Good post and argument, worzel. I need to see more of the Brooks/Lowry duo before I can commit to backing a move like this. Making a play for Nash would be the epitome of a "win now" move yet it seems like every single time we make a move using that philosophy it never plays out that way (i.e. Battier, Artest, Francis, etc.) due to whatever the circumstance may be. With our luck Nash would sign then suffer a career ending injury two days after the trade deadline.
Looks like we'd have to trade too many players to get him. Why do that when you can just sign a FA point guard like Mike Bibby, who already knows Adelman's system?
I agree. Back in his MVP days, his offensive abilities overshadowed his extreme defensive deficiency, but not now. Nash fits better in a running style offense, but one in which we will not run with Yao here.
Q: What PG did Aaron Brooks have his best career offensive game against? A: Steve Nash Over 35 PG that can't play a lick of defense, no thank you. I would be more intrigued in converting Tmac to a starting PG than signing Nash. If Tmac is OK with it, Tmac starting at PG might be a way to make the Artest/Tmac combo work.
