Trading Nash

[SirStefan32]

Exactly.

Although I'm pretty sure Nash would bring back a hell of a lot in a trade. Oklahoma City has a point guard who would be good in Porter's system (Watson), extra draft picks (including ours in 2010), and a ton of cap space this offseason ($30 million +). They'd be stupid not to try to trade for him.

And people that want Nash as a sniper, why not just trade for Jason Kapono? Nash is the best playmaking point guard in basketball, by a huge margin. His value to a team that is athletic and runs and does pick-and-rolls all day is far greater than his value to us. The whole point behind trading him hinges on the fact that he's simply a bad fit in Porter's system.

Because Jason Kapono is a one-dimensional player. Nash isn't.
Nash is, however, 35 years old, and he has chronic back problems.

What I am seeing is that most people are in one of two camps here- "Nash is washed up and useless" camp and " Nash is still the MVP and he should carry this team on his back" camp.
What cly2tw, mojorien7, and I are suggesting is that reality is somewhere in between. Nash is not the MVP anymore, he is not able to put this team on his back and carry them to victory on regular basis during the regular season and not at all in the playoffs. However, he is still an outstanding point guard who can run pick and roll, create shots by dribble penetration, and shoot jumpers like no other point guard in the league with possible exceptions of Paul and Williams.

Don't get me wrong- I am not saying that trade options should not be explored. I think if you send Nash packing and get Billups in return, for example, this team would be better off because Billups is very good defensively and is pretty good on offense too (not as good as Nash though).
You would end up with an outstanding defensive team- Billups, Bell, Barnes and Shaq are all good defenders. You'd end up having one bad defender in the lineup (Stoudemire) which is easier to cover than when you have 2 bad defenders. There are trade options that I would welcome, but I don't think that trading Nash should be a priority.

Run offense through low post- Shaq, Amare, Diaw, have other guys cutting to the hoop and taking wide open jumpers. Nash moved very well without the ball and he is one of the best shooters in the league, if not THE best).
It's ultimately up to Porter and Gentry to figure out how to set up offense to play to everybody's advantage.

 

[elindholm]

All of you who think Nash isn't still critical to the Suns' success need to be reminded of how incompetent they look when he's not on the floor. That's the team you want?

 

[Covert Rain]

Nash for Billups is one of the few trades I would actually love to see. It would have to be of that calibur or forget it.

elindhold is 100% correct. This team is anemic on offense when Nash is not on the floor. I think most of you are forgetting that Stat that pops up every single game that shows scoring when Nash is not on the floor.

Even though Nash's #'s are down, opposing players still respect his shooting ability which opens things up for other players. His presence on the floor opens up the offense even when his assists totals are low.

You cannot trade Nash for a second tier PG or this team will take a serious nose dive.

 

[Mainstreet]

All of you who think Nash isn't still critical to the Suns' success need to be reminded of how incompetent they look when he's not on the floor. That's the team you want?

Bullseye.

 

[Cheesebeef]

You cannot trade Nash for a second tier PG or this team will take a serious nose dive.

i'd rather the team took a serious nose-dive than a half-assed nose dive. A high lotto pick is a hell of a lot more productive in the long run than an 8 seed ass kicking at the hands of the Lakers, especially since next year, when we're REALLY gonna be bad, we won't even have our own lotto pick.

and e and mainstreet, trading Nash won't give us the team "we want". nothing will. the team we want is over and done with. the sooner the fans and more importantly the FO realize this and stop living in the past, the sooner we can start moving forward.

 

[Covert Rain]

i'd rather the team took a serious nose-dive than a half-assed nose dive. A high lotto pick is a hell of a lot more productive in the long run than an 8 seed ass kicking at the hands of the Lakers, especially since next year, when we're REALLY gonna be bad, we won't even have our own lotto pick.

and e and mainstreet, trading Nash won't give us the team "we want". nothing will. the team we want is over and done with. the sooner the fans and more importantly the FO realize this and stop living in the past, the sooner we can start moving forward.

I agree about the half-assed nose dive but I do think there "might" be some trade possibilities out there. They might not be likely but I think Nash has some strong value in this league.

 

[Cheesebeef]

I agree about the half-assed nose dive but I do think there "might" be some trade possibilities out there. They might not be likely but I think Nash has some strong value in this league.

to who? and that's not a snarky accusatory "you're wrong" question. ouchie and talked about this last night and we couldn't really come up with a team that a) had some talent and b) would be willing to give it up to get Nash and his contract.

the Suns have ALWAYS had the problem of refusing to hit rock bottom. actually, they did once, in 2004 and the plan would have produced a lotto pick (if they hadn't traded it) and a ton of cash which allowed us to sign Nash and Q and take a team that was the 2nd worst int he West to the best in the West. It's time to realize they have to take that tack again unfortunately.

 

[Covert Rain]

to who? and that's not a snarky accusatory "you're wrong" question. ouchie and talked about this last night and we couldn't really come up with a team that a) had some talent and b) would be willing to give it up to get Nash and his contract.

the Suns have ALWAYS had the problem of refusing to hit rock bottom. actually, they did once, in 2004 and the plan would have produced a lotto pick (if they hadn't traded it) and a ton of cash which allowed us to sign Nash and Q and take a team that was the 2nd worst int he West to the best in the West. It's time to realize they have to take that tack again unfortunately.

Good question. I would have to look at each team and see where they are at. Remember though people question who the heck would want Allen Iverson and his contract and he has been traded twice.

Not saying both situations are indentical. However, we know one thing about the NBA, there is always a team willing to do something you didn't think they would do.

I agree with the your take on the Suns and hitting rock bottom. We always retool versus building from the ground up. I think it has to be a mix of both. I can name about 28 teams in the NBA that have been hitting rock bottom for years. I don't think that is the answer either. I will say though that us taking on players at the end of their careers is a disturbing trend.

 

[nowagimp]

to who? and that's not a snarky accusatory "you're wrong" question. ouchie and talked about this last night and we couldn't really come up with a team that a) had some talent and b) would be willing to give it up to get Nash and his contract.

the Suns have ALWAYS had the problem of refusing to hit rock bottom. actually, they did once, in 2004 and the plan would have produced a lotto pick (if they hadn't traded it) and a ton of cash which allowed us to sign Nash and Q and take a team that was the 2nd worst int he West to the best in the West. It's time to realize they have to take that tack again unfortunately.

the spurs retooled around TD when robinson retired and the guards(avery, elie, elliot) got old, they didnt hit rock bottom. the suns have their young big, amare, but apparently they cant retool around him and stay competitive. If the suns had taken Deng in the '04 draft and rudy fernandez two years ago, or even held on the JJ, we wouldnt even be talking about hitting bottom and retooling.

The lakers retooled with bynum and gasol without hitting bottom. Championship level organizations have one thing in common, great management at the top.

 

[msdundee]

All of you who think Nash isn't still critical to the Suns' success need to be reminded of how incompetent they look when he's not on the floor. That's the team you want?

Well, tonight should be a good test of several different ASFN theories. Nash won't be running the point. Leandro won't be here to hog the ball. Shaq and Amare should get all the touches they can handle, and the fast breaks will again be few and far between. Stay tuned....

 

[Hat]

the spurs retooled around TD when robinson retired and the guards(avery, elie, elliot) got old, they didnt hit rock bottom. the suns have their young big, amare, but apparently they cant retool around him and stay competitive. If the suns had taken Deng in the '04 draft and rudy fernandez two years ago, or even held on the JJ, we wouldnt even be talking about hitting bottom and retooling.

The lakers retooled with bynum and gasol without hitting bottom. Championship level organizations have one thing in common, great management at the top.

I'm sorry, but Lakers took a gamble getting Bynum (being straight out of high school), and had exceptional luck in acquiring Gasol, neither which the Suns have.

 

[Kolo]

to who? and that's not a snarky accusatory "you're wrong" question. ouchie and talked about this last night and we couldn't really come up with a team that a) had some talent and b) would be willing to give it up to get Nash and his contract.

Nash has a great contract for trade value. It's guaranteed for about $8 million next year, and expires just in time for the free agent class of 2010.

Don't think Chris Mullin would give up malcontent Al Harrington, either Brandan Wright or Anthony Randolph and a 1st round pick for Nash? There's no way Mullin turns that down.

 

[mojorizen7]

All of you who think Nash isn't still critical to the Suns' success need to be reminded of how incompetent they look when he's not on the floor. That's the team you want?

You're right but i think my argument is that Porter isn't running the offense that he would like at this point because of Nash's presence. If Porter could utilize our guards(including Nash) better i don't think the +/- would be as great when Nash sits. This idea of running a hybrid offense that blends the run n gun, and also slow it down & throw it into the post isn't the answer IMO. If the SUNS would just commit to the inside/out game then Nash sitting wouldn't be as large a detriment IMO. Hope that made sense

 

[nashman]

Lots of people think they know how good or bad this team is 10 games in. Sorry its just way to early in the season for anyone to know how good or bad we are at this point. This team may or may not gel and become very good or very bad either way we are not going to know for awhile maybe 30 games or so, good team chemistry and understanding of a new offense isn't going to happen overnight. So all the trade talk 10 games in is kinda silly.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Nash has a great contract for trade value. It's guaranteed for about $8 million next year, and expires just in time for the free agent class of 2010.

Don't think Chris Mullin would give up malcontent Al Harrington, either Brandan Wright or Anthony Randolph and a 1st round pick for Nash? There's no way Mullin turns that down.

Nash is guaranteed for 13 next year and I see no reason why a young team far away from a title gives up young talent and it's future with a first round pick to get Nash who would make them go from nothing to mediocre for a year and half. If they wanted to be mediocre, they would have given Baron the contract he wanted.