Steve Nash to the Lakers

They've been talking about it the last day and a half but only really seriously for the last day. But not much before that, then again anything happens in free agent season.
 
He was asking for a trade. The Knicks were the team that has been mentioned as wanting him. The Lakers getting him is out of the blue for me but doesn't suprise me. He wants to go to a team where he can really have a shot at a title in the next year or 2.

I was sad to see the NBA overrule the Lakers trade last year which was basically Gasol for Paul. I thought the NBA overreached their authority b/c they were afraid the Lakers would then go after Howard and become this new superteam.

I think this will hurt the Lakers in the long run b/c of the # of picks the are giving up. Those picks will come in likely rebuilding years after both Bryant and Nash have either left or retired. So probably they will be higher picks that they will need at that time but won't have.
 
Just a side note on trades.... Saw Larry Bird with a few interview comments a couple days ago, regards his retirement. He said he was against the idea of players flocking to a team with minimum salaries, and thereby (in my words now) what I would call the reverse of buying a championship.

If leagues have salary caps and various trade restrictions, why is the NBA allowing the opposite of a cap -- the idea of everyone taking pay cuts?

Why would't the league insist on each team having to pay for their stars?

If it were me, I'd set up a structure with minimums and maximums, and with a balance of drafts, trades, veterans, and so on. Each team must be fielded with a balance of talent and cannot load up on veterans, all-stars, franchise players, or whatever.

Also, why did the commissioner nix, what was it, the proposed Chris Paul trade to the Lakers? Wasn't that about not allowing something that was "not good for the NBA?"

The trades going on now is just a lot of baloney if you ask me. Why even have a freaking league if each year you just swap players all around. Also why have playoffs that last almost 3 months, or so it seems.
 
Well Hu we are talking about a guy in the last few years of his career. There are many more superstars in the league now than there were 10 or 15 years ago. So I think there is room for some of those players to play on the same team and still have many other competitive teams in the league. Thus nobody is guaranteed a championship with any of these moves. The only thing it really hurts is the small market teams which can't seem to attract these superstars like Miami, Boston, LA, NY, etc can. To that end I like the way it was before where your current team could offer you significantly more $$ than any other team could. If those smaller markets could keep the superstars then perhaps there wouldn't be as much of this going on.
 
The players who take less money are idiots. You have a finite amount of years to make this stupid money, you need to maximize your earning potential. Some players like a Jordan or Lebron could take less salary as their marketing dollars, at least for Jordan, dwarfed his salary.

These other kids that are taking less money to go somewhere, it just idiotic, you have at most 20 years, your earning potential after that career drops dramatically, and alot of those players are not ready for that sudden drop in income.
 
For a lot of players this might not be a wise business decision, but Nash strikes me as the type of player that has probably made good investments over the years, so money may not be as important to him as getting a ring at this point in his career.

Granted there are no guarantees, but this move does improve his chances for a title. It also makes the Lakers a better team and as a Spurs fan, that is my only problem with the deal.
 
he'll be fine. Steve Nash is one of the most market savy athletes today and has more companies and endorsement deals than most. He will be fine taking a couple million off his contract.
 
Maybe Nash and Howard have a couple of good years left but I am not as nervous as I would have been about 6 years ago when they were still in their earlier 30s.
 
Nash and Kobe are in the twilight of their careers. They have perhaps 1 or 2 years of a good run left in them. Howard is only 26 so not sure if you were referring to him. Pau is 32 but he isn't playing like an old man yet so I think he has a good 5 or 6 years left in the tank. Thus you have a unit that can be successful for 2 more years and then can rebuild around Howard and possibly trade Gasol as part of that process.
 
In a few years, after Kobe and Nash get too old and the Lakers start declining, somebody else will trade their best player to LA for below market value.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top