Offseason Thread 7: A Tale Of Two Dragons

[jcsunsfan]

I am not bitter at Steve Nash. He was not going to be resigned with the Suns. He took the Laker job. Its a business. I do not expect players to have the same loyalties as fans do. They are mercenaries.

But with that in mind, I am not pulling for him either. He is a Laker now, and the enemy. When he takes off the Laker uni, we can be nice.

[Christine-In-AZ]

Nash is a traitor who ruined his legacy trying to chase a ring and further his media/television career in LA. Even Hill likened Nash going to the Lakers like someone transferring from Duke to UNC. He never had any real loyalty to the Suns, even went on Letterman to publicly flirt with the idea of going to the Knicks while still under contract. It's obvious he values money the most over anything though, he left a 60 win Dallas team for a bottom feeder Suns team for more money and refused to retire in order to make more money this season.

I dont get this attitude.

a.) Ring chasers are guys who have little to contribute and sign for the min JUST to get their chance. Nash was seen as a real contributor to the Lakers possible success at the time. Remember when we were all just ready to hand the Lakers their ring? Nash was a big reason why.

b.) He wasnt going to win his ring here. Should we feel betrayed because at the time he went to a team that gave him the BEST opportunity, something that he 1.) DESERVED and 2.) couldnt get with our team. Its not HIS fault he wasnt going to win one here. It was the SUNS fault.

c.) Ultimately the Lakers failure can be attributed partially to him. It didnt work in LA. And partially because of him, the Lakers are bottom feeders. That in my eyes is a WIN for us.

d.) Why should be give up the money? If owners had the ability they would be cutting players left and right to clear cap space. WHY should a players voluntarily give the owners that power? They signed him to that contract. They took the risk. And ultimately, they made the bed that they have to sleep in. I give the Lakers no pity.

e.) Had Nash retired after last season, the Lakers would have had a ton of cap space. We'd be crucifying Nash for allowing they Lakers to reload, something they WOULD HAVE DONE. Instead, they are now scraping together a pathetic team that is going nowhere for at least 2 more years.

f.) Nash could have left via FA and the suns would have got NOTHING. Instead we got 2 firsts and 2 seconds. One of those picks could turn into a high lotto. That's another win for us. I dont recall any other opportunity that would have netted those kind of assets.

g.) Its his freaking life. Did him leaving the suns hurt you? NO. Did it hurt the suns? Realistically, his going to the Lakers helped us out more than any other opportunity.

h.) Nash staying with the suns would have made us one of two things. 1.) we'd have been a treadmill team. We'd win just enough and patch things together in way that would keep us barely competitive....because we wouldnt want to do the disservice of being a terrible team during Nash's last few years. 2.) He would have suffered the same injury fate as with the Lakers and we'd be questioning the ownership as to WHY we kept him knowing that this would have happened.

I believe the events that have unfolded only unfolded because Nash went to the Lakers. We probably wouldnt have traded for Bledsoe. Probably wouldnt have traded Scola away, and we'd be asking ourselves if keeping him was the right choice. Does it suck that he went to a rival? Yes. But are we better off because of it? Yes. And is this rival worse off because of it? Most definitely. We went through ONE season of being terrible. The future is bright for us ONLY because Nash went to the Lakers. The Lakers had ONE good season with him, and its looking like they have to suffer through 4 years of recovery because of it.

The end.

Nailed it

[NavLDO]

Nash is a traitor who ruined his legacy trying to chase a ring and further his media/television career in LA. Even Hill likened Nash going to the Lakers like someone transferring from Duke to UNC. He never had any real loyalty to the Suns, even went on Letterman to publicly flirt with the idea of going to the Knicks while still under contract. It's obvious he values money the most over anything though, he left a 60 win Dallas team for a bottom feeder Suns team for more money and refused to retire in order to make more money this season.

I dont get this attitude.

a.) Ring chasers are guys who have little to contribute and sign for the min JUST to get their chance. Nash was seen as a real contributor to the Lakers possible success at the time. Remember when we were all just ready to hand the Lakers their ring? Nash was a big reason why.

b.) He wasnt going to win his ring here. Should we feel betrayed because at the time he went to a team that gave him the BEST opportunity, something that he 1.) DESERVED and 2.) couldnt get with our team. Its not HIS fault he wasnt going to win one here. It was the SUNS fault.

c.) Ultimately the Lakers failure can be attributed partially to him. It didnt work in LA. And partially because of him, the Lakers are bottom feeders. That in my eyes is a WIN for us.

d.) Why should be give up the money? If owners had the ability they would be cutting players left and right to clear cap space. WHY should a players voluntarily give the owners that power? They signed him to that contract. They took the risk. And ultimately, they made the bed that they have to sleep in. I give the Lakers no pity.

e.) Had Nash retired after last season, the Lakers would have had a ton of cap space. We'd be crucifying Nash for allowing they Lakers to reload, something they WOULD HAVE DONE. Instead, they are now scraping together a pathetic team that is going nowhere for at least 2 more years.

f.) Nash could have left via FA and the suns would have got NOTHING. Instead we got 2 firsts and 2 seconds. One of those picks could turn into a high lotto. That's another win for us. I dont recall any other opportunity that would have netted those kind of assets.

g.) Its his freaking life. Did him leaving the suns hurt you? NO. Did it hurt the suns? Realistically, his going to the Lakers helped us out more than any other opportunity.

h.) Nash staying with the suns would have made us one of two things. 1.) we'd have been a treadmill team. We'd win just enough and patch things together in way that would keep us barely competitive....because we wouldnt want to do the disservice of being a terrible team during Nash's last few years. 2.) He would have suffered the same injury fate as with the Lakers and we'd be questioning the ownership as to WHY we kept him knowing that this would have happened.

I believe the events that have unfolded only unfolded because Nash went to the Lakers. We probably wouldnt have traded for Bledsoe. Probably wouldnt have traded Scola away, and we'd be asking ourselves if keeping him was the right choice. Does it suck that he went to a rival? Yes. But are we better off because of it? Yes. And is this rival worse off because of it? Most definitely. We went through ONE season of being terrible. The future is bright for us ONLY because Nash went to the Lakers. The Lakers had ONE good season with him, and its looking like they have to suffer through 4 years of recovery because of it.

The end.

Nailed it

Gotta agree...and no, I'm not a yungsta just because I've only been on the forum for 2 months. I've been a fan for going on 30 years, but really diehard, not til the late 80's...but that's beside the point.

We are in a better position because Nash left, and the Lakers are in a worse position, yet fans want to bash Nash for going to a potential contender, that just so happens to be our most hated rival? Well, I can't tell people what to feel, just because I don't agree with it. And it doesn't make any one of us "less" of a Suns' fan because we aren't bitter towards Nash. I appreciate the time he had here, what he did for the Suns while here, and ultimately, what he did for us since he left. I actually feel a little bit bad for the Lakers, that they have to pay Nash $9M (though I couldn't think of a better team for it to happen to...); doesn't mean I like the Lakers; doesn't mean I have hatred for Nash. Just think $9M is a hefty price to pay for a mistake. But I totally get the argument that all contracts are gambles, and this gamble didn't work out.

And actually, and I'm sure this will go over like a lead balloon, but I actually feel worse for Laker fans than I do the Lakers as a team. Yes, they have some really irritating and pompous fans (every fan base does); and yes, they've enjoyed winning multiple championships; but I always feel bad for a fan base when things go horrifically wrong for their team. Call me a softy, but I do feel bad for the truly passionate fans--especially the younger ones. I can't stand to see some young kid crying because their team losses.

OK, off my soapbox. Just trying to say I see both sides of the argument, and don't think one is more right than the other one, I just happen to agree mostly with asudevil's--doesn't make the other "side" wrong. And I hope to not see anymore name-calling, questioning "fandom", or disrespecting someone's opinion, just because it doesn't happen to jive with your own. Can't we just all get along and sing kumbaya!

[Frank Lee]

....... I can't stand to see some young kid crying because their team losses.

No better tears shed in the midst of youthful passion.




PS... and really, you gotta do something about that 'feel bad for the fLakers' bit

[BurningHeart]

If the Phoenix Suns are the United States of America, and the Spurs are, say, modern-day Iran, the Lakers are the USSR/Russia.

I treat anyone who defects to either regime as treasonous and a personal affront and the higher up in prestige the defector is, the worse the offense is.

It really is as simple as that. Sorry to see people don't agree. Go on with your sentiments about "actually feeling bad for the Lakers."

[RaisingArizona]

If the Phoenix Suns are the United States of America, and the Spurs are, say, modern-day Iran, the Lakers are the USSR/Russia.

I treat anyone who defects to either regime as treasonous and a personal affront and the higher up in prestige the defector is, the worse the offense is.

It really is as simple as that. Sorry to see people don't agree. Go on with your sentiments about "actually feeling bad for the Lakers."

Hell no. I will never feel bad for the baddie lakers. They're trash, always have been, always will be.

I like to view Nash as a separate entity. He knew we were going towards a youth movement and on paper the baddie lakers appeared to not so bad. However, it turns out they were trash and Nash was constantly hurt. It didn't work out for them but as a Suns fan, I'm laughing my way to the bank. The lakers will be the trash of the NBA for decades to come and this trade helped set them back quite a bit.

I feel bad for Nash in how it ended like this. As for the garbage lakers, I do not, nor will never feel bad for them and their terribadness.

[SunsFanSSOL]

Sunsfanssol you are so far off base. The Suns didn't want him. They wanted to start a youth movement and it was a mutual parting.

I understand that. I didn't mind him leaving, it was him choosing the Lakers of all teams. Remember, this was 2 weeks after he said something along the lines of "I'm old school, I could never see myself putting on a Lakers jersey."

[Christine-In-AZ]

If the Phoenix Suns are the United States of America, and the Spurs are, say, modern-day Iran, the Lakers are the USSR/Russia.

I treat anyone who defects to either regime as treasonous and a personal affront and the higher up in prestige the defector is, the worse the offense is.

It really is as simple as that. Sorry to see people don't agree. Go on with your sentiments about "actually feeling bad for the Lakers."

Your analogy would be more vivid or real for me if the Spurs are China and we're Canada.

I'd never feel sorry for the Lakers, but I got over hating on franchises a long time ago. My Laker battle scars are many, and go back to the 1970 playoffs, but the Lakers or Spurs are just 2 (high quality) franchises out of 29 that the Suns are trying to best every year.

I respect the hell outta both the Lakers and Spurs...they keep getting "there" and then get "it" done over and over again.

[BurningHeart]

If the Phoenix Suns are the United States of America, and the Spurs are, say, modern-day Iran, the Lakers are the USSR/Russia.

I treat anyone who defects to either regime as treasonous and a personal affront and the higher up in prestige the defector is, the worse the offense is.

It really is as simple as that. Sorry to see people don't agree. Go on with your sentiments about "actually feeling bad for the Lakers."

Hell no. I will never feel bad for the baddie lakers. They're trash, always have been, always will be.

I like to view Nash as a separate entity. He knew we were going towards a youth movement and on paper the baddie lakers appeared to not so bad. However, it turns out they were trash and Nash was constantly hurt. It didn't work out for them but as a Suns fan, I'm laughing my way to the bank. The lakers will be the trash of the NBA for decades to come and this trade helped set them back quite a bit.

I feel bad for Nash in how it ended like this. As for the garbage lakers, I do not, nor will never feel bad for them and their terribadness.

Their suffering now does not ease the disgust of him affiliated with them or lessen the original offense of defecting.

Not to me, anyway.

I'm glad you're over hating franchises, Chris. That's cool. Hating the Lakers is not just about hating the franchise, for me.

[kingstyyyle]

Sunsfanssol you are so far off base. The Suns didn't want him. They wanted to start a youth movement and it was a mutual parting.

I understand that. I didn't mind him leaving, it was him choosing the Lakers of all teams. Remember, this was 2 weeks after he said something along the lines of "I'm old school, I could never see myself putting on a Lakers jersey."

Yeah the whole staying close to his kids BS was shady too.

[Sunsdeuce]

There is only a handful of players I Consider life long suns even though they got traded. Majerle, ceballos. Than there is one player I tried to hate after he got traded but couldn't, Barkley. Still one of my favorites.

Nash was fun and all but I don't get the vibe from him that phx is home to him like we get with majerle. Majerle lives and breathes phx (which pisses me off everytime I think about how those two scumbags mother truckers treated him, blanks and hunter).

Anyway Nash to me is just blah. Fun and cute era with Nash and crew. The SSOL can't hold a candle to the Barkley era so that's why Nash is blah to me. KJ was a better point guard than Nash (KJ put up assists numbers like Nash while also averaging 20+ points a game in his prime). And KJ retired a lot younger so just because Nash has more totals to me is meaningless. KJ also gets major props because he refused to wear anything but a suns jersey. Was offered a contract from Miami and couldn't do because he couldn't see himself in anything other than a suns jersey. Bam!

Anyway rant over. Got off topic, sorry.



Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[Christine-In-AZ]

If the Phoenix Suns are the United States of America, and the Spurs are, say, modern-day Iran, the Lakers are the USSR/Russia.

I treat anyone who defects to either regime as treasonous and a personal affront and the higher up in prestige the defector is, the worse the offense is.

It really is as simple as that. Sorry to see people don't agree. Go on with your sentiments about "actually feeling bad for the Lakers."

Hell no. I will never feel bad for the baddie lakers. They're trash, always have been, always will be.

I like to view Nash as a separate entity. He knew we were going towards a youth movement and on paper the baddie lakers appeared to not so bad. However, it turns out they were trash and Nash was constantly hurt. It didn't work out for them but as a Suns fan, I'm laughing my way to the bank. The lakers will be the trash of the NBA for decades to come and this trade helped set them back quite a bit.

I feel bad for Nash in how it ended like this. As for the garbage lakers, I do not, nor will never feel bad for them and their terribadness.

Their suffering now does not ease the disgust of him affiliated with them or lessen the original offense of defecting.

Not to me, anyway.

I'm glad you're over hating franchises, Chris. That's cool. Hating the Lakers is not just about hating the franchise, for me.

I'll accept and respect your hate for the Lakers...and something that seems deeper/wider than pro basketball. But your use of "defecting" and "Nash" in the same thought, especially given the circumstances 2 and a half years ago has me shaking my head. Nash had to move on, and the LA offer was one he'd have been stupid to reject...same for the Suns.

[Sunsdeuce]

Everyone here has a point about Nash defecting. He sorta did. If I remember right he asked for a trade and the front office was trying to accommodate him. There was an offer from the lakers(which Nash indicated he wanted to go there for what we now know is for BS reasons) and sarver initially refused but eased on the idea and sent him to the lakers.

So Nash had a piece of the trade. Plus Nash admitted he did it for the money which irritates me alittle.

So everyone here is right on their stance on Nash in one way or another.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[spanishninja]

Im still of the opinion that he planned all this to screw over the Lakers.

[Christine-In-AZ]

Anyway Nash to me is just blah. Fun and cute era with Nash and crew. The SSOL can't hold a candle to the Barkley era so that's why Nash is blah to me.

Wow. Really?

"Fun and Cute"? "Can't hold a candle to the Barkley era"?

To each their own, but while I enjoyed that first Barkley year, and even the gradually diminishing returns of the next two years, I'll take SSOL '04 to '08 (+'10) as my Suns fandom apex era. No finals appearance, but that was the best Suns basketball, over the longest period I'd ever seen. They were this close! and for so long. SSOL has reshaped the NBA and all of it lead by Nash.

[Sunsdeuce]

Anyway Nash to me is just blah. Fun and cute era with Nash and crew. The SSOL can't hold a candle to the Barkley era so that's why Nash is blah to me.

Wow. Really?

"Fun and Cute"? "Can't hold a candle to the Barkley era"?

To each their own, but while I enjoyed that first Barkley year, and even the gradually diminishing returns of the next two years.

I'll take SSOL '04 to '08 (+'10) as my Suns fandom apex era. No finals appearance, but that was the best Suns basketball, over the longest period I'd ever seen. They were this close! and for so long. SSOL has reshaped the NBA and all of it lead by Nash.

Did you live in phx in 92-93? Phx suns owned phx. Put it this way, the suns were so popular, regular season games were pay-per-view!

As far as best basketball, do not agree. 92-93 and even the a fully healthy 95 team would destroy any Nash era team.
KJ, Barkley, ceballos, majerle,>>>>Nash, amare, Marion, bell/JJ

Had Danny manning not got his knee destroyed by kleine, easy title.

And no the SSOL era did not reshape the NBA. Suns have always been an uptempo style since their young years. The only thing it changed is that it didn't use a conventual center. But what did that lineup get us? It did nothing but prove that it was a gimmick style while being fun. Colangelo understood that "his" suns needed a star power forward to get to the next level. Hence,Barkley. Amare couldn't get a rebound if it fell in his lap. To me d'antoni and his lack of fundamental basketball was his downfall. His offense was great because of Nash.

Feel free to disagree.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[RaisingArizona]

If the Phoenix Suns are the United States of America, and the Spurs are, say, modern-day Iran, the Lakers are the USSR/Russia.

I treat anyone who defects to either regime as treasonous and a personal affront and the higher up in prestige the defector is, the worse the offense is.

It really is as simple as that. Sorry to see people don't agree. Go on with your sentiments about "actually feeling bad for the Lakers."

Hell no. I will never feel bad for the baddie lakers. They're trash, always have been, always will be.

I like to view Nash as a separate entity. He knew we were going towards a youth movement and on paper the baddie lakers appeared to not so bad. However, it turns out they were trash and Nash was constantly hurt. It didn't work out for them but as a Suns fan, I'm laughing my way to the bank. The lakers will be the trash of the NBA for decades to come and this trade helped set them back quite a bit.

I feel bad for Nash in how it ended like this. As for the garbage lakers, I do not, nor will never feel bad for them and their terribadness.

Their suffering now does not ease the disgust of him affiliated with them or lessen the original offense of defecting.

Not to me, anyway.

I'm glad you're over hating franchises, Chris. That's cool. Hating the Lakers is not just about hating the franchise, for me.

As a fan, I get it, I'd never play for the lakers either.

As a professional, If I ever got offered the money and opportunity that he did in LA, I'm not sure I'd be able to pass it up. Seems like money cures all.

[Christine-In-AZ]

Anyway Nash to me is just blah. Fun and cute era with Nash and crew. The SSOL can't hold a candle to the Barkley era so that's why Nash is blah to me.

Wow. Really?

"Fun and Cute"? "Can't hold a candle to the Barkley era"?

To each their own, but while I enjoyed that first Barkley year, and even the gradually diminishing returns of the next two years.

I'll take SSOL '04 to '08 (+'10) as my Suns fandom apex era. No finals appearance, but that was the best Suns basketball, over the longest period I'd ever seen. They were this close! and for so long. SSOL has reshaped the NBA and all of it lead by Nash.

Did you live in phx in 92-93? Phx suns owned phx. Put it this way, the suns were so popular, regular season games were pay-per-view!

As far as best basketball, do not agree. 92-93 and even the a fully healthy 95 team would destroy any Nash era team.
KJ, Barkley, ceballos, majerle,>>>>Nash, amare, Marion, bell/JJ

Had Danny manning not got his knee destroyed by kleine, easy title.

Feel free to disagree.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

I'm a native. Yes, the place went nuts.

I wasn't arguing that SSOL could beat Barkley's Suns teams..Just that SSOL graded higher for me. Nash and Co. were at or near the top of the NBA for a long time...they were in the hunt many, many times. I enjoyed the style of play moreso. It was beautiful. You probably hate Bill Simmons but this 2007 article sums it up- http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/st ... ons/070117

I probably wouldn't have pushed back on your take if you hadn't used "cute and fun" or the candle reference.

[Sunsdeuce]

Wow. Really?

"Fun and Cute"? "Can't hold a candle to the Barkley era"?

To each their own, but while I enjoyed that first Barkley year, and even the gradually diminishing returns of the next two years.

I'll take SSOL '04 to '08 (+'10) as my Suns fandom apex era. No finals appearance, but that was the best Suns basketball, over the longest period I'd ever seen. They were this close! and for so long. SSOL has reshaped the NBA and all of it lead by Nash.

Did you live in phx in 92-93? Phx suns owned phx. Put it this way, the suns were so popular, regular season games were pay-per-view!

As far as best basketball, do not agree. 92-93 and even the a fully healthy 95 team would destroy any Nash era team.
KJ, Barkley, ceballos, majerle,>>>>Nash, amare, Marion, bell/JJ

Had Danny manning not got his knee destroyed by kleine, easy title.

Feel free to disagree.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

I'm a native. Yes, the place went nuts.

I wasn't arguing that SSOL could beat Barkley's Suns teams..Just that SSOL graded higher for me. Nash and Co. were at or near the top of the NBA for a long time...they were in the hunt many, many times. I enjoyed the style of play moreso. It was beautiful. You probably hate Bill Simmons but this 2007 article sums it up- http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/st ... ons/070117

I probably wouldn't have pushed back on your take if you hadn't used "cute and fun" or the candle reference.

Got what your saying and don't get me wrong the suns were always a top 5 team for about a 5 year period during the Nash years and if was great. But just one year, 92-93, was more dominate and special as a team than the 5 years combined combined when the suns were great in the Nash era.

But like anything else, it can be opinion style answer.

For me I just saw Barkley do so much amazing things as undersized power forward and dominated the league. 25 points and 12 boards a game was just amazing by Barkley. The dude just didn't back down from anyone.

Again it's an opinionated answer. So everyone is gonna see it different. Cheers.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[NaturalBuns]

Peak amare was scary Barkley wouldn't have stood a chance.
At the same time amare defensive woes would hurt The SSOL
Era.

If amare didn't tear his leg he's one of those players "what could of been"
Dropping 50 points at like age 22 or 23.

C'mon now that's impressive if it's a SG,SF but a PF getting 50? Let alone at such a young age.

Marion>majerle.
Putting KJ over Nash is very debatable.
And a peak amare hangs with Barkley at least on the offensive side.

SSOL teams had very little depth though.