Lakers get Steve Nash

[Jajwanda]

They won't bring back Sessions, they'll go with Morris or Goudelock as the backup 1.

[LateRoundFlyer]

https://twitter.com/#!/paulcoro A Suns beat writer just tweeted a a couple hrs ago that the Lakers and Nash are interested in a S&T. Dont know what the Lakers can would give up but it would great to get Nash for 2 yrs and bring back Sessions to back him up and learn from him and take over eventually.

I have a hard time believing Nash is seriously interested in a S&T to join the Lakers. Mavs, Knicks, Toronto, and even resigning in PHX were all ahead of us on his list just 24 hours ago, so what changed? Landry to TOR? Gordon to PHX? Yeah okay.

I predict this is little more than Nash using the Lakers as leverage before he signs a new contract with Dallas, but I'd be happy if it turned out he was being sincere.

[KingLakers]

I dont know Jajwanda they could amnesty Blake which would open up a spot. But i still can't imagine the Suns helping out the Lakers Nash really has to push this to make it happen.

[Jajwanda]

You're an incredible pessimist. First off N.Y. can't offer their deal right now because of salary. Toronto's deal has been sitting there for a while. Dallas won't compete this year. Are they in it? Sure. Are they L.A. as far as talent? You're talking about a team that could potentially feature one of the best front court duos ever, one of the best back court duos ever, and a good fifth guy who is sort of kinda crazy. If the money is even close to similar for those two years then can you really compare:

PG- Nash
SG- Courtney Lee
SF- Marion
PF- Dirk
C- Haywood

to

PG- Nash
SG- Bryant
SF- Metta
PF- Gasol
C- Howard

The Lakers adding Nash-Howard would be on the level of a Showtime team in talent.

[LateRoundFlyer]

You're an incredible pessimist.

Who are you speaking to? King? Myself? Someone else maybe? In case of the latter, you may go ahead and ignore the rest of this post. Though needless to say, I would take issue with the intimation that anyone who doesn't believe Nash is a shoe-in for the Lakers is therefore a pessimist -- whoever it's directed towards.

Firstly, a pessimist's reaction to these reports isn't terribly difficult to figure out, yet here I am scratching my head as to how you could mess up such a simple thing. A true pessimist could never believe such a deal would happen. Neither King nor I have shut the door completely on the possibility that it could.

Cynical is one thing, maybe. Pessimistic a bit of an overreach. But an incredible pessimist? Purely absurd.

You lay out an actuarially sound basis on basketball reasons why this deal makes sense. I submit it's never that simple. Does that a pessimist make? Or consider this for a moment: is it reallypessimistic to suspect Robert Sarver isn't excited about gifting his divisional rivals his flagship player for garbage? Is it really that pessimistic to wonder why Nash would suddenly renege on his words regarding the Lakers franchise just a few days earlier? Is it pessimism to suggest that what Nash wants may not be as simple as choosing between the best money or a chance at a ring?

If it is, I guess we see who the real pessimists and cynics are.

Oh, and actually, that basketball argument ("The Lakers... would be on the level of a Showtime team") makes quite a lot of assumptions. Land Howard. Keep Gasol. Round out bench. Mavs fail to reload. Et. al...

I think I don't need to point out to you Mark Cuban is hardly going to leave that roster as is or that getting Dwight and moving Pau are sure things. If (and it's a BIG if) all those things come to fruition, then great. More power to you. Who knows when the rest of business will be taken care of? Furthermore, who knows if Nash is willing to wait that long?

You speak of NY taking themselves out of the running because of Toronto signing Fields (something that I had already pointed out in my preceding post). If anything, Nash would likely be giving them more time to construct a better trade as he waits and receives late offers by PHX, LA, and others. In fact, David Aldridge points this out in his report himself. That being the case, until proven otherwise, I see no reason why to expect that the Lakers-Nash affair is more analogous to a teenager's unrequited love than a date with destiny.

Like I've already said though, I wouldn't care to be proven wrong. Do continue calling others out though.

[Jajwanda]

I think you took it a wee bit too personally. I'm reading the rest hold on.

[Jajwanda]

You're an incredible pessimist.

Who are you speaking to? King? Myself? Someone else maybe? In case of the latter, you may go ahead and ignore the rest of this post. Though needless to say, I would take issue with the intimation that anyone who doesn't believe Nash is a shoe-in for the Lakers is therefore a pessimist -- whoever it's directed towards.

Firstly, a pessimist's reaction to these reports isn't terribly difficult to figure out, yet here I am scratching my head as to how you could mess up such a simple thing. A true pessimist could never believe such a deal would happen. Neither King nor I have shut the door completely on the possibility that it could.

Cynical is one thing, maybe. Pessimistic a bit of an overreach. But an incredible pessimist? Purely absurd.

You lay out an actuarially sound basis on basketball reasons why this deal makes sense. I submit it's never that simple. Does that a pessimist make? Or consider this for a moment: is it reallypessimistic to suspect Robert Sarver isn't excited about gifting his divisional rivals his flagship player for garbage? Is it really that pessimistic to wonder why Nash would suddenly renege on his words regarding the Lakers franchise just a few days earlier? Is it pessimism to suggest that what Nash wants may not be as simple as choosing between the best money or a chance at a ring?

If it is, I guess we see who the real pessimists and cynics are.

Oh, and actually, that basketball argument ("The Lakers... would be on the level of a Showtime team") makes quite a lot of assumptions. Land Howard. Keep Gasol. Round out bench. Mavs fail to reload. Et. al...

I think I don't need to point out to you Mark Cuban is hardly going to leave that roster as is or that getting Dwight and moving Pau are sure things. If (and it's a BIG if) all those things come to fruition, then great. More power to you. Who knows when the rest of business will be taken care of? Furthermore, who knows if Nash is willing to wait that long?

You speak of NY taking themselves out of the running because of Toronto signing Fields (something that I had already pointed out in my preceding post). If anything, Nash would likely be giving them more time to construct a better trade as he waits and receives late offers by PHX, LA, and others. In fact, David Aldridge points this out in his report himself. That being the case, until proven otherwise, I see no reason why to expect that the Lakers-Nash affair is more analogous to a teenager's unrequited love than a date with destiny.

Like I've already said though, I wouldn't care to be proven wrong. Do continue calling others out though.

There’s a gap between what you said about being a pessimist versus believing Nash is a shoe-in. I don’t know what N.Y. trade can satisfy the requirements of Nash’s near double digit salary offers. Nash wouldn’t really renege on much, he was rambling on about a team he’d have a hard time envisioning himself playing for in a manner that doesn’t immediately suggest no. It’s pretty obvious that Nash isn’t signing for cheap and he isn’t taking the most lucrative deal just yet. I think he wants a chance at both and Kobe is lobbying him hard. The Lakers being on a showtime team is an argument? It’s an exclamation, something fans talk about for fun. An argument? We’re not in a serious debate.

Calling out others? Umm ya no…

[LateRoundFlyer]

There’s a gap between what you said about being a pessimist versus believing Nash is a shoe-in. I don’t know what N.Y. trade can satisfy the requirements of Nash’s near double digit salary offers. Nash wouldn’t really renege on much, he was rambling on about a team he’d have a hard time envisioning himself playing for in a manner that doesn’t immediately suggest no. It’s pretty obvious that Nash isn’t signing for cheap and he isn’t taking the most lucrative deal just yet. I think he wants a chance at both and Kobe is lobbying him hard.

That gap, my friend, is called realism. And it's got nothing to do with how I personally receive your comments. It's simply something I see a lot of on this forum (not just by you) that I finally decided to broach the subject itself.

I guess the whole issue here is whether you believe Nash was just idly rambling on or not. For my part, I take him at his word. Nash is a decent enough guy. What in his past has suggested we shouldn't receive his input at face value? This obviously doesn't go for a lot of players, but I think to make the comparison he made (that it would be like Bird putting on P&G) is quite telling. What about that screams pessimism to you? If anything, one could accuse me of being naive here.

Second of all, as to the trade itself, and NY not having the right deal in place, it's simply as I alluded to in my very first post on this subject: NY still has a lot to figure out in regards to the rest of their roster, let alone who will take assume duties as floor general. Will Lin be back? Will Nash step in? Or Kidd? I even read a rumor (though I don't take much stock into it) about Felton possibly returning to MSG.

I think it's fair to say a deal with NY wouldn't necessarily have to command that high a salary anyway, even though a $3m pittance probably won't cut it. The dude already lives there in the summer. He's a got a house in Greenwich Village. It'd be just as illustrious a destination as the Lakers in terms of bookending his career -- and it comes with the benefit of chasing a ring without joining his biggest rivals.

Some of these elements are true with Dallas as well, although one could scarcely make the claim it is the most glamorous of the three cities. But it would be a return home of sorts, just as Toronto and NY would be.

Regarding Kobe pulling for him, I really don't think Kobe is the type to lobby aggressively for particular players, be they superstars or role players either, and recent history would seemingly back me up on this. Look at what's happened when Kobe's courted free agents in the past, like Barnes and Raja Bell (I exclude Metta, because he was a different case). He simply is not going to chase anyone to join his team. Not Nash. Not Howard. But if they landed with his endorsement, who's going to say he did? Not one single person. They would know better not to.

So while I won't say, if the reports are true, that he has said nothing, I would be surprised if he and Nash have shared anything more than a short phone call or two.

The Lakers being on a showtime team is an argument? It’s an exclamation, something fans talk about for fun. An argument? We’re not in a serious debate.

Calling out others? Umm ya no…

I wonder where it is that I said we were debating whether or not that was a Showtime-worthy team as well. Could that possibly be attributed to the fact I never did? Why, yes! In fact, I would love to see a team like that. So... where's the debate lol?

The whole point in that particular paragraph, if it wasn't readily clear, isn't about whether such a team would be awesome. It's that for that team to actually be assembled, and therefore look as irresistible to Nash as you propose for him to join us, several other things must first break our way. And every event you add to the list of stipulations makes it ever less likely that it happens. That's simply how the offseason works. Go back and read that part again if you'd like. It might make better sense the second time around.

In conclusion, you can say what you'd like about it, but if you're going to mis-label myself or anyone who's adopted a similar view of this situation as pessimists, the responses will likely be far less composed than mine. Take it as you will, however.

[CJH248]

I think it's fair to say a deal with NY wouldn't necessarily have to command that high a salary anyway, even though a $3m pittance probably won't cut it. The dude already lives there in the summer. He's a got a house in Greenwich Village. It'd be just as illustrious a destination as the Lakers in terms of bookending his career -- and it comes with the benefit of chasing a ring without joining his biggest rivals.

There is a zero percent chance New York wins the title in the next 3 years.

[IMAN5]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zqfqamNanGc&feature=plcp[/youtube]

[BobbieL]

Suns fan here and I might be the only one who would do a Nash Sign and Trade to the Lakers - but I would do it - but, here is the trade. And the names mentioned, Sessions, Jordan Hill, Matt Barnes, wll that is garbage.

The only way, I as a Suns fan work the Nash trade is this

Lakers get: Nash, Childress and Frye

Suns get: tbd - either expiring or young talent

Team X: takes Gasol

Suns would offload two contracts in Frye and Childress that are not great - but they are hurting the cap

Lakers dump Gasols contract but they have to pay a penalty by taking on Frye and Childress

Suns get youthful talent or expirings for Gasol

Granted, before you say "no way in hell." I realize that - its a total pipe dream. But as a Suns fan, this is the only type of Nash to Lakers trade I make - one in which the Suns get cap flexibility after 2013, or a good young player or both - maybe an expiring and a good young player. As if Nash isn't coming back, might as well get something that Toronto, Dallas or the Knicks cannot give. Granted, I have no idea who Team X is but I am sure there is one out there

[stunnar0b]

Whatever gets the ball out of kobes hands. And me thinks this would get it done

[desertlakerfan]

Suns fan here and I might be the only one who would do a Nash Sign and Trade to the Lakers - but I would do it - but, here is the trade. And the names mentioned, Sessions, Jordan Hill, Matt Barnes, wll that is garbage.

The only way, I as a Suns fan work the Nash trade is this

Lakers get: Nash, Childress and Frye

Suns get: tbd - either expiring or young talent

Team X: takes Gasol

Suns would offload two contracts in Frye and Childress that are not great - but they are hurting the cap

Lakers dump Gasols contract but they have to pay a penalty by taking on Frye and Childress

Suns get youthful talent or expirings for Gasol

Granted, before you say "no way in hell." I realize that - its a total pipe dream. But as a Suns fan, this is the only type of Nash to Lakers trade I make - one in which the Suns get cap flexibility after 2013, or a good young player or both - maybe an expiring and a good young player. As if Nash isn't coming back, might as well get something that Toronto, Dallas or the Knicks cannot give. Granted, I have no idea who Team X is but I am sure there is one out there

If Gasol is moved it would take a better PF coming back than Frye with Nash to get LA to make the trade. Nash has value, but not Gasol value, and the Lakers don't look at moving Gasol as strictly a salary dump. No other team is offering anything even remotely close so there is no point for LA to overpay so drastically.

Nash for a S&T of Sessions, or Hill plus a first rounder in 2013 is likely the best you'll get from LA. That's still way more than NY/Dallas/Toronto are offering afaik.* So Sarver can either get some solid value in return for Nash or let him walk and effectively "cut off his nose to spite his face" when it comes to the Suns organization.

*Edit: I stand corrected here, according to Woj NY has apparently put out a offer that's about the same as ours, better if we don't include a pick, with Shumpert, Douglas and 3 filler players. I could see them taking it over sending Nash to a conference rival, I don't think the Knicks have enough talent to get Nash a ring though unfortunately.

[stillflossin]

I keep trying to break Pau into pieces to split with Phoenix in a Nash S&T, but every time I do it just seems like Phoenix would be better off with nothing and a good draft pick 2013.

[WCDYNASTY]

Are YOU aware that the Suns have no interest in those three players? They would more likely let Nash walk for free than take those players back and tie up cap money that they can be using elsewhere.

The Suns have no incentive to facilitate a trade with the Lakers. If they want them, they have the cap space to pursue them outright. If you want the Suns to help you sign Nash, you have to give them real incentive (ie a pick).

Sarver is that you???

[WCDYNASTY]

Heck yeah! Send them Sessions, Hill, or Barnes... DO IT MITCH!

My god. If this is what you meant when you were talking about your trade suggestions the other day, you need to stop posting for a while.

Let's just take Westbrook for a TPE! It's so easy, why hasn't Mitch thought of it!?!?!?

For one thing, none of those players are attractive to PHX, outside of maybe Hill. Another is that they haven't even been signed yet, so if you were banking on a S&T to get this done, you better hope another team doesn't overpay for any of them.

You again?? Really?? I know something else you need to stop

But just for the record those players were brought up by Aldridge and NOT by me! Read the previous posts! I personally don't think Nash is going to come to LA anyways.

[Jetset]

Marc Stein ‏@ESPNSteinLine
Sources briefed on talks say Lakers' reported S-and-T push for Nash blocked to date by Suns brass. Can't stomach dealing him to old rival

[Jajwanda]

That'll go over well with Nash. Back to the drawing board Mitch.

[jigga_man]

Marc Stein ‏@ESPNSteinLine

Sources briefed on talks say Lakers' reported S-and-T push for Nash blocked to date by Suns brass. Can't stomach dealing him to old rival

lol.

[Jajwanda]

What a ****. What a ****. They probably cost Steve a ring to end his career.