, their team would have been absolutely loaded already.

Posted by mpowell | April 11, 2008 12:45 PM

I think tnk has it right. Shaq lets Phoenix play more styles well, frees up Amare from being doubled by a second big, and Shaq has been there, done that when it comes to winning NBA championships. As the intensity picks up in the playoffs a lot of the rebounds a high energy player like Marion gets disappear because everybody is playing with high energy. Shaq's size is a constant in the playoffs.

It's a high risk, high reward trade but I don't fault Kerr for pulling the trigger. The shame in Phoenix is that they gave away a bunch of quality 1st round picks in the past few years to save money and one of those players could have been the extra 3pt shooting perimeter player they lack in this year's model Suns.

Posted by joejoejoe | April 11, 2008 12:49 PM

And Matthew doesn't even link to my comment that goaded him into this post. Blech.

Anyway, Matthew makes some good points, but of course it is unknowable whether they could still be doing this well had they kept Marion. But it is certainly true that a lot of people expected the Suns to decline, since they believed Marion>Shaq so therefore Suns (with Marion) > Suns (with Shaq). And so the fact that, after the initial transition period, the Suns have not seemed to decline would seems to throw some cold water on the idea that Suns (with Marion) > Suns (with Shaq).

But I'm actually interested in the cap aspects Matthew references at the end of the post. My understanding is that this year, they are actually paying Shaq less than they paid Marion+Banks. (Let me know if my understadning is incorrect!) It is only in the next two years of Shaq's contract that the cap issue comes into effect - and that's only to the extent that Marion doesn't get paid once (or if) he opts out. In essence, they replaced a bad Banks contract and an unknown Marion contract with a bad Shaq contract. But since we don't know what would have happened with Marion (in fact, they could have lost him for nothing, and then they'd have a lot more cap space but would be much worse than they are now), it is difficult to say that the cap issue militates toward not getting Shaq.

Of course, all this isn't to say that they didn't make a mistake in trading those draft picks. Of course that was a mistake.

Posted by Al | April 11, 2008 1:07 PM

I much prefer the NBA but you have got to show the Caps some love. 8 straight to make the playoffs, from last to first, heck, even Lemieux is pulling for them.

Posted by Peter Driscoll | April 11, 2008 1:07 PM

If ticket sales are up, and if they sell out every playoff game, then Kerr is vindicated, at least in the eyes of the signer of the paycheck...

A lot has been said about the Suns physical trainers and/or medical staff and their efforts to improve the Diesel. If what is said is true, Shaq might have a playoff run reminiscent of years past... if so, people will be lining up to kiss Steve Kerr where the sun don't shine...

Posted by Petr | April 11, 2008 1:08 PM

If ticket sales are up, and if they sell out every playoff game, then Kerr is vindicated, at least in the eyes of the signer of the paycheck...

A lot has been said about the Suns physical trainers and/or medical staff and their efforts to improve the Diesel. If what is said is true, Shaq might have a playoff run reminiscent of years past... if so, people will be lining up to kiss Steve Kerr where the sun don't shine...

Posted by Petr | April 11, 2008 1:09 PM

I agree that it's hard to judge this trade until the playoffs.

Years upon years of watching the Nets has convinced me you need a really good post player to dominate in the playoffs. And Amare, dominant as he is, really plays more like a wing than a power forward. Shaq's given the Suns an interior presence on defense, which they've never had.

Add on to that the undeniable leadership that Shaq brings to a team. Nash has always been more of a quiet leader, and Amare is notoriously moody. Statistically, it might be an even trade, but no player does a better job of getting his teammates mentally prepared for the playoffs than Shaq. He's the best since Jordan in that regard.

I believe in stats as much as the next guy (probably more, actually), but I also realize that basketball is very much about effort and focus. And I think that adding Shaq is a HUGE upgrade to their focus. This (in theory) will show in the playoffs.

Posted by ly_yng | April 11, 2008 1:21 PM

Oh, and of course it is correct to say that the true judgement of post-trade Phoenix will be in the playoffs. But Jimmy is wrong to say that it is a "waste of time" to debate it now. What else are blogs for if not to waste time on these kind of questions?

Also, re Mike's statement that D'Antoni is an idiot because he "left most of his starters in the Spurs game even though the outcome was already decided and the Spurs had pulled all their starters". Exactly! And he left the starters in despite the fact that Phoenix has a woefuly short bench and thus ought to be resting the starters whenever they have the opportunity. On the flipside, I have been somewhat impressed with D'Antoni's ability to revise his style of play to suit the Shaq acquisition.

Posted by Al | April 11, 2008 1:23 PM

As always - bottem line . . .

The Suns could not beat the Spurs in a series before the trade . . . They can now!

Posted by Wisconsin Reader | April 11, 2008 1:31 PM

WHo ever diparaged the bball knowledge of stat geeks is corrrect. Stats are to experienced based-knolwedge as masturbation is to intercourse. This is especially true in basketball becasue there are only 5 players on a team and one player can make a huge difference in a myriad of ways, including ways that don't show up in stats.

But anyway, if you have ever played basketball at a serious level, you would be able to think back on your experiences and remember playing on teams that just worked. It's chemistry and the right combination of skills. And you will rememberr beating "better" teams. A team is more, and often less, than the sum of its parts.

I don't know if the shaq trade will work in the end. THe test is a trip to the finals. But trade was not about stats, it was about chemistry and the right combination of players. I think Steve Kerr has pretty much been vindicated as being in the ballpark. It wasn't a stupid trade. It was a really gutsy trade. It signals that Steve Kerr, at least, knows how winning teams are constructed (chemistry, right parts) and that he is not a time-serving coward. Although, didn't the owner come up with this trade?

Posted by cw | April 11, 2008 1:34 PM

Shaq offers several valuable benefits that make this trade a good idea. He's a great cheerleader while Marion was described as a locker room cancer. His presence alone turns Amare into a massive power foward rather than a small center, increasing his stats considerably. He massively reduces second-chance shots (though Marion may have picked up more rebounds than Shaq, Shaq has dramatically changed the Suns' +/- rebounds). Shaq also has acted as a coach and mentor for Amare. He also shuts down a lot of the league's big men in a way Kurt Thomas couldn't (witness the 4th quarter of the last Suns-Spurs game) and is able to help Barbosa run the offense when Nash is off the floor.

Shawn, meanwhile, is malingering like the rest of the Heat. He was never really injured (recently) with the Suns and is one of like 6 or 7 other Heat players who are riding the pine. He feels he deserves $20 million (as much as Shaq) and that's one of the reasons why he left. He was a great wing defender, but his absence has allowed Diaw to really grow as a player in his absence.

This year, with Marion, we weren't as good as we were the year before. We had to do something to change the team to make it in the playoffs or risk having Nash's career fade into obscurity. Now, we're built for the playoffs and have a couple of chances at it. Nash's and Shaq's contract expire at the same time and we should have a nice core to rebuild around then. The decision may still flop, but I feel good about it now.

Posted by ben | April 11, 2008 1:48 PM

if Phoenix's ownership had been willing to spend like this just a little while back, they could have resigned Kurt Thomas and not sold their draft picks

That's not quite right. They had Kurt Thomas under contract, at a reasonable price, and bribed Seattle to take him off their hands by offering them TWO future first round picks. Totally bonkers. All they got back was a second-round draft pick and a trade exception.

Posted by right | April 11, 2008 2:06 PM

You don't have to double Amare or Shaq. Teams that do will probably lose to the Suns. Teams that don't will probably win.

Utah can take away Shaq's space hogging with perimeter movement with Okur. New Orleans can do it with Tyson Chandler on the perimeter even though he's no threat to shoot out there.

Home losses to Detroit, Utah, and Dallas haven't really helped the Suns down the stretch. If they could take care of business at home they'd easily be the favorites in the West.

The road win at San Antonio was impressive.

Posted by Gabriel Sutherland | April 11, 2008 2:17 PM

Speculation about what they could have done with Marion is pointless - Marion hated the Suns organization, everybody hated him, he wasn't with the program, he had to go and everybody knew it. Simple as that.

Plus, Jimmy's right. This was a deal for the postseason. The only way they were going to get there with the momentum needed to exploit Shaq's usefulness in the playoffs was by shedding Marion.

Posted by UN Plaza | April 11, 2008 2:30 PM

"New Orleans can do it with Tyson Chandler on the perimeter even though he's no threat to shoot out there"

Shaq doesn't ever go out to guard a jump shooter. Rik Smits used to kill him. And if Chandler is no threat out there, then why would shaq go out there, even assuming that was something he did.

I think NO is the least likely to the top teams to make it even to the conference finals. Paul has been carrying them and in the finals people will figure out how to hold him down, plus they just don't have the experience.

Posted by cw | April 11, 2008 2:34 PM

So how about the Jason Kidd trade?

Posted by blah | April 11, 2008 2:40 PM

experience? pshaw! chris paul has been beating up on everybody, and the team is loaded. in the playoffs, teams don't play the bench anyway........

it's funny everyone's writing off the hornets, even though they've been the most constant team in the west the whole season. really, no one should be surprised to see any of the 1-7 teams in the west reach the finals, and no one should be surprised to see any of those teams lose to whoever comes out of the east.. this is gonna be the most amazing playoffs EVER (at least on paper it should be)

for the record, i root for the suns

Posted by tnk | April 11, 2008 3:01 PM

Bottom Line: They had to get Amarie and Marion split up. The issues weren't out-and-out destructive, but it has been described by numerous insiders as the sort of slow-simmering poisonous chemistry that sabotages even great teams - especially in the post season.

On top of that, it was apparently taking its toll on Nash in the lockerroom, and without their floor general in top shape, the Suns are dead in the water.

I think it was a bold management call by Kerr and will eventually be looked on favorably. They're banking on Stoudamire to really reach his potential now, which he has in outstanding fashion since the trade, and Shaq is actually a very suitable mentor for ascendent players. Shaq's offensive presence changes the whole dynamic, and anybody that saw the Suns match up with the Spurs the other night witnessed his greatest strength - he physically matched up strong with Duncan all night, and he'll be able to pull the same act on any other big men in the West that used to always get an edge on the undersized Suns.

Dealing Shaq is physically punishing, especially over a playoff series. That alone puts them in a better position for the post season than their line-up with Marion.

Posted by Shogun | April 11, 2008 3:36 PM

But since the trade Amare's started taking more shots and so he's now scoring somewhat more points...

Oh come on, Matt, are you being deliberately obtuse? No less a critic of the deal than Hollinger had this to say (stats through April 3):

In 22 games at power forward, Stoudemire has been the best player in the league. No, really, he's been that good. He has averaged 29.4 points on 58.2 percent shooting and averaged nearly 11 free-throw attempts.

For you to judge the trade via a simplistic Shaq-against-Matrix comparison... You're smarter than that. Actually, your post deserves a righteous fisking (with a shred of weak stuff like "the team's doing no better than it was previously" by highlighting the team's current play against WC playoff contenders [5-2 over the last month]) but I'm getting married in eight days so time is short.

Posted by Gold Star for Robot Boy | April 11, 2008 3:37 PM

i'm betting your placing too much emphasis on fairly meaningless games with the spurs, one in which spurs led and then went cold as they sometimes do, another in which manu was off (some abdominal thing). not saying suns may not match up better with spurs now, but those two games don't conclusively establish that the suns win a 7 game series against the spurs, who always lose a couple in every series, let alone anyone else (though phx is still really good). out west, i could see lakers, utah, dallas, new orleans, and spurs beating suns, and wouldn't be particularly surprised. i certainly didn't feel that way about the suns last year (though that may reflect improvement by other teams, rather than suns setting).

Posted by dj superflat | April 11, 2008 3:58 PM

Another nice benefit is that Shaq's entrance makes the Sun's a little less soft. The dude's got elbows of steel and can punish a team's big man over a 7-game series. Even my wife giggled a bit when he caught Oberto in that last game in PHX with a high one.

Posted by ben | April 11, 2008 4:58 PM

I don't get why people are insulting Matt for being a "stathead" or what not.

What makes this post, at least in part, so simple-minded is that he is doing such a poor job of using stats or just using stupid stats as Robot Boy pointed out.

He also apparently doesn't understand the salaries involved in the Shaq trade as pointed out by Al.

So, by all means, go after this post. Just don't lump him in with "statheads." It insults us.

Posted by Nicholas G | April 11, 2008 5:18 PM

Obviously, a stathead would realize that Phoenix is winning at a lower percentage since the Shaq trade than it was before.

So if you were going by stats - like their record - you wouldn't be saying that the trade improved them.

And frankly, I'm not sure it has.

Odds are Phoenix still loses in the first round of the playoffs, which is what they were likely to do before the trade.

Posted by Billybob | April 11, 2008 6:30 PM

Obviously, a stathead would realize that Phoenix is winning at a lower percentage since the Shaq trade than it was before.

That stathead would realize as much, if he looked at the W-L record without caring about context. Then again, if he did so, he wouldn't really be a stathead.

Phoenix's season can be broken down into four parts:

With Marion: 34-14

Post-trade but pre-Shaq: 3-2

Adjustment: 3-6*

Eureka!: 13-4

Now, what were you saying about statheads?

*-The Suns successfully installed the triangle offense during the season. D'Antoni won't receive any Coach of the Year votes, but that's a hell of a coaching accomplishment.

Posted by Gold Star for Robot Boy | April 11, 2008 7:10 PM

The Suns' record against the rest of the league will be irrelevant if/when they meet the Spurs in the playoffs.

The 2007 Suns couldn't beat the Spurs. Now they have a chance. And they're still just as good -- or almost as good -- in their other matchups. That's a successful trade. The Suns were not going to win a championship with Marion.

Posted by Robert C. | April 11, 2008 7:23 PM

^^^^^^^^ Agreed 100% with the above post. The four-part breakdown of the season was good too, but the main point to be reckoned with is that the Suns are capable of beating the Spurs in a series with Shaq. That wasn't the case before, so stats be damned - they're now a better team because they aren't inherently terminal in the post season.

The potent influence of deeply ingrained Shaq-hatred seems to prevent people from seeing this trade in perspective. Even an old, tired, and alltogether slowed-down Shaq is still a major problem for defenses (and some offenses). Marion might be dynamic, but year after year, the Sun's post-season has proved that he and Amarie weren't too strong of a combination to be dealt with.

Shaq changes everything and makes the team stronger multiple ways - awesome trade.

Posted by Yinka | April 11, 2008 8:23 PM

Some of us have vision and some of us wear Kurt Rambis-esque blogger-goggles

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.

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

Posted by Just Karl | April 11, 2008 9:02 PM

Is it so important that the Suns beat the Spurs? Can they also beat the Jazz, Hornets, and Lakers? The Celtics? I'm not looking at the seeding at the moment, but they've got to get through more than one team in the playoffs, and it's not clear to me that the Spurs are the best of those teams-- not anymore.

Posted by ? | April 11, 2008 9:11 PM

? at 9:11pm -

Jazz, Hornets and Lakers have Boozer, Chandler and (soon) Bynum. Shaq is more effective defending against those guys than Amaré-qua-center would be. Marion probably couldn't cover those guys (maybe he could give Boozer some trouble)

Against the East, Shaq is less effective. Marion would be useful defending against Garnett or Rasheed.

Posted by nbt | April 11, 2008 9:28 PM

Funny that all the pundits were proclaiming the Death of Shaq in December-January and now he's everybody's darling again.

Posted by nbt | April 11, 2008 9:37 PM