Revolutionistt wrote:enetric wrote:That type of thinking is exactly what is wrong with the Troy deal.
We need to STOP these fantasies about older vet players magically training the bad news bears into winners.
Because of the cap structure int he NBA...because of NBA drafts where the elite talent are not found in the top 5 rounds of a draft or in the top 50 players but in the top 5 picks....you need to build a team with a long term focus in mind. Not year to year.
High paid ready to win talent at the end of their career doesnt fit a group of prospects. Get coaches to tech...get players and contracts that fit the direction..then....HAVE PATIENCE and watch it grow.
The Nets signed Troy Murphy to mentor the young players? I find that a little hard to believe. And let me ask you this, since everyone knows how I think pretty much by now, exactly whos progression would acquiring Nash hinder? Harris? Im sorry but Harris is not the answer at PG if we want to be an elite team. Ben Uzoh? Enough said. Elite players are only found in the first 5 picks?? Please man, how do you explain Tony Parker? Carlos Boozer? Reggie Miller? Im sure theres alot more but those are the only ones I can think of right now. Im not here to say yeah lets get Nash, Im all for it, we need this guy asap. Im just trying to get you to see the other side of the spectrum.
No, your thinking...your calidation of trading for a player like this was the same validation fans had this off season for why we NEEDED a Troy. Why his presence would have more impact long term than his CAP SPACE. ITs the thinking I am dismissing. Its BAD thinking. Cap management works. Bringing in in the veteran catcher to help your team like Bull Durham and Major league for a year to teach those young kids a thing or two doesnt work in the NBA when you have MANY MAN MORE needs.
Its the thinking that is the issue. Too many fans buy into a Hollywood version...a mamby pamby version of what would make them feel good idea of team building. And in baseball you can have those feel good moments. In the NBA because of its cap...beause of how few players are impact players year to year...you have to have MUCH more respect for the FLEXIBILITY of what you give up with each move. So...your moves have to reflect your place in the NBA. Young, tons of picks and prospects does NOT scream LAST PIECE VETERAN TALENT at the end of their career. Its not the way you put a team together if you want success. If you want marketing? Sure. But fans dont root for marketing decisions...they FALL FOR THEM.
Big difference.
As for you question...Nahs wouldnt hinder progression of specific players. His contract and the assets we give up would. Its like giving a homeless man a cashmere coat. Looks good, feels good...but at the end of the day still homeless and going no where.