Buying Nash would definitely be being low. Unfortunately, there is no up-side. In other words - it will be buying low for the purpose of remaining low. We can do better.
I wouldn't go quite so far to say he wouldn't fit this team in any capacity, but with his back, his age and having clearly lost a step on offense I don't see how he'd be anything other than a marginal upgrade to Steve Blake at this point in his career -- and a woefully short term upgrade at that. If you're going to trade for an old point guard at least get one whose game was never predicated on speed and jitterbug quickness in the first place. Andre Miller and Jason Kidd spring to mind and of those two Miller seems like a better bet since he's still got it.
Why do you have Brandon Roy playing 28 minutes... Roy is our best player, and even with a lot of rest, he'd still be playing 33-35 minutes per game.
Heres the online article how the Kings stun the Suns. http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/dailydime?page=dime-090330 I agree the Suns are done and are looking at the summer to do trades or use the lottery.
I agree; totally demoralizing loss to Utah pretty much put the lid on it. Clearly, a good team doesn't get blown out by Sacramento unless they've mailed it in. Blakey & Roy's wives will be happy soon.
Shoot. Now that the Suns are getting a lotto pick, they're not as likely to sell it. Do they have other picks in Rd 1?
nate, you missed it. Reread your post, he has brandon playing 8 min at the pg spot in addition to his 28 at the 2.
You'd think that would be the case, but this was a team willing to trade Amare for some cap relief next season, so I'd never say never!
I dunno, I don't think he would be a whole lot better at this point if he had (though Im sure he'd be a bit better). He's just getting old. However, I do think he'd clearly be the "Most Dominant Ever" if he had done so (and fixed his free throws...). Instead, he's merely in the argument for it. Also, as someone else said, he wouldn't be a Sun anyways. I bet he'd still be a Laker if he had kept himself in better shape. They'd probably have a lot more titles too.
A broken down Steve Nash is still a much better passer, shooter and leader than anything we currently have at PG. I definitely wouldn't mind swapping Blake out for him. Yeah, he's a crappy defender, but really good teams can always live with one bad defender, provided he brings something else. That said, it's hard to imagine paying that much for a guy who would basically be a role player.
Steve Nash's A/TO ratio is worse than Blake's this year. His usage% is higher - meaning that he needs the ball more in his hands to achieve these higher assists - and the only way this happens on this team is by taking the ball away from Brandon Roy - which is a bad idea. Add the fact that the slower the pace is - the worse Nash is - and this team plays a lot slower than the Suns - even a lot slower than the Terry Porter era Suns where Nash was even worse than he is right now. We would get a worse A/TO ratio, worse defense and someone that needs the ball in his hands to be effective thus taking it away from our best player - all while playing in a system that exposes him much more. He is a terrible fit on this team - and the only place where he is/was effective was in the entertaining but futile style imposed by D'antoni. Fool's gold comes to mind.
"better", yes. "much better", not so sure. Yes, I agree. He is a crappy defender. Much worse (yes "much") than even Blake, and we all complain about Blake's defense constantly. Yes, I agree. A team can live with one bad defender. So, do we sit Brandon (a poor defender) or Nash (currently a horrifingly bad defender)? What do we do with Sergio and Outlaw? Nash was at his best when paired with a top 5 guard defender / role player to be his sidekick. Brandon is not Raja Bell. Brandon could use his own Raja Bell equivalent. (I think that might be Batum in a couple of years.) Nash use to bring such an enormous advantage on the offensive end, that he still gave the team a "plus" after deducting for his give backs on the defensive end. However, during the playoffs, with schemes and scouting coupled with the talent of the best teams, some of Nash's offense was stifled (a bit), and Nash was more consistently attacked on the defensive end, reducing his net plus contribution. Now, Nash has lost a step, and thus is not as good an offensive player and is an even worse defensive player. And going forward his minutes would need to be very limited. Your plan is to trade our starting PG for a part timer? What starting quality PG then splits time with Nash? Who starts when Nash sits out for 10 games nursing this or that injury that is slow to heal? I am not feeling the Nash to Portland (mini) bandwagon. I prefer to take a flyer on a youngin' that may pan out or bring in an end-prime (not past prime) vet.
Says who? If I remember correctly, the last time they had a lotto pick--which I think was the #7 pick (Luol Deng)--they traded it to the Bulls for a first the next season (which ended up being in the early 20's).
The Suns also dumped a panned-out Joe Johnson because they didn't want to pay him. The Suns definitely have precedent for ditching highly valuable assets for financial reasons, not just low first-round picks.
Currently, Nash is #13 in 3pt% and Blake is #15 while making 24 more threes. They are 0.2% apart. I'm not sure that is much better. Taking Blake's volume into account, I would rather have Blake taking the shots. Nash is a great (but inconsistant) offensive leader, but not on the other end of the court. I would say no mainly because Nash has to dominate the ball and that would remove it from Brandon. Nash is on his way down and out and will not be available for a title window.
of course when you look at actual fg% and free throw % along with 3pt%, nash clearly is a much better shooter. and i don't have any doubt that nash could play well off the ball when roy needs it. but i still don't think nash would be someone the blazers should look to acquire.
Is there an NBA team that has squandered more assets over the past 3-4 years? I can't think of one. They could have a lineup of Nash, Fernandez, Johnson, Marion and Amare. That is an insanely good offense (although defensively not so much).
