If we were to trade Nash...

[SirStefan32]

Paul being a very good defender is way overstated. Advanced stats and everything pretty much show that defense from the PG position has very very little effect on the team defense.

I'd like to see some actual evidence of that. Even if that IS the case, I would still think that it is a good thing to have a good individual defender as your PG.

A good defense is anchored by a big man. Do you think Horford or Gortat are defensive anchors?

Neither one of them is Dwight Howard or Hakeem Olajuwon, but they are both SOLID defenders. I would also argue that two strong defensive players playing next to one another actually makes both of them better than they are individually.

 

[AzStevenCal]

I'd bet a billion bucks to one that Atlanta would never make that deal. If it turned out I was wrong I'd be thrilled and I'm pretty sure I'd welch on the bet too.

Steve

 

[Covert Rain]

Paul being a very good defender is way overstated. Advanced stats and everything pretty much show that defense from the PG position has very very little effect on the team defense.

A good defense is anchored by a big man. Do you think Horford or Gortat are defensive anchors?

Slin have you not been watching your own team? How can you say that? We have seen first hand what happens when you have a PG who can't keep people in front of him and allow dribble penetration.

Nash is the poster child for how important having a decent defender at PG can be. Fewer fouls, fewer points in the paint, less of your defense getting caught in bad rotations, less zone and less of hiding of your PG by making other players cover his man.

Just when I thought you were coming back to the light you go dark on me. Seriously, even on last year's team if you subtract Nash and add CP we get into the playoffs IMO.

 

[slinslin]

Nash is not the reason the Suns were only an average defensive team.

 

[Covert Rain]

Nash is not the reason the Suns were only an average defensive team.

Correction. Nash was not the ONLY reason the Suns were only a below average defensive team.

The Suns still gave up the 2nd most points per game in the entire NBA. Overall that is not average and is terrible. The position that significantly got better was the Center position post the Gortat trade and the teams opposing FG% allowed. That skyrocketed up the charts post the Gortat trade as well.

Nash has always been and will always be a major part of why the Suns struggle defensively. Name a team that hides their PG more than the Suns do. Name another team that had their SF or SG cover PG's more than the Suns do. Name another team that resorted to Zone defense to protect their PG more than the Suns do.

That screws up your team defense and has a trickle down effect. How nice would it be to have normal defensive assignments and allow guys to actually cover their natural positions defensively more often? Overall that is the problem with the Suns defense. They are always using guys like Grant, Dudley etc... to defend guys that should be covered by Suns players via their natural positions. The Suns are poster children for playing guys out of position both offensively and defensively.

 

[slinslin]

Total points given up is absolutely NO indicator for defense.

The truth is that Steve Nash over the years in defensive advanced stats does not grade out worse than average and that even the PGs with a good reputation for defense don't actually have more success stopping other PGs.

 

[SirStefan32]

Slin, I'd like to see those stats, but regardless of the stats, all you have to do is watch a couple of Nash games and then watch a couple of CP games. There is a big difference. Nash can not stay in front of his man, which collapses the entire defense. Paul stays in front on his man just fine.

I'm not really sure why we are even having this silly argument. All other things being equal, a good defensive point guard is better to have than a poor defensive point guard. I think we can all agree on that.

 

[jandaman]

You realize its not MY offers right? ESPN just posted that article and I shared it on here. The link is in the original post.

And here's another one for those that care



http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/page/trades-111129/let-wheeling-dealing-begin

wow
just saw that.

Hawks really entertained Suns with a Nash for Horford deal?

its like me trading in my really old 16GB iPOD for a brand new 8gb iPhone... its heavily advantageous for one party (me)

 

[AzStevenCal]

wow
just saw that.

Hawks really entertained Suns with a Nash for Horford deal?

its like me trading in my really old 16GB iPOD for a brand new 8gb iPhone... its heavily advantageous for one party (me)

If you read the article you'll see it's not what it's being made out to be. There is no mention of the Hawks having interest it's merely an example of the kind of deal that would now be allowable under the new agreement. He's not suggesting it's in any way likely. He's just saying that under the old agreement, a Nash for Horford deal would not have worked and now it will.

Steve

 

[Covert Rain]

Total points given up is absolutely NO indicator for defense.

The truth is that Steve Nash over the years in defensive advanced stats does not grade out worse than average and that even the PGs with a good reputation for defense don't actually have more success stopping other PGs.

NO indicator? LOL. Right. Giving up the 2nd most points of any team in the NBA is NO indicator. Just when you thought it was safe to go in the water.......

Also, your wrong. Nash has consistently been one of the worst defending PG's year in and year out. If you don't realize that you have not been watching the games.

Again...challenge you to find a team that hides their PG defensively more than the Suns.

 

[slinslin]

Dude if you don't understand why total points are not an indicator for good defense it is not worth discussing any more with you.

Do you understand what pace means? Total points given up means nothing without adjusting it to pace/posessions.

 

[JCSunsfan]

Its long past time to trade Nash. We need you players and/or decent picks and not just to dump salary. Nash is a FA next year so dumping salary is no big deal. We do need a young (ish) pg.

I would do the Toronto, NY, and Indiana deals, especially if picks came back.

 

[jibikao]

None of the possible trades look good enough and I seriously doubt Lopez has any value left... not after that horrible 2010-2011 season. I honestly believe Lopez is the biggest reason why Suns did poorly. We were expecting a 'break out" season from him especially after Amare left but instead he played like he was clueless and scared.

If none of the trade looks good, you might as well keep Nash.

I believe Dudley is what people want the most but Suns shouldn't let him go. I like him a lot.

 

[Covert Rain]

Dude if you don't understand why total points are not an indicator for good defense it is not worth discussing any more with you.

Do you understand what pace means? Total points given up means nothing without adjusting it to pace/posessions.

slin you would make an ounce of sense had you said that PPG allowed ALONE is not an indicator but to flat out say it's Not an indicator at all??

On what planet?

Not only is your argument not logical but it's not reasonable. I could buy the argument that they were not quite as bad as points allowed because they allow teams more possessions. However, the Suns were 2nd worst. Even if you buy the argument they were not as bad as Point Allowed indicated, they would still be somewhere near the bottom.

To completely dismiss Points allowed per game is crazy and there is not a coach or analyst alive that I have heard call the Suns a decent or average overall defensive team.

P.S. We were also the 6th worst team in steals, 10th worst in blocks, top 5 worst in Defensive Rebounds before the Gortat trade, 2nd worst at giving up points in the paint. Even if you want to completely ignore Points Allowed, all of this together spells bad. If you can't understand that your right...it's not work discussing.

 

[Folster]

I'm hoping Nash asks for a trade. I'd send him to NY for Billups, Shumpert, and whatever else we could get without taking back major salary. Shumpert was the #17 pick and was a player the Suns were really high on. Some may say that the #17 pick is not enough, but we're realistically not getting a lotto pick for Nash. If we trade him it will be to a contender which will net us a pick in the mid to late 20's;

I've said this before: The real value in trading Nash is not what we would get in return, but how bad the team would be without him. A Suns team without Nash (and as a result no Hill) is guaranteed to have a top 4 pick in a deep, talent-filled draft. Along with a top prospect, we'll have a ton of capspace to potentially/hopefully lure a top free agent or two. And to top it off, this is a shortened season which means we'll have two less months than normal to watch a horrible team. This the perfect time to tank. Come on Steve; Demand a trade already! Ownership needs to stop pretending that we're contenders and run a franchise. We are the Phoenix Suns not the Phoenix Nash's.

 

[slinslin]

slin you would make an ounce of sense had you said that PPG allowed ALONE is not an indicator but to flat out say it's Not an indicator at all??

On what planet?

Not only is your argument not logical but it's not reasonable. I could buy the argument that they were not quite as bad as points allowed because they allow teams more possessions. However, the Suns were 2nd worst. Even if you buy the argument they were not as bad as Point Allowed indicated, they would still be somewhere near the bottom.

To completely dismiss Points allowed per game is crazy and there is not a coach or analyst alive that I have heard call the Suns a decent or average overall defensive team.

P.S. We were also the 6th worst team in steals, 10th worst in blocks, top 5 worst in Defensive Rebounds before the Gortat trade, 2nd worst at giving up points in the paint. Even if you want to completely ignore Points Allowed, all of this together spells bad. If you can't understand that your right...it's not work discussing.

PPG is a worthless defensive statistics YES. As I said if you do not understand that it is pointless to discuss any further with you. The Suns during the Nash years traditionally were an average defensive team.

 

[Covert Rain]

PPG is a worthless defensive statistics YES. As I said if you do not understand that it is pointless to discuss any further with you. The Suns during the Nash years traditionally were an average defensive team.

WOW. If you had your own TV show and spewed that garbage at least you would get ratings for making people's jaw drop. I will give you that.

 

[SirStefan32]

PPG is a worthless defensive statistics YES. As I said if you do not understand that it is pointless to discuss any further with you. The Suns during the Nash years traditionally were an average defensive team.

Wow, if Suns were an average defensive team, I would hate to see what poor defensive teams looked like. You come up with some really off-the-wall stuff.

 

[elindholm]

Wow, if Suns were an average defensive team, I would hate to see what poor defensive teams looked like. You come up with some really off-the-wall stuff.

I think it depends on how you define "defense." There were a couple of SSOL years in which the Suns' first-shot defense really wasn't bad at all, solidly in the middle of the pack. But their overall defense was terrible because they were one of the worst defensive rebounding teams in the league -- in fact they were dead last at least once, if I remember correctly. They were also toward the bottom in forcing turnovers.

So, if defense means "allowing a low shooting percentage," it's true that the Suns were average for a stretch a few years ago. But for PPP, they have been poor for as long as anyone can remember.