Rumor: Nash gone in the offseason

[green machine]

If they build around Amare its failed already! Sorry I know your an Amare apologist he just isn't a franchise player period we tried to build around him and it hasn't worked at all he wanted a center we got him a HOF center and Amare has regressed, doesn't want to play D or rebound he is what he is a scoring PF who can be replaced.

So are you saying Nash is a franchise player right now or that the team doesn't have one?

Because if you are saying that he is then your credibility is 0, and if you are saying the team doesn't have one yet then the best thing to do is blow it all up, try to get young pieces for all the veterans and established players and try again.

 

[nashman]

We don't really have one I mean I guess Shaq is but not at this point in his career. Point is this team we have now minus Amare and some additional pieces could be very very good given time to come together this offense already looks very dynamic WITHOUT Amare hogging the touches. Lou and Duds while not being great players are giving us what we need hard nosed scrappy defenders that rebound we have enough scorers we don't need Amare. I never said Nash was a franchise player at this point in his career, he is however still one of the better point guards in the league and no better person for Dragic to learn from than Nash!

 

[Mainstreet]

Because that makes so much sense, trade our best piece for "good young pieces" and keep all the over the hill guys like Nash on a rebuilding team.

No thanks, Nash has to go, it's better for him and better for the longterm future of the Suns.

It's true, Nash might be better off finishing his career elsewhere. However, like DA, the Suns better have a replacement lined up first. Dragic is still a gamble at PG.

 

[elindholm]

It's true, Nash might be better off finishing his career elsewhere. However, like DA, the Suns better have a replacement lined up first. Dragic is still a gamble at PG.

The Suns aren't getting the Point Guard of the Future by trading Nash, because his trade value simply isn't very high. Whether the Suns keep him for one more season doesn't address the future PG problem one way or the other.

 

[nashman]

It does address it to a degree if they keep him here teaching Dragic elindholm

 

[Mainstreet]

The Suns aren't getting the Point Guard of the Future by trading Nash, because his trade value simply isn't very high. Whether the Suns keep him for one more season doesn't address the future PG problem one way or the other.

I'm not saying the Suns will be getting the PG of the future if they trade Nash, but they should have a competent replacement. Having Nash at PG is better than no PG next season. However, since Nash is one of my favorite players, I think he deserves to move on to a better team so he can avoid the rebuilding process.

 

[TucsonDevil]

Not that this means a whole lot... however, I found a bunch of Nash jerseys (home and away) for $30 at Sports Authority in Mesa. These are the $80 jerseys. I have only found jerseys for that cheap after a player has been traded.

Haven't looked anywhere else. Just my $.02

 

[cly2tw]

Not that this means a whole lot... however, I found a bunch of Nash jerseys (home and away) for $30 at Sports Authority in Mesa. These are the $80 jerseys. I have only found jerseys for that cheap after a player has been traded.

Haven't looked anywhere else. Just my $.02

Money talks.

 

[slinslin]

It does address it to a degree if they keep him here teaching Dragic elindholm

Because that worked out so well with Barbosa etc..

Dragic is a completely different player, it's not like Nash can teach him because Dragic will never ever be the type of player Nash is.

What will teach him best is simply playing minutes in the NBA, not sitting on the bench looking at Nash.

 

[elindholm]

It does address it to a degree if they keep him here teaching Dragic elindholm

When has this ever happened, with any two players at any position on any team ever in the history of the league?

 

[Mainstreet]

When has this ever happened, with any two players at any position on any team ever in the history of the league?

Big Penny and Lil' Penny.

 

[Cheesewater]

Because that worked out so well with Barbosa etc..

Dragic is a completely different player, it's not like Nash can teach him because Dragic will never ever be the type of player Nash is.

You see the two bolded points are in contradiction, don't you? And how you can know that "Dragic will never be the type of player Nash is" is subject to high debate. I would say that Dragic has already shown that he is the "type" of player Nash is. Pass first, ball-handling, fearless driving, shooting range... Did you mean the quality of Nash? Because you can't know that yet either. If anyone is different from Nash it's Barbosa.

What will teach him best is simply playing minutes in the NBA, not sitting on the bench looking at Nash.

Agreed. Dragic needs experience on the court.

 

[Cheesewater]

When has this ever happened, with any two players at any position on any team ever in the history of the league?

Are you actually asking for an example of a veteran player tutoring a younger player?

Moses Malone and Charles Barkley is the one that came to mind first.

 

[nashman]

Well its easy to see Barbs has learned from Nash his passing and playmaking skills are much better now than a few years ago. Sorry but its dumb to assume these guys don't learn from one another, Barbs is a much better player and ball handler than he was and Nash is always in his ear sure that helps him.

 

[lou_skywalker]

Well its easy to see Barbs has learned from Nash his passing and playmaking skills are much better now than a few years ago. Sorry but its dumb to assume these guys don't learn from one another, Barbs is a much better player and ball handler than he was and Nash is always in his ear sure that helps him.

so we can expect Nash to tutor Dragic before he goes....
Maybe we can have LB as starting PGwhen Nash goes, and get a young backup SG instead....

 

[elindholm]

Are you actually asking for an example of a veteran player tutoring a younger player?

Moses Malone and Charles Barkley is the one that came to mind first.

No, I'm asking for an example of a veteran player teaching a clueless youngster how to play. Barkley was already a major force and a high draft pick (5th overall, if memory serves, averaging 14 and 9 as a rookie). If Malone tutored him at all, it was in the NBA lifestyle, not in how to be an effective PF.

 

[Cheesewater]

No, I'm asking for an example of a veteran player teaching a clueless youngster how to play. Barkley was already a major force and a high draft pick (5th overall, if memory serves, averaging 14 and 9 as a rookie). If Malone tutored him at all, it was in the NBA lifestyle, not in how to be an effective PF.

Indeed Barkley was further along than Dragic appears to be...but now you are specifying that a youngster has to be clueless? Dragic is a professional basketball player, he isn't clueless.

In an interview I saw some time ago (I'll see if I can find a transcript somewhere) Barkley said Malone taught him everything about being a professional. Practice, conditioning, preparation...

 

[elindholm]

Indeed Barkley was further along than Dragic appears to be...but now you are specifying that a youngster has to be clueless? Dragic is a professional basketball player, he isn't clueless.

That's splitting hairs. Dragic is, right now, a marginal NBA player at best. Barkley already knew what he was doing. The question is whether Nash can "tutor" Dragic, and I maintain that there is no precedent for such a thing to happen.

In an interview I saw some time ago (I'll see if I can find a transcript somewhere) Barkley said Malone taught him everything about being a professional. Practice, conditioning, preparation...

Yes, that's what I meant by "lifestyle." I see no indication that Dragic's shortcomings are primarily a matter of practice, conditioning, or preparation.

If you want to believe that keeping Nash around is the key to whether Dragic develops into a real player, go ahead, but I can't understand how anyone could reach that conclusion.

 

[Cheesewater]

That's splitting hairs. Dragic is, right now, a marginal NBA player at best. Barkley already knew what he was doing. The question is whether Nash can "tutor" Dragic, and I maintain that there is no precedent for such a thing to happen.

Yes, that's what I meant by "lifestyle." I see no indication that Dragic's shortcomings are primarily a matter of practice, conditioning, or preparation.

I think you are just lying here. Lifestyle means outside of basketball. Practice, preparation...that IS basketball. No way was Barkley already a professional in college.

If you want to believe that keeping Nash around is the key to whether Dragic develops into a real player, go ahead, but I can't understand how anyone could reach that conclusion.

That entire post is splitting hairs. I never asserted that keeping Nash was they key to developing Dragic.

 

[elindholm]

I think you are just lying here.

About what? You mean what I meant by "lifestyle"? I got lazy with my choice of word, but yes, that's what I meant.

Practice, preparation...that IS basketball.

Oh bull. I could execute all of the "lifestyle" perfectly and I'd never be a player. Can those things make the difference between a run-of-the-mill professional and greatness? Sure, but that's not being debated.

No way was Barkley already a professional in college.

That's not relevant. I'm not denying that Malone taught Barkely important things. I'm saying that Dragic's problems go far beyond insufficient peer tutelage.

I never asserted that keeping Nash was they key to developing Dragic.

No, you instead jumped into a conversation in which I was arguing against that very point as made by Nashman. Yes, some degree of mentoring happens under certain circumstances, but mentoring can't turn a scrub into a player.

 

[Cheesewater]

About what? You mean what I meant by "lifestyle"? I got lazy with my choice of word, but yes, that's what I meant.

Oh bull. I could execute all of the "lifestyle" perfectly and I'd never be a player. Can those things make the difference between a run-of-the-mill professional and greatness? Sure, but that's not being debated.

I don't buy this excuse that you just got lazy. I think you really thought Charles Barkley was a complete professional player the second he put on a Philly jersey. Malone taught Barkley many valuable tools in how to be a professional basketball player. Barkley himself indicated that he in no way had the tools. Nash can do the same for Dragic. Just because you don't think Dragic has the skills to be a future starting point guard doesn't mean he won't benefit from Nash's presence.

That's not relevant. I'm not denying that Malone taught Barkely important things. I'm saying that Dragic's problems go far beyond insufficient peer tutelage.

You made the challenge to find a veteran who ever taught an inexperienced rookie.

No, you instead jumped into a conversation in which I was arguing against that very point as made by Nashman. Yes, some degree of mentoring happens under certain circumstances, but mentoring can't turn a scrub into a player.

You were having a private conversation on a public forum? No.

Also if you read the thread, specifically this post http://www.arizonasportsfans.com/vb/showpost.php?p=1992491&postcount=45 I am the one who brought up Nash tutoring Dragic.

Parsing out what mentoring goes on (which I doubt you have any idea of in this case) and leaning hard on your assertion that Dragic is a scrub does nothing for your argument.

 

[Errntknght]

Too bad Moses' lessons didn't have more effect on Barkley - he worked a lot harder on defense than Charles ever did. CB wasn't Amare-esque but he certainly conserved his energy on D - I've always felt that we'd have won a title if Charles would have put forth serious effort on defense.

 

[cly2tw]

Well its easy to see Barbs has learned from Nash his passing and playmaking skills are much better now than a few years ago. Sorry but its dumb to assume these guys don't learn from one another, Barbs is a much better player and ball handler than he was and Nash is always in his ear sure that helps him.

no, LB learned nothing from Nash. he matured only after separation from DA. that's fact you probably don't want to see

 

[Mainstreet]

no, LB learned nothing from Nash. he matured only after separation from DA. that's fact you probably don't want to see

I've noticed that LB has greatly improved his ability to keep his dribble alive and now looks to make some nice passes to the corner when his penetration to the basket is cut off. This is definitely a page from Steve Nash.

 

[elindholm]

I don't buy this excuse that you just got lazy.

Well, this is obviously an unresolvable argument. I know what I meant, but if you want to believe that you caught me in a conceptual error, we'll just have to move on.

I think you really thought Charles Barkley was a complete professional player the second he put on a Philly jersey.

Seriously? Have I ever demonstrated that depth of naivete before? Good grief man.

Malone taught Barkley many valuable tools in how to be a professional basketball player. Barkley himself indicated that he in no way had the tools. Nash can do the same for Dragic.

Restating this doesn't make it any more true. You maintain that the Malone/Barkley relationship is applicable to the Nash/Dragic one. I disagree.

But also, Barkley was clearly exaggerating when he said that he "in no way" had the tools. He was already putting up good numbers.

You made the challenge to find a veteran who ever taught an inexperienced rookie.

And turned him from a scrub into a player, you left out.

You were having a private conversation on a public forum? No.

No, of course not, there's no reason to get huffy. I was just clarifying what I was responding to.

I am the one who brought up Nash tutoring Dragic.

Well that's your folly then.

Parsing out what mentoring goes on (which I doubt you have any idea of in this case)

I don't know what goes on, and it doesn't matter, because I still haven't been presented with a single example of "mentoring" turning a scrub into a player. They could talk about Socrates and the unified field theory for all I care. Where are the results?

and leaning hard on your assertion that Dragic is a scrub does nothing for your argument.

Do you deny that he is a scrub? Seriously? I'm not talking about his "potential." I'm talking about right now. Is he anything more than a marginal NBA player right now?