I'm not going to lie. I am all apeshit over Nash. Even the 3 year rental Nash. Gotta seriously look at our team. If we were just a .500 team on the road; we would be 2nd in the West. With a Nash; we stood a better chance against Detroit, Utah and Sac Queens. That is the difference between being a 3-9 team, to a 6-6 team on the road. You don't think the addition of Nash wouldn't help push the tempo and energy on the road?
I don't know ... probably. But you keep throwing out these trade scenarios that basically involve getting him for almost nothing. The Suns aren't going to part with him easily when he's basically the only reason they can sell tickets in their arena. Secondly, assuming you're going to get three productive years out of Nash is pretty hard to justify for a guy who has had a history of back issues ... and we don't have the Suns legendary training staff to keep him upright.
Felton is expiring, Matthews is guaranteed for a couple more years; but very manageable contract. We take on 2.5 more million back in the trade; basically giving them another 2.5 free. Babbit is a lost cause; but he's only a 2 mil player. We take back Childress; which is a failed experiment for them and they want him off their books. Felton and Matthew's PERS add up to Nash. Also, they are in good shape to have free money to go after free agents this summer; especially if Felton doesn't resign with them. What if they get a top 3 pick? Maybe Felton stays? They could bring in a difference maker PF. It's not as bad as you think it is.
It's a pretty reasonably comparison. Although even a hobbled 38 year old Stockton was still a better defender than Nash in his prime. By then Stockton was molasses slow, but he knew where he was supposed to be and honestly cared deeply about defense. Nash seems quicker, and has always been a better scorer.
If we had a fast break coach, Nash could play the Nash style. If we go after Nash, we should simultaneously pursue a coach who will have the whole team play the Nash way. Actually, we'd have to get the coach first, or Nash wouldn't come here. He'd retire in lieu of playing for Nate. Nash would be an ordinary NBA starting guard in McMillan's system.
Bump. We need Nash dammit! Hell let's throw in Wallace and Matthews for Nash and Childress. We need a perimeter leader and floor general.
I so want to see Nash and Aldridge on the same team. It's killing me. If we can do a deal without losing Batum, man oh man. We'd have two starters with 24 PERs. When your team can say that, you are generally a contender.
I would give up so much to make it happen. Matthews, Felton and Babbit for Nash and Childress or Wallace, Matthews, Felton for Nash, Childress and over-the-Hill.
Revised my offer. Nash, Childress and (keep it weird PDX) Frye for Felton, Matthews and Wallace. New starting core: PG: Nash, SG: Crawford, SF: Batum, PF: Aldridge, Center: Camby Key bench players: PG: Nolan Smith / Crawford, SG: E. Will, SF: Childress / Babbit, PF: Frye / Rhino, Center: Thomas / Frye
Our front court bench would really, really suck. But then it seems like it always has been the case on Steve Nash teams. You run up the score when he's in for 30 minutes, and you try to not killed too badly when he sits for 18. We'd probably have to throw in youngsters and/or picks. And really, I'd be ok with doing that and signing on scrubs like Patty Mills (ugh) or whoever is currently killing in the D-league or some vets at the minimum. We've already had shitty draft after shitty draft, and a team with Aldridge and Nash are going to draft in the 20's anyway, meaning likely another shitty draft. (Hell, we might be able to buy the pick right back from Phoenix. They've sold us picks like that twice before.)
Picks are going to be tough, because our 2013 pick is already committed to Charlotte, which invokes the Stepien rule about not trading first round picks in consecutive years; we'd have to somehow get a third team involved.
