He probably would have tried, but never would have succeeded. JC had become just about the most powerful man in basketball and would never allow the Suns to be moved as long as he was living.
Devin Booker is the greatest player EVER in Suns history
- Thread starter BirdGangThing
- Start date
Carolinacacti
Hall of Famer
It’s Booker. In the modern era
Proximo
ASFN Icon
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2015
- Posts
- 12,169
- Reaction score
- 9,879
It's Booker in any era and I don't even think it's very close at this point.
Even without diving into stats.
Nash and Barkley were never a Sun for their lifetime.
Only Barkley and Book made a finals appearance.
The sad part is the state of the NBA, where Book hasn't received many accolades in the form of MVP's, all NBA or all star appearances. In fact there's the narrative that he's not a superstar, and is also hated on in social media.
Carolinacacti
Hall of Famer
Hawkins was the better player
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2004
- Posts
- 36,038
- Reaction score
- 14,903
Connie was the most gifted player that ever wore a Phoenix uniform and he seemingly could dominate whenever he wanted to. But he was never quite the same once he was finally allowed into the NBA at the age of 27.
Players that had played with or against him prior to joining Phoenix tend to rank him in the top 5 or top 10 of all time but I don't think he ever consistently played at that level in the NBA other than for short stretches.
- Joined
- May 13, 2002
- Posts
- 37,007
- Reaction score
- 21,615
He hurt his knee and had surgery the year before he joined the Suns. Surgery and rehab was not nearly as good back then.
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2004
- Posts
- 36,038
- Reaction score
- 14,903
Yeah I knew about the knee but we got so little information in that era, I had no idea of the extent of his injury/recovery. He was easily my favorite player back then but all the old timers (that I interacted with) used to rip him regularly for what they perceived as a lack of effort.
OP
OP
BirdGangThing
Casual Fan
whatever doesn't kill you makes you stronger?
He would’ve demanded a trade. Kyrie always been the second man on a winning team so he accepted his role.
Bufalay
ASFN Lifer
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2006
- Posts
- 4,674
- Reaction score
- 777
What about Shaq? Are you saying Hawkins was the most gifted during his time on the Suns? It's unclear from your post, but since I never saw him play I'm curious if you think Hawkins was more gifted than Shaq.
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2004
- Posts
- 36,038
- Reaction score
- 14,903
I debated this as I typed my post. I never really got to see Connie at his best except for highlights on ABC's Wide World of Sports. He was incredible at times when he first signed with the Suns but he wasn't always as engaged (perhaps due to injury?). I saw more greatness first hand from Shaq than I did from the Hawk but like I said, his peers put Connie up there with MJ and a few others so I wouldn't know which of them come out on top.
GatorAZ
feed hopkins
They’d get along fine because they’re both alphas that want to win.
Luka only wants to win if his way, Booker wants to win at any cost. There's a big difference. Luka has done nothing to indicate he wants to achieve greater team success over his career. He's never helped make a teammate better, quite the opposite in fact. The Mavericks have been better without Luka than with Luka over the last 5 years. That is evidence of his unwillingness to bend his game for the team's success.
I still say Nash. Nothing against Booker. For me it comes down to this. Who would I want taking the last shot in a playoff game? No question it's Nash. Now factor in his insane passing. Booker has disappeared to many times for me in the playoffs. Now if he becomes more clutch in close games, I would have no issues changing my pick to Book. I have to see it more consistently first.
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2004
- Posts
- 36,038
- Reaction score
- 14,903
Nah, I'd much rather have Booker in a clutch situation. I'll give you the insane passing, there is no comparison between the two. And it's not like Steve hasn't come up short many times in the postseason. Most of it was refs allowing guys like Billups and Fisher to beat him up, strip the ball by hacking his forearms and such but still, it was a real problem made far worse in the postseason. IMO, Booker has disappeared in the playoffs occasionally but he's also been strong in postseason play. If I give Nash the edge overall it's his ability to make the players around him better.
Phrazbit
ASFN Icon
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2011
- Posts
- 19,759
- Reaction score
- 10,620
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2003
- Posts
- 113,256
- Reaction score
- 52,872
I'm leaning this way as well. Great players want to be around great players.
Not me. Not only could Steve find an open lane that most people couldn't find but he has hit way more clutch shots than Book has. Again, I did say, if Book could be more consistent, I could change my mind. I have just seen him disappear to many times in huge games in the playoffs. To me that is the "next level" for Book.
Phrazbit
ASFN Icon
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2011
- Posts
- 19,759
- Reaction score
- 10,620
Agreed.
It's between Booker and Nash, no one else is even on the radar and, in my opinion, it is still Nash.
Two MVP awards, some absolutely bonkers playoff moments and, the 2006 run in particular... that team made the conference finals, had a real chance to win the whole thing... if Nash isn't on that roster it is probably a bottom 5 team in the entire NBA.
Booker has been amazing, if not for him, I don't know where we'd be... but even so... Nash still edges him. Booker just hasn't racked up either the accolades or the level of heroics to top Nash.
It's not a knock on Booker, but Nash was the engine on a team that was a 6 year contender.
I 100% expect that Booker WILL overtake Nash, title or not, but he isn't quite there yet.
Its a shame we went through so much, the JJ broken face, the Nash bloody nose, the Horry hipcheck and suspensions.
The lack of accolades isn't a Book thing, its a national media thing and their narratives...he's just empty stats, he's just offense and no D, oh CP3 carried him, etc. Nash's resume is a better. So far despite the accolades:
Nash only made the playoffs 5 years (excluding his pre-trade era to the Mavs):
3 Conference Finals (Spurs, Mavs, Lakers)
1 Second Round (Spurs)
1 First Round (Spurs)
Booker:
1 Finals (Bucks)
2 Second Round (Mavs, Nuggets)
Booker average more Points, rebounds, and surprisingly a better 3pt % than Nash. The greatest disparity are the assists, 7 for Book and 11 for Nash.
Last edited:
GatorAZ
feed hopkins
We missed AD, Jamal Murray, Kawhi (twice), George, Zion the past few years. Imagine had we faced Dallas or San Antonio in the playoffs without Duncan or Dirk those years, hell even just Parker or Ginobili. Even with Amare’s shortcoming had he just stayed on the arc from 05’ we win at least one title with his knee surgery. Still pisses me off looking back that era.
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2004
- Posts
- 36,038
- Reaction score
- 14,903
Yeah, we've had some good luck but even more bad luck through the years. Maybe the luckiest we ever got was the year we gave up that last second putback by Artest that kept us out of the finals. A healthy Brandon Roy and we don't even make it out of the first round.
But I think we advance to the finals against the Bucks even if AD hadn't gone out, and could well have won it all if CP3 didn't get injured 3 or 4 times, Booker didn't get his nose broke and then feel a twinge in his hamstring just a few minutes to go in a game he had been tearing it up or CamP and Saric hadn't gone down. Luck plays a huge role in who wins it all almost every season, deep teams with solid defenses tend to need less luck than offensive teams, especially those that are top heavy.
Ouchie-Z-Clown
I'm better than Mulli!
When two players are as close to each other in importance and accomplishment like nash and book I see no reason select one over the other. Nothing hinges on the decision, so I just enjoy both.
