Long time no post..........Nash to Dallas? - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

MaverickOutlaw · 06-18-2012, 04:17 PM

I hate to say it but if DW does not come here lets sign Nash. Guy still has 3 good years left in him and he is not slowing down.

markus1234 · 06-19-2012, 06:21 AM

Maybe Nash is not slowing down, because he is not playing in May and June...

And i am not sure if he can chase Westbrook and co. for 38+min in a conf. finals. Reg season is a different story.

Budapest Maverick · 06-19-2012, 06:53 AM

He wouldn't guard Westbrook, he would guard Sefolosha. Not that it would really matter much, it is proved that there is basically no correlation between PG defense, and winning basketball games. It's the least impactful defensive position, by far. Nash would be awesome if Deron doesn't come, but in order to have any chance for a championship, we'd also have to sign a guy like Gortat, who is a good defender, and (!) a nice pick&roll weapon in the post, to compliment the pick&pop game between Nash and Dirk. Now getting this guy, would be a lot tougher than getting Nash, because i don't even know if there is such guy out there, who we could get with the remaining capspace in that scenario.

aexchange · 06-19-2012, 08:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Budapest Maverick

He wouldn't guard Westbrook, he would guard Sefolosha. Not that it would really matter much, it is proved that there is basically no correlation between PG defense, and winning basketball games. It's the least impactful defensive position, by far. Nash would be awesome if Deron doesn't come, but in order to have any chance for a championship, we'd also have to sign a guy like Gortat, who is a good defender, and (!) a nice pick&roll weapon in the post, to compliment the pick&pop game between Nash and Dirk. Now getting this guy, would be a lot tougher than getting Nash, because i don't even know if there is such guy out there, who we could get with the remaining capspace in that scenario.

I don't know how you can make that assertion. The field day opposing point guards would have driving into the lane against Nash would cause all sorts of downstream issues for the Mavs --- big man foul trouble, help/rotation defense issues, and poorer perimeter rotations as a result of penetration into the lane.

I just don't know if Nash's offensive skills really offset the liabilities he causes on the defensive end. Gortat would be a very nice get, but I just don't think thats realistic.

adonis · 06-19-2012, 12:44 PM

But would Deron be able to stop Harden/Westbrook from having field days as well? We can "hide" Nash on defense if we can find a rim protecting center.

Kante · 06-19-2012, 02:02 PM

Deron Williams can guard them better than Nash can, Nash can't even guard a chair.

OP: No, thanks!

mavs777 · 06-19-2012, 05:47 PM

PG defense isn't really important in the NBA anymore with the rules, it's all about funneling (sp?) guards to bigs. Nash still is an extremely valuable player that is as effecient as a PG of anyone in the league, I'd rather have dragic than him because long term but nash would make some sense.

adonis · 06-19-2012, 10:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mavs777

PG defense isn't really important in the NBA anymore with the rules, it's all about funneling (sp?) guards to bigs. Nash still is an extremely valuable player that is as effecient as a PG of anyone in the league, I'd rather have dragic than him because long term but nash would make some sense.

Bingo.

THE LOVER · 06-20-2012, 10:58 AM

NO NO NO NO!!!!!!!!!!

Budapest Maverick · 06-21-2012, 06:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aexchange

I don't know how you can make that assertion. The field day opposing point guards would have driving into the lane against Nash would cause all sorts of downstream issues for the Mavs --- big man foul trouble, help/rotation defense issues, and poorer perimeter rotations as a result of penetration into the lane.

I just don't know if Nash's offensive skills really offset the liabilities he causes on the defensive end. Gortat would be a very nice get, but I just don't think thats realistic.

With the rule changes, there is no stopping fast guards from penetration anymore. But even before the rule changes, a fast point guard simply beat anybody off the dribble, because defense, and especially "first line" defense is reactionary. The attacker will always be faster than the defender, especially with the angle. A PG can attack in the lenght of the court, and has the most space. As mavs777 wrote, it's really all about funneling the players into the help defense.

But even if on some occasion, the defender somehow can stay in front of the opposing PG without fouling, it's not really gonna make an impact on the game, when the attacking PG can ask for a screen any time he wants, and easily beat even a much faster defender. As i said, it is statistically proven, that there is no, or very little correlation between PG defense, and winning basketball games in the NBA. I can maybe find the article, but i pretty much think this is in a more and more well known fact territory, and that's why Nash can still top, or be near the top on any adjusted +- impact list, with the disastrous roster he has around him. Because he's still that good, and because PG defense has basically no impact on the game.

jacktruth · 06-21-2012, 09:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by adonis

Bingo.

I see your point, but these statistics include a lot of teams that don't make the playoffs, or exit early every year. If you look at the overall category of perimeter defense, it is an important part of the game. Kidd and Deshawn on defense was absolutely critical in the title run. Also, look how much time Marion spent guarding opposing PGs last year.

This team is committed to Carlisle. Carlisle is committed to defense. A PG that is MIA on the defensive end probably should not be a starter on this team. Coming off the bench, fine, but not your main PG.

One other thing to consider with Nash...can he adjust his game to be a better defender. It's hard at his age, but look at his list of coaches. Has any of them been defensive minded in the least? Maybe he could adjust.

HueyFreeman · 06-21-2012, 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jacktruth

I see your point, but these statistics include a lot of teams that don't make the playoffs, or exit early every year. If you look at the overall category of perimeter defense, it is an important part of the game. Kidd and Deshawn on defense was absolutely critical in the title run. Also, look how much time Marion spent guarding opposing PGs last year.

This team is committed to Carlisle. Carlisle is committed to defense. A PG that is MIA on the defensive end probably should not be a starter on this team. Coming off the bench, fine, but not your main PG.

One other thing to consider with Nash...can he adjust his game to be a better defender. It's hard at his age, but look at his list of coaches. Has any of them been defensive minded in the least? Maybe he could adjust.

Insert quote about old dogs and new tricks. That being said, if we miss out on Deron I don't really see many options that are better than Nash.

Underdog · 06-21-2012, 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HueyFreeman

if we miss out on Deron I don't really see many options that are better than Nash.

Short term or long term? Because Chris Paul is an unrestricted free agent next summer...

HueyFreeman · 06-21-2012, 11:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

Short term or long term? Because Chris Paul is an unrestricted free agent next summer...

I think we have to think short-term, or consider letting Dirk go. Letting Chandler go was clearly a mistake. I think we could have cleared enough space (with amnesty, avoiding Odom/ Carter, etc.) to sign Deron and Chandler (spilled milk). We have to learn from our mistakes however. If we miss out on Deron we can't justify waiting another year on a player less likely to come here IMO.

Nash can still play at a high level. With him, Dirk, a resigned J-Kidd, #17, and some role players; and with an emphasis on careful minute allocation I believe we can contend for a title (maybe I'm crazy).

Kidd Karma · 06-22-2012, 12:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HueyFreeman

I think we have to think short-term, or consider letting Dirk go. Letting Chandler go was clearly a mistake. I think we could have cleared enough space (with amnesty, avoiding Odom/ Carter, etc.) to sign Deron and Chandler (spilled milk). We have to learn from our mistakes however. If we miss out on Deron we can't justify waiting another year on a player less likely to come here IMO.

Nash can still play at a high level. With him, Dirk, a resigned J-Kidd, #17, and some role players; and with an emphasis on careful minute allocation I believe we can contend for a title (maybe I'm crazy).

Yea, but the dream for Cuban and Nelson last offseason was to land Deron and Howard to add with Dirk, thus losing Chandler. Last I check neither has signed long term deals. I don't think we've made a mistake, this was the organizational plan. Even if we don't hit Deron, we still have the cap space to get a salary dump, ie Rudy Gay, Iguodala, or even possibly Howard. Will Nash come on a one year deal? I can't see that happening.

MaverickOutlaw · 06-24-2012, 06:26 AM

Funny folks talk about Westbrook that guy need to work on his apg. His point guard Iq is very horrible.

G-Man · 06-24-2012, 06:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaverickOutlaw

Funny folks talk about Westbrook that guy need to work on his apg. His point guard Iq is very horrible.

But he was dramatically better this season than last. Remember, he didn't play point in college. If he can keep his ego in check, he can be a great one. Or be an undersized killer 2.

grndmstr_c · 06-24-2012, 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by G-Man

But he was dramatically better this season than last. Remember, he didn't play point in college. If he can keep his ego in check, he can be a great one. Or be an undersized killer 2.

The only thing I saw that he really did better this season than last was shoot the midrange jumper. He didn't look any more like a PG to me than he did before. And he didn't at all look like one before. Doesn't mean he's not a hell of a player, of course.

BGMaverick9 · 06-24-2012, 06:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by grndmstr_c

The only thing I saw that he really did better this season than last was shoot the midrange jumper. He didn't look any more like a PG to me than he did before. And he didn't at all look like one before. Doesn't mean he's not a hell of a player, of course.

He was extremely formidable as a pull-up shooter off the elbow. The pick and roll really killed teams, like Dallas, with Westbrook as he showed that he had the capability of hitting that shot. Even with that, he's absolutely relentless as an attacker towards the rim. The next step for him on offense is developing that Tony Parker floater. If he can get that and continue to develop as a spot-up shooter, he'll be absolute murder.

With the pieces OKC has, I don't think they need Westbrook to be a pure or true PG. The fact of the matter is that concept of a pure PG is a dying breed. What they do need is some form of offense. They just rely on their scorer's to break through tough defenses on their own.

chumdawg · 06-24-2012, 07:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BGMaverick9

The fact of the matter is that concept of a pure PG is a dying breed.

I'm interested in hearing more about this.

It seems clear that the 5 is changing a lot, as players at the other positions are getting bigger. I'm not sure why the 1 is changing, though, except for situations like Lebron playing the point forward.

grndmstr_c · 06-24-2012, 07:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BGMaverick9

He was extremely formidable as a pull-up shooter off the elbow. The pick and roll really killed teams, like Dallas, with Westbrook as he showed that he had the capability of hitting that shot. Even with that, he's absolutely relentless as an attacker towards the rim. The next step for him on offense is developing that Tony Parker floater. If he can get that and continue to develop as a spot-up shooter, he'll be absolute murder.

With the pieces OKC has, I don't think they need Westbrook to be a pure or true PG. The fact of the matter is that concept of a pure PG is a dying breed. What they do need is some form of offense. They just rely on their scorer's to break through tough defenses on their own.

That pull-up is what I saw as an improvement. Attacking..he was already phenomenal at that. A floater can't hurt, but until his explosiveness starts to ebb I wouldn't expect it to make much of an impact on his overall effectiveness.

As for him being a pure point, I agree they don't need that. They do need him to get better at delivering the ball to Durant, though.

Underdog · 06-24-2012, 07:43 PM

Westbrook's biggest problem is that he's a #1 option on a team that already has a better #1 option.

I still think that declined Rondo-Westrook swap would have been in the best interest of both teams - OKC would get a PG who's a little more comfortable with deferring, but can step up big when called upon, and Boston would get a franchise-caliber PG to rebuild their team around... Win-win.

BGMaverick9 · 06-24-2012, 08:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by grndmstr_c

That pull-up is what I saw as an improvement. Attacking..he was already phenomenal at that. A floater can't hurt, but until his explosiveness starts to ebb I wouldn't expect it to make much of an impact on his overall effectiveness.

As for him being a pure point, I agree they don't need that. They do need him to get better at delivering the ball to Durant, though.

I guess I just look at the floater as a preemptive move to ensure he doesn't have to go the Wade route. To this day, Wade will go hard to the rim and take a fall, even if he really doesn't need to. That stuff will wear on you and eventually lead to breakdowns. If you can develop the floater early and minimize the damage, I think it's in your best interest (game wise and durability wise).

I agree with the point with Durant, but KD has got to make himself more available and do so in positions that are more favorable for himself and the team. He's got to work closer to the basket. I'm not saying he needs to be going to Hakeem and working on post stuff, but he does need to operate closer with a more consistent starting point than 22-25 feet away from the basket.

mavs777 · 06-25-2012, 03:56 AM

Rondo would make OKC's offense a lot worse. His ineffeciency has killed the celtics and would have done the same with OKC, OKC's offense was great this year.

Spurred1 · 06-25-2012, 05:08 PM

Terry Porter tried to teach the Suns defense. It failed on all levels and he got fired. Look, Nash has lasted a long time due to the excellent medical staff for the Suns. But haven't you guys noticed that he's spending more and more time on his back during the games? I would be surprised if he did last three more years at this level, esp. if the medical staff isn't what he's used to.
He would be fine as a backup, but his back and persistent lack of defense, combined with Dirk's below average defense would increase the defensive work for everyone else. Chandler was great at covering up Dirk's defensive liabilities as well as Terry's. Marion, Kidd, and Stevenson were all terrific at playing defense. Kidd can't do that as much, Marion is aging(aren't we all) and Stevenson is a Net(poor thing). Haywood is backup center material and can't cover other players' lack of defense.
If the Mavs had more defensive players, Nash would be a good fit here because his no defense play would be covered. And you can say that defense doesn't matter from his position, but it really does come down to defense when you want to win. The Heat shut down the Thunder and made it difficult for them to get going.
Nash has had plenty of opportunities to win with incredible offense. He's never tried defense and there is no reason to think he will now. I'd prefer the Mavs try to get younger overall, also.

dude1394 · 06-25-2012, 06:12 PM

I like nashie but I'm just not interested in offensive only players. Our defense needs to get back where it was, nashie would not help that at all.

Budapest Maverick · 06-25-2012, 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dude1394

I like nashie but I'm just not interested in offensive only players. Our defense needs to get back where it was, nashie would not help that at all.

Our defense was statistically better in both the regular season, and in the playoffs as last year, definitely in the playoffs. Our offense though, became a lot worse. Also, there is no correlation between PG defense, and winning basketball games. It is a statistically proven fact. Not saying Nash is the answer, but your reasoning is wrong imo. Age is the factor for me, if anything.

Underdog · 06-25-2012, 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Budapest Maverick

Also, there is no correlation between PG defense, and winning basketball games. It is a statistically proven fact.

spreedom · 06-25-2012, 08:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Budapest Maverick

Also, there is no correlation between PG defense, and winning basketball games. It is a statistically proven fact.

I would love to see statistics that prove that.

Budapest Maverick · 06-26-2012, 05:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

Now wing defense, that's a whole other question. As we all know, Kidd did a tremendous job guarding SG's, and SF's last season. Good job on the picture btw, it made me laugh.

Budapest Maverick · 06-26-2012, 05:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spreedom

I would love to see statistics that prove that.

I'll try my best to find those articles, and statistical samples, but i can tell you this, it is more and more accepted amongst basketball minds (especially with the increased used of advanced stats) that this is the case, because of a couple reasons, most importantly the end of the hand check era, and probably also the improvement of the offensive schemes. I read an unhealthy amount about this sport, and this is definitely one of the things i gathered in the last couple of years. To me, that's like saying TS% is better than FG%. I can understand why some of you don't feel that way, and we can agree to disagree, with that said, i'm gonna put in the time and try to find those articles and such that i read about this the last couple of years, hopefully it will lead to a good discussion.

markus1234 · 06-26-2012, 08:55 AM

All i know is that dominant guards are important. Guards who can attack the basket and draw fouls.

http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/pl...n/point-guards
http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/pl...hooting-guards

Nash is a shooter. At best he can trade baskets with the other guards, but he will never put pressure on their bigs. He will never challenge Ibaka, Bynum, Bosh, Chandler, Noah and co...

oilfieldtrash · 06-26-2012, 08:56 AM

No. If we don't get DWill I'm on the Dragic bandwagon. We are going in the wrong direction age wise unless you're trying to put together an over 40 team.

spreedom · 06-26-2012, 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by markus1234

All i know is that dominant guards are important. Guards who can attack the basket and draw fouls.

http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/pl...n/point-guards
http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/pl...hooting-guards

Nash is a shooter. At best he can trade baskets with the other guards, but he will never put pressure on their bigs. He will never challenge Ibaka, Bynum, Bosh, Chandler, Noah and co...

He won't challenge them by trying to shoot over them, but he will drive and dish so he can find their men wide open for a dunk or layup.

PartywithDirk · 06-30-2012, 12:27 PM

If we're reduced to Nash as our option, I would rather tank this year and try to rebuild through the draft/fa next year.

Trade Marion for what you can get, amnesty Haywood, sign a bunch of 1 year contracts to fill out a roster, hope Cunningham turns into a player, and pray for next year.

But don't insult your intelligent fans by trotting Nash back out there and telling us it's an upgrade.

mavs777 · 06-30-2012, 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PartywithDirk

If we're reduced to Nash as our option, I would rather tank this year and try to rebuild through the draft/fa next year.

Trade Marion for what you can get, amnesty Haywood, sign a bunch of 1 year contracts to fill out a roster, hope Cunningham turns into a player, and pray for next year.

But don't insult your intelligent fans by trotting Nash back out there and telling us it's an upgrade.

You mean the same nash that almost took a team with gortat and a bunch of scrubs to the playoffs?

mavs777 · 06-30-2012, 12:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dude1394

I like nashie but I'm just not interested in offensive only players. Our defense needs to get back where it was, nashie would not help that at all.

PG defense is almost irrelevant right now, and Nash's defense is average as the advanced stats show, but hey listen to the media myths and telling it as facts.

pepe · 06-30-2012, 12:52 PM

What will Nash market value be? a one year contract perhaps a two year contract 2/16 or somewhere around those figures is borderline insane!

grndmstr_c · 06-30-2012, 12:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pepe

What will Nash market value be? a one year contract perhaps a two year contract 2/16 or somewhere around those figures is borderline insane!

You're insane.

dude1394 · 06-30-2012, 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mavs777

PG defense is almost irrelevant right now, and Nash's defense is average as the advanced stats show, but hey listen to the media myths and telling it as facts.

Oh sorry...didn't realize nashie was such a competent defender.