Re-tool around a re-signed Nash. Good idea?

[mojorizen7]

After reading and listening to Kerr's recent comments it sounds like the plan is to explore all trade possibilities(GM rhetoric). Kerr has said that he feels that Nash has a few more good years and that he'd like to see Nash retire as a PHX SUN.
Simple public poll.

 

[nashman]

Think thats the plan and they will explore trade opportunities for Shaq, Amare and see what can be done. Nash I think is as Kerr said the engine for this team he is a very smart top 5 PG in the league not many of those out there to be had. You surround him some better D players specifically P&R defense and this team can be very good. Trade Amare or Shaq, resign Hill maybe Barnes if reasonable deal. Think Nash can finally get some rest if Dragic keeps progressing and have a nice bench of Barbs, Lou, Duds, Dragic, Lopez. If we could trade Amare in the starting lineup for a Battier/Artest type of PF we could be solid.

 

[Covert Rain]

I say it's a mistake. Nash is OK if you want to entertain. Nash is OK if you don't care about defense. Nash is not OK if you want to build a title contending team that plays defense. Nash is a liability. His bad defensive play gets our bigs in foul trouble. His bad turnover problems leads to other teams getting too many easy buckets.

I would change my mind to maybe if you could get offensive stoppers in the two through 5 positions. That is not going to happen. Even the best defensive teams in the leagues are not that deep with defensive guys. There are not enough to go around and I don't believe we could trade for them.

I would change my mind to a yes if Nash was relagated to a backup role at PG. Not going to happen.

So...again...it's a mistake.

 

[mojorizen7]

Think thats the plan and they will explore trade opportunities for Shaq, Amare and see what can be done. Nash I think is as Kerr said the engine for this team he is a very smart top 5 PG in the league not many of those out there to be had. You surround him some better D players specifically P&R defense and this team can be very good. Trade Amare or Shaq, resign Hill maybe Barnes if reasonable deal. Think Nash can finally get some rest if Dragic keeps progressing and have a nice bench of Barbs, Lou, Duds, Dragic, Lopez. If we could trade Amare in the starting lineup for a Battier/Artest type of PF we could be solid.

+1) You make a decent argument in terms of the recent progression of Dragic. Kerr mentioned this,he mentioned finally being able to cut Nash's minutes due to Dragic's improvement.

-1) I keep hearing about trying to improve the P&R defense. Moving Shaq for a big man that can defend it...ok fine,but what about defending it from the guard position? We're gonna rely on a 2nd year backup PG to improve the P&R defense? Unrealistic.

 

[carey]

His bad turnover problems leads to other teams getting too many easy buckets.

Under Gentry I belive Nash's a/to ratio was 3.6 to 1. Chris Paul is 3.7 to 1. I don't think turnovers are an issue.

 

[carey]

Also it's ******** to think that all 5 players on the floor have to be great defenders. You can't tell me Paul Pierce & Ray Allen were great defenders before they went to Boston and got a defensive leader in KG to help pull the TEAM defense together. Nash is a small part of the problem not THE problem.

 

[cly2tw]

Under Gentry I belive Nash's a/to ratio was 3.6 to 1. Chris Paul is 3.7 to 1. I don't think turnovers are an issue.

Turnover would become an issue in half court games with Nash dominating the ball. Yet, as Kerr stressed the reason #1 is entertaining with Nash. So, who cares about playoffs.

I say it's a mistake. Nash is OK if you want to entertain. Nash is OK if you don't care about defense. Nash is not OK if you want to build a title contending team that plays defense. Nash is a liability. His bad defensive play gets our bigs in foul trouble. His bad turnover problems leads to other teams getting too many easy buckets.

I would change my mind to maybe if you could get offensive stoppers in the two through 5 positions. That is not going to happen. Even the best defensive teams in the leagues are not that deep with defensive guys. There are not enough to go around and I don't believe we could trade for them.

I would change my mind to a yes if Nash was relagated to a backup role at PG. Not going to happen.

So...again...it's a mistake.

Astute observation. In short, if Nash played like Stockton, it'd be fine going forward, but it's a mistake to use him as the #1 guy, unless entertaining is all you want for the rest years of the franchise.

 

[mojorizen7]

Also it's ******** to think that all 5 players on the floor have to be great defenders. You can't tell me Paul Pierce & Ray Allen were great defenders before they went to Boston and got a defensive leader in KG to help pull the TEAM defense together. Nash is a small part of the problem not THE problem.

They don't have to be great defenders but they ALL need to be willing to buy into it.
I would argue that having a stout defensive player at the point of attack(PG/SG) and at the rim(PF/C) is the key.
Our best defender's don't qualify for either. G.Hill? Dudley? Barnes?

 

[cly2tw]

Also it's ******** to think that all 5 players on the floor have to be great defenders. You can't tell me Paul Pierce & Ray Allen were great defenders before they went to Boston and got a defensive leader in KG to help pull the TEAM defense together. Nash is a small part of the problem not THE problem.

Actually, both Pierce and Allen were capable defenders before joining force with KG. Yet, as the featured scorer on their respective team they saved energy for offense by design. This is no longer necessary now and they don't hold back on defense any more. In this sense, Amare always stepped up on both ends in playoffs, for good or bad. Nash is just old for better defense.

 

[ShuHanGuanYu]

Nash wouldn't be so bad if we had another guard that could take over some of the major defensive assignments. Nash and Barbosa together is dual-revolving door and isn't going to get it done. Bell was awesome for a couple years, but now we have Nash/Richardson/Barbosa. When Bell didn't work we would use Marion in that role. Now we are just completely lost with no option on the exterior save Hill, who is generally not quick enough to fill the role we need on defense.

It's not just KG on defense in Boston. Rondo is phenominal on D. Tony Allen is a also nice matchup defender off the bench. Before that they had Posey. You don't need every player to be a great defender, but you must have at least one solid exterior defender and at least on solid interior defender if you plan to do anything defensively.

 

[Wally]

Other than flopping .....er, I mean taking a charge, Nash has no defense. I find it interesting that Kerr wants wants his cake and eat it too in that he wants the team to play defense and wants Nash to be the PG. As a backup, I think Nash would be an excellent option for instant offense off the bench, but I'd guess that wouldn't be the plan (there must be a plan, right?). If Nash stays and Amare stays, that leaves 3 guys - you pick-em - to defend five.
I see Nash as a glass that is half empty.

 

[cly2tw]

Other than flopping .....er, I mean taking a charge, Nash has no defense. I find it interesting that Kerr wants wants his cake and eat it too in that he wants the team to play defense and wants Nash to be the PG. As a backup, I think Nash would be an excellent option for instant offense off the bench, but I'd guess that wouldn't be the plan (there must be a plan, right?). If Nash stays and Amare stays, that leaves 3 guys - you pick-em - to defend five.
I see Nash as a glass that is half empty.

hahah, that's true mainly because when Nash loses his man and Amare gets lost too. So, with Dragic at PG, we'd still be defending 5 on 5.

 

[Mainstreet]

Nash wouldn't be so bad if we had another guard that could take over some of the major defensive assignments. Nash and Barbosa together is dual-revolving door and isn't going to get it done. Bell was awesome for a couple years, but now we have Nash/Richardson/Barbosa. When Bell didn't work we would use Marion in that role. Now we are just completely lost with no option on the exterior save Hill, who is generally not quick enough to fill the role we need on defense.

This seems logical. In retrospect, I think the J-Rich trade hurt the Suns defensively both in the front-court and the back-court with the loss of Diaw and Bell. At the time, I liked the trade but J-Rich has struggled to fit in with the Suns. I wouldn't mind if the Suns tried to trade him.

 

[Bufalay]

Nash I think is as Kerr said the engine for this team he is a very smart top 5 PG in the league not many of those out there to be had.

Top 5 on the Suns roster.

 

[Covert Rain]

Nash is a small part of the problem not THE problem.

Any time you are the weakest link on the starting 5 on your team defensively.....I would say it's a HUGE problem. Any time you are a starting PG who is #1 in the NBA amungst PG at turning the ball over and giving up easy buckets to the other team........I would say is a huge problem.

Nash might not be THE problem but he is still a huge one. He is one of those rare guys that can make guys on offense around him better but yet at the same time drag his entire team down on the other side of the ball at the same time.

 

[SirStefan32]

The Suns are facing a major problem- they need to rebuild, but they have very few assets they can use to do achieve that goal. Completely rebuilding around Nash is a mistake. You simply can not rebuild around a 35 year old point guard, especially if he is not capable of guarding a chair.
On the other hand, if they get rid of Nash, Amare and Shaq, the team is going to be terrible, and they don't have their own draft pick in the next draft.
My guess is that Kerr (under Sarver's orders) might be trying to simply make some money next season by having an entertaining team that makes playoffs and at best gets to the second round. If they can sign Nash to a 3-year deal at $4M per year, it kinda makes sense. You shed your payroll in the short term while keeping a good, entertaining point guard. You avoid luxury tax and probably make playoffs.
From the business perspective, it makes sense.

 

[lou_skywalker]

put some defensive players around Nash and see how he performs. It won't be too late to make the final decision in 2010.