A goodbye from Nash to Suns fans

[Mainstreet]

So wouldn't it have made more sense then to sign a temporary, cheaper PG to run the team while Marshall gets ready to take over? Signing Dragic to a relatively large long-term deal means that unless one of them is traded in the next couple of years, then Marshall will not be a starting PG in this league, won't even get an opportunity to, at least not until four years from now.

So if the Suns signed Dragic to be the Suns starting PG until Marshall is ready to take over, then they must not intend on Dragic still being in Phoenix a couple years from now. And if the Suns envision Dragic as their starting PG for the entire four years and perhaps longer, then either they don't plan on keeping Marshall or they don't see him as anything more than a career backup. I am not sure what the long-term plan is, assuming there is one.

I think the Suns drafted who was the BPA on their draft board... that's all. If Marshall develops beyond a backup PG then the Suns will have a pleasant problem to deal with. I think they did the same thing in drafting Morris. Both may be no more than career backups but they appear to be in the category of safe choices.

 

[elindholm]

Signing Dragic to a relatively large long-term deal means that unless one of them is traded in the next couple of years, then Marshall will not be a starting PG in this league, won't even get an opportunity to, at least not until four years from now.

I'll be honest; I thought that Dragic's contract was for three years instead of four. I agree that four seems long given these circumstances. Three would have made sense.

 

[Superbone]

We already knew that. But there was no way he was going to get 3/30 from us.

Re-read it. Duffy said he would have signed for 3/10.

 

[Superbone]

This is kind of like how I was after the trade... must watch

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7iHDIoNjrCE&feature=player_embedded#!

Can't watch. Private.

 

[slinslin]

Re-read it. Duffy said he would have signed for 3/10.

That has to be a typo.

Must have meant 3 years at 10M$ per year.

 

[Mainstreet]

That has to be a typo.

Must have meant 3 years at 10M$ per year.

I never read it as a typo, just how bad Nash wanted to stay in Phoenix. IMO, this was an example given by Duffy to illustrate how much Nash wanted to stay in Phoenix near his family.

I think the Suns just moved on without Nash and made no offer to keep him.

 

[elindholm]

I never read it as a typo, just how bad Nash wanted to stay in Phoenix. IMO, this was an example given by Duffy to illustrate how much Nash wanted to stay in Phoenix near his family.

Duffy's next sentence refers to the Suns' inability to pay Nash "a large salary." No one would consider $10 million over 3 years a large salary (by NBA standards, of course!). He had to have meant $10 million per.

 

[SirStefan32]

Nash's salary is irrelevant. Suns needed to move on, and start rebuilding. They couldn't rebuild with Nash on the roster, whether he makes $3M per year or $10M. If he wanted to play for free, I would have still let him go.

 

[95pro]

nash could have easily said to management " i'll stay for 3years at 10mill for the term, go get me some players to work with". not the case though, he was just waiting to hear from the highest bidder. just so happens that the lakers can pay that amount and are playoff bound.

nash is full of nice words and never burned a bridge, whether that was his contacts with Toronto, the knicks, suns fans, suns management. he says all the right things, but sure enough he's willing to sign with the lakers and get the most $$ he can while he's at it. he's no different than any other star out there, he just does things with a little more class which is why there's no media outbreak on what happened.

 

[chickenhead]

I seem to recall reports of Nash wanting 3 years at 10-12m per a few months ago, but maybe that was speculation. In any case, my guess is that there is 0% Nash is not a Sun if he would take 3 years for 10m total.

 

[Suns_fan69]

Keep in mind he turned down a reported offer of 3 yrs 36m for a 3/27m offer. 9 million is nothing to scoff at.

 

[95pro]

Keep in mind he turned down a reported offer of 3 yrs 36m for a 3/27m offer. 9 million is nothing to scoff at.

was the 3/36 from toronto?
was it a straight sign, no s&t?

 

[mojorizen7]

Nash's salary is irrelevant. Suns needed to move on, and start rebuilding. They couldn't rebuild with Nash on the roster, whether he makes $3M per year or $10M. If he wanted to play for free, I would have still let him go.

+1
I dont know why so many fans in this town don't understand this.
Maybe i need to type it in large,bold lettering...

Steve Nash
born February 7th 1974

Now,check your calendars and do the math.

 

[Superbone]

+1
I dont know why so many fans in this town don't understand this.
Maybe i need to type it in large,bold lettering...

Steve Nash
born February 7th 1974

Now,check your calendars and do the math.

Maybe because you make them check calendars and do math. Did you ever think of that?!

 

[mojorizen7]

Maybe because you make them check calendars and do math. Did you ever think of that?!

That response makes no sense,so i'll just take it that you disagree.

Then why are fans still dwelling on the why's? the where's? and the contract? and the "what if's?"

Then there's the completely ignorant fans who are burning Nash jerseys....

There really is no argument as to whether or not it was time for the Suns to move on. It was overdue,in fact. If you feel otherwise i'm willing to listen. Seriously. I'm all ears. Lay out a scenario for us that says re-signing Nash at the age of 38 for any dollar amount is good for the franchise in 2012.

 

[Superbone]

That response makes no sense,so i'll just take it that you disagree.

Then why are fans still dwelling on the why's? the where's? and the contract? and the "what if's?"

Then there's the completely ignorant fans who are burning Nash jerseys....

There really is no argument as to whether or not it was time for the Suns to move on. It was overdue,in fact. If you feel otherwise i'm willing to listen. Seriously. I'm all ears. Lay out a scenario for us that says re-signing Nash at the age of 38 for any dollar amount is good for the franchise in 2012.

It was just tongue in cheek. It was not meant to agree or disagree with the sentiment.

 

[mojorizen7]

It was just tongue in cheek. It was not meant to agree or disagree with the sentiment.

Sorry.