PDA

View Full Version : Amare told the Suns to choose Nash over Kobe



Swashcuff
09-02-2010, 12:20 PM
http://www.azcentral.com/sports/suns/articles/2010/09/01/20100901phoenix-suns-amare-reflects.html#ixzz0yNo9E0gh


Wednesday was like any early September day at US Airways Center the past eight years.

Always an early-summer arrival, Amar'e Stoudemire was working out in the training room, playing informal games with some Suns and leaving last after a rigorous individual session.

Even though he wore Suns shorts, he was just visiting an old home now that he's a member of the New York Knicks. It is a common open-door policy for NBA players to work out in opposing arenas, but Stoudemire did not expect to find a game to join, and he needed to borrow shorts.

Three months after signing a five-year, $99.7 million deal with New York, Stoudemire, who played eight years with Phoenix, said he is not used to his new life. But he has no hard feelings about his departure.

Managing Partner Robert Sarver offered him a five-year, $96.6 million contract with $56 million guaranteed and the rest kicking in if Stoudemire logged significant minutes in the third and fourth years.

"It was fair from Robert's standpoint," Stoudemire said. "I understand his concerns, which were injuries and health. There are no hard feelings at all. From a security standpoint for myself and with as much work as I put in on the court, I was after a greater goal. It was a fair offer from his standpoint. We still talk and have a good friendship.

"The greater goal was to have a sense of security. I didn't want a football deal (with some or all of the money non-guaranteed). I want a NBA deal. That's what I ended up getting."

Stoudemire said he had not heard of such a contract structure, which Sarver said required Stoudemire to play 2,200 minutes (26.8 minutes per game for 82 appearances) in each of the third and fourth years.

Stoudemire entered his first free agency with two priorities: staying in Phoenix and pursuing a championship. Picking New York was a step away from both.

"My goal is to do what I did here in Phoenix - to rebuild," Stoudemire said. "The year we traded Stephon (Marbury), Penny (Hardaway) and Googs (Tom Gugliotta), the next year we rebuilt.

"The question ownership asked to me was, 'Who do I want - Jason Kidd, Steve Nash or Kobe Bryant?' I said Steve. Over Kobe. At the time, Kobe had a reputation for being selfish and Steve was the ultimate point guard. I felt like that's what we needed. We had Joe Johnson and Shawn Marion. We just didn't have a PG to control tempo. Kidd was banged up after microfracture (knee surgery)."

Stoudemire, also a microfracture success story, had medical and training information shared with Knicks staff. He worked out on the court with New York assistant Phil Weber, who served on Mike D'Antoni's Suns staff.

When D'Antoni left for New York in 2008, Stoudemire criticized how little D'Antoni coached defense and talked to him.

"It definitely changed," Stoudemire said. "We communicate more. I'm more mature than I was at 22 or 23. Studying defense over the past couple years helped, and I'm a better defensive player. He's committed to it, but the main thing is for us as players to commit to it."

Stoudemire was a co-star ever since Nash's 2004 arrival but now has downgraded to Raymond Felton for his point guard.

"I was pretty good for the three years before we got Steve," Stoudemire said. "We're going to be OK. These young guys are not quite used to working hard. We're going to get them over the hump.

"We can be as good as we want to be. In order to be a great leader, you must follow first. I've been able to follow Steve, Grant Hill, Shaquille O'Neal and Penny. Now I feel it's time for me to lead these young guys to success."

bigsams50
09-02-2010, 12:22 PM
Had they Kept JJ and Marion then ok. But they didnt. So they shoudla gotten Kobe

sep11ie
09-02-2010, 12:24 PM
I thought all NBA contracts were guaranteed cash. Does he have option years or something?

rhymeratic
09-02-2010, 12:25 PM
That's what I'm talking about Amare! Let's GO!

NYKalltheway
09-02-2010, 12:25 PM
I'm pretty sure he means that Nash could be valuable to any team while Kobe needs the right pieces around him to perform like the superstar he is. Not saying Nash doesn't need great players around him, but it's much easier for a passing PG to have success with just one great scoring big man ;)

KnicksorBust
09-02-2010, 12:25 PM
It's interesting that the Suns ownership even thought they could get Kobe.

Jays Claw
09-02-2010, 12:25 PM
Don't you just miss that core of Marion, Stoudemire, Nash, Diaw and Barbosa?

llemon
09-02-2010, 12:26 PM
I guess it's possible that story is true, but I find it hard to believe.

stejay
09-02-2010, 12:26 PM
Except if you read it, it was for more selfish reasons, as he would see more ball with Nash than he would with Kobe....he even says that in the article

stejay
09-02-2010, 12:27 PM
Don't you just miss that core of Marion, Stoudemire, Nash, Diaw and Barbosa?

add Shaq, and they should have at least 1 ring.... but they dont.

Swashcuff
09-02-2010, 12:28 PM
It's interesting that the Suns ownership even thought they could get Kobe.

THIS!

Same exact thing I was thinking. I mean obviously IF they had a shot at getting him it may have cost them JJ and Marion/Amare, for the very least.

blams
09-02-2010, 12:29 PM
:laugh2:

llemon
09-02-2010, 12:30 PM
add Shaq, and they should have at least 1 ring.... but they dont.

Shaq couldn 't even get them into the playoffs

stejay
09-02-2010, 12:33 PM
=llemon;14768144]Shaq couldn 't even get them into the playoffs



However, in 28 regular-season games, O'Neal averaged 12.9 points and 10.6 rebounds in his first year with the Suns reaching the playoffs


from Wikipedia.......

Swashcuff
09-02-2010, 12:34 PM
Shaq couldn 't even get them into the playoffs

the Shaq of 05-06 couldn't get them into the playoffs?

U MAD?

Hawkeye15
09-02-2010, 12:37 PM
Amare didn't want his shot attempts cut into probably haha

stejay
09-02-2010, 12:40 PM
This is just exhibit a of Amare being incredibly selfish

king4day
09-02-2010, 12:46 PM
Had they Kept JJ and Marion then ok. But they didnt. So they shoudla gotten Kobe

The Suns never had a realistic shot at Bryant. Until this interview, the reasoning behind the Suns going after Nash was, they didn't believe Kobe was leaving and didn't want to lose out on Nash.
It was 100% the right move instead of coming away with nothing.

Avenged
09-02-2010, 12:47 PM
How'd that turn out for the Suns? Amare/Kobe is like Shaq/Kobe only less, less dominant :p

llemon
09-02-2010, 12:48 PM
the Shaq of 05-06 couldn't get them into the playoffs?

U MAD?

'08-'09 Shaq couldn't get them into the playoffs.

Who would they have traded to get '05-'06 Shaq?

Swashcuff
09-02-2010, 12:48 PM
This is just exhibit a of Amare being incredibly selfish

actually not. He gave good reasoning as to why he said what he said. At the time in his mind it seemed as the right thing to do.

king4day
09-02-2010, 12:49 PM
Don't you just miss that core of Marion, Stoudemire, Nash, Diaw and Barbosa?

I miss Nash, Amar'e, Marion, and Joe Johnson, Q-Rich more. If that quartet stayed together, ya never know what coulda happend.

stejay
09-02-2010, 12:50 PM
'08-'09 Shaq couldn't get them into the playoffs.

Who would they have traded to get '05-'06 Shaq?

The 08 Suns made the Playoffs with Shaq/.............

Swashcuff
09-02-2010, 12:50 PM
'08-'09 Shaq couldn't get them into the playoffs.

Who would they have traded to get '05-'06 Shaq?

the prevoius post was talking about their core of Diaw, Marion, Nash etc of the 05-06 season. Put that Shaq on that team and they'd be contenders thats how i interpreted the meaning. Oh and they could have gotten that Shaq quite easily for Amare and Marion which would have been too much.

llemon
09-02-2010, 12:50 PM
from Wikipedia.......

Shaq played 28 games for Suns in '07-'08.

Suns 17-11 with Shaq, 38-16 without him.

Shaq didn't get Suns into playoffs. Suns got Shaq into the playoffs.

stejay
09-02-2010, 12:51 PM
actually not. He gave good reasoning as to why he said what he said. At the time in his mind it seemed as the right thing to do.

But, he does say Kobe was known to be more selfish so he chose Nash.... read that. That would imply, in my mind, that he wants the more looks he would get from being with Nash rather than Kobe

Swashcuff
09-02-2010, 12:53 PM
But, he does say Kobe was known to be more selfish so he chose Nash.... read that. That would imply, in my mind, that he wants the more looks he would get from being with Nash rather than Kobe

I see your point.

stejay
09-02-2010, 12:53 PM
Shaq played 28 games for Suns in '07-'08.

Suns 17-11 with Shaq, 38-16 without him.

Shaq didn't get Suns into playoffs. Suns got Shaq into the playoffs.

it was mostly the same team the year later:facepalm: Shaq obviously didnt get them to the playoffs in 08, but he wasnt why they didnt in 09. So did Shaq go to the playoffs in 08 or not???? Plus, thought you didnt use stats. Im sure wins and losses are stats.....

saintl2510
09-02-2010, 12:56 PM
kobe was never going to leave the lakers he was just pressuring them to surround him with talent

llemon
09-02-2010, 12:59 PM
it was mostly the same team the year later:facepalm: Shaq obviously didnt get them to the playoffs in 08, but he wasnt why they didnt in 09. So did Shaq go to the playoffs in 08 or not???? Plus, thought you didnt use stats. Im sure wins and losses are stats.....

Wins and losses are what the game is about.

'07-'08 team was a playoff team without Shaq (38-16).

The acquired Shaq, who made them a worse team (17-11), but they still made the playoffs. I would not call that Shaq getting Suns into the playoffs.

In Shaq's one full season with the Suns, the Suns did not make te playoffs

topdog
09-02-2010, 01:00 PM
Except if you read it, it was for more selfish reasons, as he would see more ball with Nash than he would with Kobe....he even says that in the article

He said Kobe was a ballhog which was true at the time. Plus, I keep reflecting back on what a good team Phoenix had with Nash, Johnson, Marion and Amare until Johnson got injured and left to be "the guy."

stejay
09-02-2010, 01:03 PM
Wins and losses are what the game is about.

'07-'08 team was a playoff team without Shaq (38-16).

The acquired Shaq, who made them a worse team (17-11), but they still made the playoffs. I would not call that Shaq getting Suns into the playoffs.

In Shaq's one full season with the Suns, the Suns did not make te playoffs

I didnt say Shaq got them to the playoffs did I???? I said, and I quote,
So did Shaq go to the playoffs in 08 or not????
He was. I saw him. I didnt say HE got them there, I just said he made the playoffs with the Suns, something you denied. Plus, wins and losses are stats. 61-21 are just numbers, but if you know they are NBA stats, you will say thats 61 wins and 21 losses. So they are stats

stejay
09-02-2010, 01:04 PM
He said Kobe was a ballhog which was true at the time. Plus, I keep reflecting back on what a good team Phoenix had with Nash, Johnson, Marion and Amare until Johnson got injured and left to be "the guy."

I get what your saying here, which was kinda true at the time. But his comments, and how he said them are what I am getting at here.

pebloemer
09-02-2010, 01:05 PM
Hindsight is 20/20, but hard to argue with his logic here.

Nash won two MVP's over Kobe in his time in Phoenix. They were consistently competitive in the West. Obviously we all know how it ended, with 0 rings for Phoenix and multiple rings for the Lakers, but Kobe has evolved since the time these comments were made.

llemon
09-02-2010, 01:06 PM
I didnt say Shaq got them to the playoffs did I???? I said, and I quote,
He was. I saw him. I didnt say HE got them there, I just said he made the playoffs with the Suns, something you denied. Plus, wins and losses are stats. 61-21 are just numbers, but if you know they are NBA stats, you will say thats 61 wins and 21 losses. So they are stats

And I originaly said "Shaq could not get them (the Suns) into the playoffs"

jasondrobinson
09-02-2010, 01:07 PM
makes sense,amare is a player who likes/needs his touches why not choose a credible point guard rather than a shooting guard who was ball dominant (with good reason)

stejay
09-02-2010, 01:10 PM
And I originaly said "Shaq could not get them (the Suns) into the playoffs"

08-09 Shaq couldnt get them into the playoffs ..... Didnt realize Shaq wasnt there in 08, and that he was the sole reason the Suns never made it to the playoffs in 09.... Obviously you made the comment to troll, and guess what, you caught a bite!

llemon
09-02-2010, 01:19 PM
08-09 Shaq couldnt get them into the playoffs ..... Didnt realize Shaq wasnt there in 08, and that he was the sole reason the Suns never made it to the playoffs in 09.... Obviously you made the comment to troll, and guess what, you caught a bite!

Just stating the facts. Shaq is not the God some of you make him out to be.

He is certainly one of the top 5 Centers of all-time, and for quite a few years, was the best Center playing in the NBA.

But he ain't a God.

still1ballin
09-02-2010, 01:21 PM
lolz

shep33
09-02-2010, 01:22 PM
I think Kobe would average 40ppg in that Suns offense. But lets be honest, all bigs want a pg to play with rather than a shooting guard. All of us who played the 4 or 5 in our lives know that we like/need the ball, so of course he'd want a pg. So would any other big.

IndyRealist
09-02-2010, 01:26 PM
I thought all NBA contracts were guaranteed cash. Does he have option years or something?

They can all be garuanteed. They don't have to be.

thephoenixson28
09-02-2010, 01:40 PM
The suns couldve realisticly had Kobe,Nash and Amare. When Kobe demanded a trade he wanted to go to Chicago,New York, or Phoenix. If traded to the suns the lakers wanted Joe Johnson and Marion. But the suns didn't budge.

stejay
09-02-2010, 01:43 PM
Just stating the facts. Shaq is not the God some of you make him out to be.

He is certainly one of the top 5 Centers of all-time, and for quite a few years, was the best Center playing in the NBA.

But he ain't a God.

wow... backup the truck WTF man??? Where have I said any of that.....:facepalm:

DisturbedFTW83
09-02-2010, 01:46 PM
He's right in my opinion. All big guys need a great point guard to help them get the ball and do pick and rolls to perfection. Kobe would have just beasted his own team in shooting the ball, ego's would have collided and thus, trading away Amare somewhere (ala Shaq). Honestly, the Lakers and fans would have sold their souls to keep Kobe there. There was no way Phoenix would have landed Kobe. Amare is the guy now in NY. He's got a legit point guard in Felton up there. And a coach who knows will get plays in for him. Whatever he says may be the truth. But I don't think he's dissing Kobe, he's just saying Nash (who was drafted by the suns btw) was the better fit, he was a need.

DisturbedFTW83
09-02-2010, 01:50 PM
The suns couldve realisticly had Kobe,Nash and Amare. When Kobe demanded a trade he wanted to go to Chicago,New York, or Phoenix. If traded to the suns the lakers wanted Joe Johnson and Marion. But the suns didn't budge.

If that is true. Wow, suns FO missed on that. But Johnson and Marion were both beasts at the time (JJ still is beast btw). Nash, Kobe, Bell(?), Amare and whoever center they had at the time. That's a pretty nice big 3 right there. Actually, both teams would have benefited off that trade. Lakers get JJ and Marion, they had Fisher and Shaq at the time too? I don't know but that would have been a blockbuster times 2 trade there! Got all hyped over that trade that never happened...

llemon
09-02-2010, 01:51 PM
wow... backup the truck WTF man??? Where have I said any of that.....:facepalm:

Obviously no one said that.

But it's always, "And if they had Shaq".

Shaq ain't all that anymore.

Hasn't been all that since his last Title, which Wade was more responsible for than Shaq.

That's what I'm saying.

stejay
09-02-2010, 02:00 PM
Obviously no one said that.

But it's always, "And if they had Shaq".

Shaq ain't all that anymore.

Hasn't been all that since his last Title, which Wade was more responsible for than Shaq.

That's what I'm saying.

THEY are sayin 04-05 Shaq..... who was just about to win a championship...Not Shaq now, Shaq then

llemon
09-02-2010, 02:02 PM
THEY are sayin 04-05 Shaq..... who was just about to win a championship...Not Shaq now, Shaq then

Well, someone said '05-'06 Shaq, and I asked what would it have taken Suns to have traded for Shaq back then, or was Shaq going to be a gift from Stern?

Da Knicks
09-02-2010, 02:04 PM
Amare will make the knicks relevant...

llemon
09-02-2010, 02:15 PM
Amare will make the knicks relevant...

Congrats

ChiSox219
09-02-2010, 02:18 PM
Don't you just miss that core of Marion, Stoudemire, Nash, Diaw and Barbosa?

They were fun to watch.

stejay
09-02-2010, 02:37 PM
Well, someone said '05-'06 Shaq, and I asked what would it have taken Suns to have traded for Shaq back then, or was Shaq going to be a gift from Stern?

That makes no sense....

RaiderLakersA's
09-02-2010, 02:37 PM
The suns couldve realisticly (sic) had Kobe, Nash and Amare. When Kobe demanded a trade he wanted to go to Chicago, New York, or Phoenix. If traded to the suns the lakers wanted Joe Johnson and Marion. But the suns didn't budge.

Which is why everyone to a man in the Suns' front office should have had their heads examined.

I don't fault them for picking Nash over Kobe. I don't fault them for seeking the counsel of Amar'e, their star player. All prudent choices. But if you have a chance to build a team with a core of Nash, Amar'e and Kobe, you make that deal.

Yes, even with a selfish Kobe. At that time he was still a better all around player on both sides of the court than Matrix and Joe Johnson combined. A core of Nash, Amar'e and Kobe would have not just made the playoffs, but likely competed for and won a championship. Given the goal, a little volatility in the locker room isn't necessarily a bad thing.

As it turned out, they opted for a ride on the good ship Lollipop, had an incredible harmony and production with Nash and Stoudemire, but have zero rings to show for it. Maybe they can frame this article -- well articulated by Amar'e, by the way -- and keep THAT in their trophy case???

stejay
09-02-2010, 02:39 PM
Amare will make the knicks relevant...

He will be a piece in the puzzle...they need one more piece I think though. I like Azubuike and Gallinari, but you guys need a lot more than that to be relevant again

thephoenixson28
09-02-2010, 02:59 PM
Which is why everyone to a man in the Suns' front office should have had their heads examined.

I don't fault them for picking Nash over Kobe. I don't fault them for seeking the counsel of Amar'e, their star player. All prudent choices. But if you have a chance to build a team with a core of Nash, Amar'e and Kobe, you make that deal.

Yes, even with a selfish Kobe. At that time he was still a better all around player on both sides of the court than Matrix and Joe Johnson combined. A core of Nash, Amar'e and Kobe would have not just made the playoffs, but likely competed for and won a championship. Given the goal, a little volatility in the locker room isn't necessarily a bad thing.

As it turned out, they opted for a ride on the good ship Lollipop, had an incredible harmony and production with Nash and Stoudemire, but have zero rings to show for it. Maybe they can frame this article -- well articulated by Amar'e, by the way -- and keep THAT in their trophy case???The suns gave a offer to kobe. They offered him 100 million for 5 years if he didn't except it within a certain amount of days that's when they went after Nash. So it's not like they didn't make a offer to get Kobe.

stejay
09-02-2010, 03:03 PM
The suns gave a offer to kobe. They offered him 100 million for 5 years if he didn't except it within a certain amount of days that's when they went after Nash. So it's not like they didn't make a offer to get Kobe.

Because Kobe never really intended to leave LA.... he was calling their bluff to give him more tools to work with, rightly so IMO, and got them, and gave LA 2 more rings and counting in the process. Thats why they never, IMO, had a chance of actually landing Kobe

thephoenixson28
09-02-2010, 03:23 PM
Because Kobe never really intended to leave LA.... he was calling their bluff to give him more tools to work with, rightly so IMO, and got them, and gave LA 2 more rings and counting in the process. Thats why they never, IMO, had a chance of actually landing Kobe Yeah so technically the suns front office isn't that stupid, so amares comments are pointless, the suns weren't going to get him anyways that's why they got Nash. But if they did imagine
Pg.
Sg.Joe Johnson
Sf.Kobe
Pf.Marion
C.Amare

in the run n gun system

Sly Guy
09-02-2010, 05:22 PM
everyone always prefers to play with team players.
:hide:

stejay
09-02-2010, 05:32 PM
everyone always prefers to play with team players.
:hide:

Yea, hope Phoenix enjoys those rings they won the last two years with Kobe.... oh, hang on.....

Point is, Kobe has turned into a hell of a team player, and two rings are showing that very nicely indeed

valade16
09-02-2010, 05:38 PM
Yea, hope Phoenix enjoys those rings they won the last two years with Kobe.... oh, hang on.....

Point is, Kobe has turned into a hell of a team player, and two rings are showing that very nicely indeed

Funny how when he the Lakers went out and got Gasol, Odom, Artest, Ariza, and Bynum that Kobe became a "team player" but before them he was selfish.

Might it have more to do with the team than the player? :eyebrow:

That being said Kobe is arguably the greatest and best player playing basketball right now, who wouldn't want to play with that?

xM1GSx
09-02-2010, 05:44 PM
who cares it was in the past

kswissdaf
09-02-2010, 05:46 PM
Think about when u play b ball u never want to be on the ball hogs team cause its not fun

SteveNash
09-02-2010, 05:46 PM
I like how this thread is filled with LA ignorance.

Raps18-19 Champ
09-02-2010, 05:49 PM
Except if you read it, it was for more selfish reasons, as he would see more ball with Nash than he would with Kobe....he even says that in the article

What's the point though if it's not going to help your team though. They didn't have a PG and they had Marion and JJ at PG.

Kashmir13579
09-02-2010, 09:31 PM
great read. amares the man.

Enemey
09-02-2010, 09:54 PM
If the Suns had Nash, Kobe, and Amar'e they would've easily defeated the Spurs and would've won multiple titles because Kobe OWNS them in the playoffs. When the Lakers were going for a 3peat start of the Decade it was Kobe who was shittin on the Spurs.

Duncan = Donkey
09-02-2010, 09:55 PM
Thank God, couldnt stand Kobe Bryant on the Suns.

Evolution23
09-02-2010, 10:02 PM
If the Suns had Nash, Kobe, and Amar'e they would've easily defeated the Spurs and would've won multiple titles because Kobe OWNS them in the playoffs. When the Lakers were going for a 3peat start of the Decade it was Kobe who was shittin on the Spurs.

U can't say that. Its one or the other. Either Nash or Kobe, not both. Don't forget the suns were 2 suspensions away from the finals.

llemon
09-02-2010, 10:10 PM
If the Suns had Nash, Kobe, and Amar'e they would've easily defeated the Spurs and would've won multiple titles because Kobe OWNS them in the playoffs. When the Lakers were going for a 3peat start of the Decade it was Kobe who was shittin on the Spurs.

Start of the decade Kobe was playing alongside he best Center in the game.

And the last thing Kobe wants is a real PG.

Enemey
09-02-2010, 10:11 PM
U can't say that. Its one or the other. Either Nash or Kobe, not both. Don't forget the suns were 2 suspensions away from the finals.

Well someone pointed out when Kobe demanded a trade and one of the places he would like to go to is PHX, and the lakers wanted Joe Johnson and Marion but I guess PHX didn't want it?

Enemey
09-02-2010, 10:14 PM
Start of the decade Kobe was playing alongside he best Center in the game.

And the last thing Kobe wants is a real PG.

So what? Kobe still shitted on spurs in 2008 WCF while Shaq and Suns lost to that same team.

They wanted a Spur killer thinkin Shaq was the Reason the Lakers beaat them when Shaq and Tim were a wash. The Difference maker was Kobe who 2001 game 1 on the road vs Spurs scored 45 points to then sweep them.

llemon
09-02-2010, 10:28 PM
So what? Kobe still shitted on spurs in 2008 WCF while Shaq and Suns lost to that same team.

They wanted a Spur killer thinkin Shaq was the Reason the Lakers beaat them when Shaq and Tim were a wash. The Difference maker was Kobe who 2001 game 1 on the road vs Spurs scored 45 points to then sweep them.

Yet Suns didn't want Kobe. Who would have thunk it?

king4day
09-02-2010, 10:31 PM
Which is why everyone to a man in the Suns' front office should have had their heads examined.

I don't fault them for picking Nash over Kobe. I don't fault them for seeking the counsel of Amar'e, their star player. All prudent choices. But if you have a chance to build a team with a core of Nash, Amar'e and Kobe, you make that deal.

Yes, even with a selfish Kobe. At that time he was still a better all around player on both sides of the court than Matrix and Joe Johnson combined. A core of Nash, Amar'e and Kobe would have not just made the playoffs, but likely competed for and won a championship. Given the goal, a little volatility in the locker room isn't necessarily a bad thing.

As it turned out, they opted for a ride on the good ship Lollipop, had an incredible harmony and production with Nash and Stoudemire, but have zero rings to show for it. Maybe they can frame this article -- well articulated by Amar'e, by the way -- and keep THAT in their trophy case???

I'm not sure where he heard that trade was possible, but it's the first I've heard of it.
I have a hard time believing the Suns brass turned down a chance to bring Kobe to Phoenix if it presented itself.

llemon
09-02-2010, 10:34 PM
I'm not sure where he heard that trade was possible, but it's the first I've heard of it.
I have a hard time believing the Suns brass turned down a chance to bring Kobe to Phoenix if it presented itself.

I don't believe Amare's story is true

king4day
09-02-2010, 10:35 PM
Yea, hope Phoenix enjoys those rings they won the last two years with Kobe.... oh, hang on.....

Point is, Kobe has turned into a hell of a team player, and two rings are showing that very nicely indeed

As a Laker fan, you should know better than anyone that there was 0 chance Kobe was leaving at that time.
As I've said, I have a hard time believing the Suns management would listen to Amar'e and say, "kobe or Nash?". D'Antoni would have said, get Kobe, and trade Amar'e if you have to. Kobe in his prime, on the Suns, with or without Nash, would have eventually led the team to a title.

Avenged
09-02-2010, 10:44 PM
As a Laker fan, you should know better than anyone that there was 0 chance Kobe was leaving at that time.
As I've said, I have a hard time believing the Suns management would listen to Amar'e and say, "kobe or Nash?". D'Antoni would have said, get Kobe, and trade Amar'e if you have to. Kobe in his prime, on the Suns, with or without Nash, would have eventually led the team to a title.

Yep, I believe this as well.

Management would have to be really stupid to pass up on Kobe for Nash if they even had the chance to get Kobe in the first place.

Nash really wasn't as establish at the time as he is now, Kobe on the other hand was already on top of the league or near the top.

You simply don't pass up on Kobe, bad reputation or not. He was already a 3 time champion at the time and was a major reason for it, so it's not like he was a cancer.

HakeemTheDream
09-02-2010, 11:30 PM
Would Nash be as good as he became if he wasn't playing for Phil Jackson? Last time he played without PJ (and Shaq) he missed the playoffs so I doubt it. PJ had/has A LOT to do with how good Kobe became/is

llemon
09-03-2010, 10:51 AM
That makes no sense....

Just because YOU don't understand something doesn't mean it makes no sense.

stejay
09-03-2010, 11:35 AM
Just because YOU don't understand something doesn't mean it makes no sense.

It doesnt. You took a hypothetical point from another user literally. So what you said didnt make sense

stejay
09-03-2010, 11:37 AM
Start of the decade Kobe was playing alongside he best Center in the game.

And the last thing Kobe wants is a real PG.

Hang on, what? The last thing Kobe wants is a real PG. The thread isnt about that. Its about Amare wanting a real PG, not Kobe. That statement makes no sense either

stejay
09-03-2010, 11:39 AM
As a Laker fan, you should know better than anyone that there was 0 chance Kobe was leaving at that time.
As I've said, I have a hard time believing the Suns management would listen to Amar'e and say, "kobe or Nash?". D'Antoni would have said, get Kobe, and trade Amar'e if you have to. Kobe in his prime, on the Suns, with or without Nash, would have eventually led the team to a title.

I know, which is why I said that like 2 posts above the one you quoted......

llemon
09-03-2010, 11:40 AM
Hang on, what? The last thing Kobe wants is a real PG. The thread isnt about that. Its about Amare wanting a real PG, not Kobe. That statement makes no sense either

You just can't make sense of my posts, can you.

Somehow, that makes me feel like I'm doing a good job of posting.

TheWatcher34
09-03-2010, 12:10 PM
clear case!!
..Amare knows that playing alongside Nash will contribute more towards his own stat line!
Kobe cannot set him up perfectly in pick and rolls, etc..

todu82
09-03-2010, 12:24 PM
The thing is would the Suns have won a title had Kobe been signed by them instead of Nash? Hindsight is always 20/20 in these things.

stejay
09-03-2010, 02:19 PM
You just can't make sense of my posts, can you.

Somehow, that makes me feel like I'm doing a good job of posting.

Not really, everyone else disagrees with you or ignores you... including me from now on.

llemon
09-03-2010, 02:34 PM
Not really, everyone else disagrees with you or ignores you... including me from now on.

I feel honored

CLASSOF72
09-03-2010, 03:52 PM
Wow, it's funny how some guys can totaly blow it even when they are given the choice. Reminds me od Boozer leaving the Cavs for Utah saying he didn't want to play in LeWandas shadow his whole career. Idiots.

Voodoo Alchemy
09-03-2010, 04:23 PM
Had they Kept JJ and Marion then ok. But they didnt. So they shoudla gotten Kobe

should've, could've, would've. the fact is kobe was never considering the suns so they went after nash because that deal was more realistic.

Voodoo Alchemy
09-03-2010, 04:26 PM
The thing is would the Suns have won a title had Kobe been signed by them instead of Nash? Hindsight is always 20/20 in these things.

kobe still hasn't proven he can win a title unless he has other superstars on his team. amare is a good player but he's not a superstar. the suns lacked a center and bench, that's why they couldn't win a title in 04/05.

WadeKobe
09-03-2010, 05:32 PM
kobe still hasn't proven he can win a title unless he has other superstars on his team. amare is a good player but he's not a superstar. the suns lacked a center and bench, that's why they couldn't win a title in 04/05.

No one ever has.

llemon
09-03-2010, 06:16 PM
No one ever has.

Wilt did, Hakeem did, Billups' Pistons did, Isiah's Pistons did

Swashcuff
09-03-2010, 06:16 PM
kobe still hasn't proven he can win a title unless he has other superstars on his team. amare is a good player but he's not a superstar. the suns lacked a center and bench, that's why they couldn't win a title in 04/05.

Are you serious right now?

SouljahPhil...
09-03-2010, 06:35 PM
kobe still hasn't proven he can win a title unless he has other superstars on his team. amare is a good player but he's not a superstar. the suns lacked a center and bench, that's why they couldn't win a title in 04/05.

Can you win 1 with only 1 superstar on your team nowadays? hell no!

HeaTxRipZz
09-03-2010, 08:07 PM
Wilt did, Hakeem did, Billups' Pistons did, Isiah's Pistons did

Chauncey wasn't even a allstar when they won the title. I don't see how it's possible to be a superstar and you aren't even a allstar until 2 years afterwards.

Chauncey had Rip, Sheed, Prince, Big Ben, Okur. All really good players that was a team of all team work that won them that championship dude. Prince was a defensive juggernaut at the time too

As a matter of fact the only allstar at that time on that team was Ben Wallace

llemon
09-03-2010, 09:06 PM
Chauncey wasn't even a allstar when they won the title. I don't see how it's possible to be a superstar and you aren't even a allstar until 2 years afterwards.

Chauncey had Rip, Sheed, Prince, Big Ben, Okur. All really good players that was a team of all team work that won them that championship dude. Prince was a defensive juggernaut at the time too

As a matter of fact the only allstar at that time on that team was Ben Wallace

So Billups' Pistons won a Title with NO superstars. That's less than one.

That's the point I was making

Storch
09-03-2010, 09:34 PM
Nash over Kobe? Well thats a pretty stupid decision now isnt it? All he has to do with kobe is prove that he can make it so he can be trusted and he'd get the ball everytime, ala fisher.

Storch
09-03-2010, 09:36 PM
kobe still hasn't proven he can win a title unless he has other superstars on his team. amare is a good player but he's not a superstar. the suns lacked a center and bench, that's why they couldn't win a title in 04/05.

:facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm: :facepalm:
(i hate using the face palm but wow you deserved it, even kobe haters can laugh at you right now)

Everything that I want to say to you right now would cause me to be banned so just use your imagination.

But anyway, when did players have to win with no stars around them? Is this a new rule that the NBA required to win the ship?

Storch
09-03-2010, 09:38 PM
So Billups' Pistons won a Title with NO superstars. That's less than one.

That's the point I was making

the pistons had 4 all stars

Storch
09-03-2010, 09:39 PM
Chauncey wasn't even a allstar when they won the title. I don't see how it's possible to be a superstar and you aren't even a allstar until 2 years afterwards.

Chauncey had Rip, Sheed, Prince, Big Ben, Okur. All really good players that was a team of all team work that won them that championship dude. Prince was a defensive juggernaut at the time too

As a matter of fact the only allstar at that time on that team was Ben Wallace

hey rook, theres a rule allowing only one sig. get with it.

llemon
09-03-2010, 09:39 PM
the pistons had 4 all stars

But no superstars

Storch
09-03-2010, 10:22 PM
But no superstars

Just because they had no superstar makes 4 all stars garbage? What's ur logic kid

HeaTxRipZz
09-03-2010, 10:27 PM
hey rook, theres a rule allowing only one sig. get with it.

lol @ rook....been here a good while....I mean there's also a rule on flaming but I don't see anyone following that :)

Oh also they did not have 4 allstars when they won the title......Chauncey, Rip didn't become allstars till 2006 Rasheed was a allstar before hand and became a allstar again in 2006 with them

evadatam5150
09-03-2010, 10:32 PM
Shaq couldn 't even get them into the playoffs

You mean Nash and Amare couldn't get them into the playoffs right.. It's funny how you put the load on Shaq's shoulders when it wasn't even his team.. Even now why do peeps have such a hard time finding fault or at the very least making Nash bare some of the burden of the Suns failings..?? Shaq is there for little over a full season and you blame him for the Suns not making the playoffs.. That's pretty rich..

llemon
09-03-2010, 10:58 PM
Just because they had no superstar makes 4 all stars garbage? What's ur logic kid

Follow the thread, my man.

It was stated a team couldn't win an NBA Title with only ONE superstar.

I am showing that statement to be false.

Storch
09-04-2010, 12:07 AM
lol @ rook....been here a good while....I mean there's also a rule on flaming but I don't see anyone following that :)

Oh also they did not have 4 allstars when they won the title......Chauncey, Rip didn't become allstars till 2006 Rasheed was a allstar before hand and became a allstar again in 2006 with them

You consider that flaming? You must be a sensitive guy. Just stating the rules, don't be sensitive.

Storch
09-04-2010, 12:08 AM
Follow the thread, my man.

It was stated a team couldn't win an NBA Title with only ONE superstar.

I am showing that statement to be false.

In that case, you are 100% correct and I got ur back