Is the only source of the rumblings not-with-the team-anymore Steve Kerr? I don't know that I'd go crazy in a trade for Nash, but I'd love to see them ship out Brooks and upgrade the position. Tiny out of position SGs only thrive on bad teams.
they might be the 2 worse defending PGs in the L. one is too small and weak; the other is too small and slow. what the rockets need is an all-around all-star. they don't need one piece to plug in here and things like that. getting nash is not going to make us a contender.
I'm not sure guards would drive by nash any more quickly than against brooks and at least nash is taller. I think it's a wash and the defense isn't affected by this switch....offensively, too many scorers for brooks to average more than about 18 a game, which Nash is capable of, but even only at about 15-16 he's going to up the scoring of others. Offensively i can't see the team ever having problems getting good shots, whether it's the 1st or 4th quarter. You improve the offense and don't make the defense any worse, that's always a good thing.
Age difference between Brooks and Nash... Brooks still has his prime ahead of him... there's no way I'd trade Brooks for that old of a player. As great as Nash is, he's going to slow down some time... (I know people say that every year, but it's going to happen eventually). Yes, we want to win NOW, but this isn't the way to do it.
Nash is getting old and he won't help the defense. With him I don't think we win the championship so I'd say no to Nash. It's not worth the cost of our young talent.
he's 37. i think we still have no shot at the ring if we don't shore up our offense. what's the point of trading for nash? keep garnering up assets and eventually get that superstar, whoever that may be. if you guys like being stuck in one and done playoffs, that's fine with me. if we make this move, it's a now move that basically just to put fans in the seats.
Yes worse that Brooks. But Nash makes it up on the other end. If he's available and depending on the price, get it down....if we are really going all in this season. If not, pass.
36 technically....i dont think it's a stretch to say he won't slow down for another 2 years. He takes preparation and training very seriously. Melo has zero reason to come here, since he'll be able to walk to NY this summer. What other superstar will be avilable within 2 yrs? Very unlikely now that most paired up in miami, NY, and CP got new teammates. Deron is secure in utah, roy in Portland. Durant in OKC...and so on. Melo was our best shot and that door is basically shut. Iggy is the only hope and he's not a superstar. I dont think you make a move for Nash and stop because it's enough to contend...there's definitely still improvements to make defensively. Right now we score well all game and then go back to struggling for short stint in the 4th, which kills us, along with bad defense. This solves that bump in offense late in games. We're set offensively, just need Yao to keep progressing. We can't just keep collecting assets, especially with Yao and scola approaching their start of a decline in 2-3 years. Nash's window and theirs matches perfectly. This is the year we need to start setting the core group in stone for our short window to win now. If we dont, what happens to yao this summer will be a very difficult situation for both sides.
^ we will NOT come close to winning a championship with this pathetic defense we're playing. adding nash will either worsen it or keeping it just as bad. we might be fun to watch, and make the playoffs as a top 4 or 5 seed, but that's the end of it. it's a band-aid move.
YES!!! Adding the worst defensive player of the past decade to a team that can't play defense is a recipe for success
Question to ask yourselves about Nash, does he give you a better chance to win RIGHT NOW. Nash is what Aaron's ceiling could be but who knows if he'll get there. The defense will stay bad but Nash's offense would be a MAJOR upgrade over AB's simple because he would provide the consistency that Aaron has yet to provide. His contract is short and wouldn't cripple the squad, also consider the raise Aaron might get whether he deserves it or not.
Which is why i said we'd still need to improve our defense.... Our defense is the main problem, but if we didnt have those late issues getting a good shot for 2-3 minutes we would have pulled off at least 2 of the past 4 games. Balance on both sides is great, but if you can nearly perfect the offense then that's going to win you some games alone, which will help with seeding in this tough conference. The important thing is that it won't make our defense worse. A lot of "solutions" for our offense have suggested we sacrifice some of our defense for more offense, this wouldnt do that, at least not in the example i gave. Battier and Ghill are a wash, both are older, Battier is generally been a better defender, but Hill is solid and his edge in athleticism can help him make up for battier's defensive smarts. On top of that Hill is better offensively, scoring and passing wise...Hill is replaced by the pick up of dampier, who's probably a better defender, even at his age, due to experience. Nash for brooks defensively is a wash as well.
