Suns intend to offer Steve Nash multiyear deal

slinslin

Welcome to Amareca
Joined
Jun 28, 2002
Posts
16,855
Reaction score
562
Location
Hannover - Germany
Terry Porter is not a good coach. He has never shown that he could teach defense in Milwaukee. He had a bunch of players who were going against him like Nash and forced him to make adjustments.

All that and a roster of players who are used to play fast, some who can't play any other way and some who don't play defense and you have a deadly combo.
 

YouJustGotSUNSD

Custom User Title!
Joined
Jun 6, 2007
Posts
5,168
Reaction score
0
Step 1: Sign Nash to new deal starting less than his current salary but extending for 3 years in order to give him financial security.

Step 2: Wait the 3 months that you cannot trade a player after they sign a new contract.

Step 3: Entice prospective buyers with his new improved contract in exchange for young talent.
 

Covert Rain

Father smelt of elderberries!
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2005
Posts
36,536
Reaction score
15,623
Location
Arizona
Yeah, Terry Porter did a brilliant job of that, huh? :rolleyes:

I was one of the few minority that was happy with our offense. We never fell out of the top 5 (even under Porter) and this team was the best half court Suns team I have seen in a long time. I never understood the need for this team to "open" things up when offense was not our problem. Yes our offense was uglier and not as fluid but if your still top 10 in the NBA, I don't think being #1 is going to change much if you are not playing defense on the other end. The other reason that kept being repeated here was that the run and gun system was suppose to cut down on turnovers because Nash couldn't play half court. The Suns are still 4th worst in the NBA and Nash still top 3 in the NBA in turnovers.

Looking at our record, our defense since going back to the run and gun style......I would say going back to the Run and Gun Suns was a FAIL all the way around.

IMO, the only thing changing the system did was allow us to beat a few teams with 130+ points versus beating them with our old system scoring 110 and keeping them under 105.
 
Last edited:

slinslin

Welcome to Amareca
Joined
Jun 28, 2002
Posts
16,855
Reaction score
562
Location
Hannover - Germany
Step 1: Sign Nash to new deal starting less than his current salary but extending for 3 years in order to give him financial security.

Step 2: Wait the 3 months that you cannot trade a player after they sign a new contract.

Step 3: Entice prospective buyers with his new improved contract in exchange for young talent.

Not sure how a 35 or 36 year old with a 3 year contract is more appealing to teams than a 35 year old with an expiring big contract.
 

green machine

I rule at posting
Joined
Sep 4, 2002
Posts
6,126
Reaction score
11
Location
Phoenix, AZ
Yeah, Terry Porter did a brilliant job of that, huh? :rolleyes:

Porter tried to change the offense but the players, Nash being a main one, resisted and made things worse.

I'm saying you don't keep Nash just because he can run this offense, you change the offense to where you don't need to have a player with Nash's deficiencies to run it.
 

GYDevil

Veteran
Joined
Jul 23, 2007
Posts
116
Reaction score
0
Location
Goodyear
Wait a second, I am confused about something. If it so obvious that a team with Nash's defensive liabilities could never win a championship, why would a team give up a top-10 draft pick to trade for him?
 

Ninjafish

Registered
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Posts
610
Reaction score
0
While I would love to see Nash stay for a few more years if he wants stay, I almost think he deserves better than this team.

Then again, maybe Kerr will do some amazing things this summer to make us a contender again by fixing all of the mistakes he made.
 

Covert Rain

Father smelt of elderberries!
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2005
Posts
36,536
Reaction score
15,623
Location
Arizona
Wait a second, I am confused about something. If it so obvious that a team with Nash's defensive liabilities could never win a championship, why would a team give up a top-10 draft pick to trade for him?

If there is a very good defensive team surrounding Nash he becomes less of a liability. There might be a team out there that feels they are very good defensively that is looking to add a little punch to their roster by adding a scoring/assist type PG.
 

dreamcastrocks

Chopped Liver Moderator
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2005
Posts
46,247
Reaction score
11,852
If there is a very good defensive team surrounding Nash he becomes less of a liability. There might be a team out there that feels they are very good defensively that is looking to add a little punch to their roster by adding a scoring/assist type PG.

I think it is an oxymoron. I don't think that you can have one. Dribble penetration is key to collapsing defenses and Nash's man gets to the lane with ease. Even Garnett or TD behind Nash won't make much of a difference IMO.
 

Covert Rain

Father smelt of elderberries!
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2005
Posts
36,536
Reaction score
15,623
Location
Arizona
I think it is an oxymoron. I don't think that you can have one. Dribble penetration is key to collapsing defenses and Nash's man gets to the lane with ease. Even Garnett or TD behind Nash won't make much of a difference IMO.

I completely agree. I was strictly referring to the feasability of a team wanting to make a trade. Every single year you see teams trade away defensive oriented guys for an offensive player to add scoring punch to their lineup. I think lot's of teams are simply willing to take the risk (i.e. Detroit).
 

ASUCHRIS

ONE HEART BEAT!!!
Joined
Sep 2, 2002
Posts
16,544
Reaction score
14,735
Time to move on...it's just not going to work. Shaq and Nash both need to go.
 

mojorizen7

ASFN Addict
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Posts
9,165
Reaction score
472
Location
In a van...down by the river.
It'd better be a situation of a sign & trade.
Moving Nash would(and should)mark the end of this SUNS era that began when D'Antoni/Nash put us back on the NBA map in '05.
Its time to move on.
 

jandaman

Hall of Famer
Joined
Feb 24, 2005
Posts
1,263
Reaction score
3
Nash's defensive lack can be hidden by the zone defense, the problem is the big men are poor defenders too.
Dribble penetration can be directed towards the middle or sides, but you have to have power forward who can guard spots and a center who is mobile.

Having Stoudemire and O'Neal basically doesnt help Nash's case.

There are many good defensive point guards out there, but none stand out because the offensive arsenal of guards are just too much... basically.... if the rest of the team can shut down their men, and just let Nash's man be the offensive guy then it SHOULDN'T be a problem..

but when Nash's man scores 20+, JRich's man scores 20+, O'Neal and Stoudemire's man goes for another 20 each... then its redundant.... make Nash's man take the shots, that way it takes away from the other team's players...
 

OldDirtMcGirt

Registered User
Joined
Dec 14, 2006
Posts
1,255
Reaction score
0
Nash's defensive lack can be hidden by the zone defense, the problem is the big men are poor defenders too.
Dribble penetration can be directed towards the middle or sides, but you have to have power forward who can guard spots and a center who is mobile.

Having Stoudemire and O'Neal basically doesnt help Nash's case.

There are many good defensive point guards out there, but none stand out because the offensive arsenal of guards are just too much... basically.... if the rest of the team can shut down their men, and just let Nash's man be the offensive guy then it SHOULDN'T be a problem..

but when Nash's man scores 20+, JRich's man scores 20+, O'Neal and Stoudemire's man goes for another 20 each... then its redundant.... make Nash's man take the shots, that way it takes away from the other team's players...

Exactly. I still think that you could have Steve Nash as the starting point guard on a championship caliber team. It just has to be the right team. The only way to turn resigning him into a good outcome is to trade basically everybody else on the team (Shaq, JRich, Amare, Barbs), so that we surround Steve with excellent defensive players. Also, because the guy is on his last leg, you'd have to trade them for players who can make an impact next season. Frankly, I'd doubt if Steve Kerr is that savvy to pull something of that magnitude off.
 

Covert Rain

Father smelt of elderberries!
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2005
Posts
36,536
Reaction score
15,623
Location
Arizona
Nash's defensive lack can be hidden by the zone defense,

Only partially. The zone defense only keeps Nash's man from penetrating. However, the result of playing zone is giving up more 3 point shots. This by far is the Suns worse season I have seen in awhile at protecting the perimeter. Most of that is caused by the zone defense.

You get a better defensive PG, you can play more one on one and stop protecting your PG which causes other problems.
 
Last edited:

cly2tw

Registered User
Joined
Oct 26, 2002
Posts
5,832
Reaction score
0
Porter tried to change the offense but the players, Nash being a main one, resisted and made things worse.

I'm saying you don't keep Nash just because he can run this offense, you change the offense to where you don't need to have a player with Nash's deficiencies to run it.

From the fact of failure, one can't simply say Porter's idea was bad per se. Porter, however, was responsible for inability to make a feasible plan to make it work. Actually, Gentry showed the same tendency when it counted, namely to play more of Nash to the detriment of the team in the end.

Wait a second, I am confused about something. If it so obvious that a team with Nash's defensive liabilities could never win a championship, why would a team give up a top-10 draft pick to trade for him?

Nash being an incumbent franchise player is unwilling to change. In another environment like Portland, he'd have to fit in being second fiddle to Roy. They can hide his defensive deficiency a lot better if he were not to play 40 min every game that is tightly fought. A veteran coach would sit Nash to avoid unfavorable matchups and abuses. 25-30 min used wisely, Nash will give you the role of lethal assassin. So, the proper statement would be, "Nash could never LEAD a team as the FRANCHISE player to a championship", a status he will not want to lose on the Suns.

I think it is an oxymoron. I don't think that you can have one. Dribble penetration is key to collapsing defenses and Nash's man gets to the lane with ease. Even Garnett or TD behind Nash won't make much of a difference IMO.

True. But you could maniplulate rotation pattern to minimize the negative effect, to keep a balance. This certainly requires to play Nash less than he has.

Nash's defensive lack can be hidden by the zone defense, the problem is the big men are poor defenders too.
Dribble penetration can be directed towards the middle or sides, but you have to have power forward who can guard spots and a center who is mobile.

Having Stoudemire and O'Neal basically doesnt help Nash's case.

There are many good defensive point guards out there, but none stand out because the offensive arsenal of guards are just too much... basically.... if the rest of the team can shut down their men, and just let Nash's man be the offensive guy then it SHOULDN'T be a problem..

but when Nash's man scores 20+, JRich's man scores 20+, O'Neal and Stoudemire's man goes for another 20 each... then its redundant.... make Nash's man take the shots, that way it takes away from the other team's players...

That's so wrong. We saw it first-hand with Kidd abusing Nash in our "final" vs. Mavs, to refresh the memory. And everybody abuses him. There is always a chain breakdown. It's too hard to cover. And it's not like KT covering Shaq one-on-one and the Spurs say "let Shaq get his and shut down all other". KT gave good resistence and at least tire up Shaq in the process. In contrast, Nash provides no such resistence and really make all the opposing players confident shooting and scoring. And no offense is worth this deficiency, not from an aged Nash with dimishing offensive efficiency anyways.
 

Sunshooter

Registered
Joined
May 31, 2004
Posts
471
Reaction score
3
1. Re-sign Nash, keep Gentry

2. Trade Nash, find another head coach
 

SunsFanVegas

Registered
Joined
Jul 24, 2007
Posts
308
Reaction score
0
All the "Nash" bashing is just getting sickening. He is NOT the sole reason this team is not making the playoffs.
 

OldDirtMcGirt

Registered User
Joined
Dec 14, 2006
Posts
1,255
Reaction score
0
All the "Nash" bashing is just getting sickening. He is NOT the sole reason this team is not making the playoffs.

Sure he's not the sole reason, but fans are fed up with compromising defense for an explosive offense. Nash is the embodiment of the style (fantastic offense, and unspeakable defense). He's also the leader of the team. Of course he's going to get ragged on, just as he was showered with adulation during his MVP run. It's the way the game works.
 

binkar

ASFN Lifer
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Posts
2,672
Reaction score
52
or possibly he is still a top 10 PG and they know its not that easy to find one better

Wouldn't it make sense to keep MVSteve? I mean really, the dude's defensive IQ is poor, but that has always been known.

Who in the league could run this offense better? Steve is a Sun...

1. Re-sign Nash, keep Gentry

2. Trade Nash, find another head coach

The problem that you are all failing to realize is that it's time to rebuild. We obviously don't have a championship caliber roster so that means we have to go back to the drawing board. We aren't a player or two away, nor do we have the valuable trade pieces to fix our problems now and make this team a contender next season.

So the only option that leaves us is to completely rebuild. Rebuilding in the NBA generally isn't a quick process. So is Steve Nash still a fantastic player and a top 10 pg? For arguments sake let's just agree that he is. The fact is that he is 35 years old and by the time we have the correct pieces in place to have a championship caliber team Steve will be ready to call it a career. Sometimes you have to be willing to take a few steps backwards to get where you want to be.

Think of the majority of championship caliber teams in the NBA:
Cleveland, Boston, Orlando, Atlanta, Lakers, Denver, Portland, Houston, Hornets, and Utah (I don't think they are all championship caliber team but they are the top teams).

The key players for almost all of these teams were only able to be attained because their respective teams sucked enough at some point to be in a position to draft them. It's sad but true.

All these teams (or the majority of them) have had their days in the basement in not to distant past, and had to do so to be where they are at now.

We have to accept that our window is closed and it's time to let go. Keeping Nash around with a depleted team doesn't do us any good. Sure maybe we win 25 games instead of 20, or 30 games instead of 25, but what's the point?

As a Suns fan I thank him for the exciting brand of basketball he brought to the valley for many years and wish him the best, but to think there is really any point in having him around during a rebuilding phase is pure ignorance.
 
Last edited:
Top