Is Steve Nash the type of guy who could come off the bench?

[Finkelskyhook]

It is easy to forget how good Nash is on offense since we always concentrate on his assists and maybe his FT shooting. He is a great scorer too who loves passing. Unlike Rondo, Nash has a better feel for when he needs to start shooting more.

I don't see why Nash can't work in our team defense.

I can.  He's never played defense in his NBA career.  He's not going to start at the end of his career.

I love how every trade on here is so pro - Celtics that it is incredibly pathetic...(And no i dont love it, thats sarcasm).

You make trades to better your team, no?...you can only do that if you get more than what you have to give. It's a blog...people throw out ideas...don't call it pathetic if you don't like it.

First of all, we don't have Scalabrine to trade so every trade in this blog looks weird.

[pearljammer10]

I love how every trade on here is so pro - Celtics that it is incredibly pathetic...(And no i dont love it, thats sarcasm).

You make trades to better your team, no?...you can only do that if you get more than what you have to give. It's a blog...people throw out ideas...don't call it pathetic if you don't like it.

You make trades to make your team better but you also have to think about how the other team would get better as well. How would proposing a trade of JO and Nate Robinson for Steve freakin Nash even be remotely attractive to the Suns

[pearljammer10]

It is easy to forget how good Nash is on offense since we always concentrate on his assists and maybe his FT shooting. He is a great scorer too who loves passing. Unlike Rondo, Nash has a better feel for when he needs to start shooting more.

I don't see why Nash can't work in our team defense.

I can.  He's never played defense in his NBA career.  He's not going to start at the end of his career.

I love how every trade on here is so pro - Celtics that it is incredibly pathetic...(And no i dont love it, thats sarcasm).

You make trades to better your team, no?...you can only do that if you get more than what you have to give. It's a blog...people throw out ideas...don't call it pathetic if you don't like it.

First of all, we don't have Scalabrine to trade so every trade in this blog looks weird.

Haha. TP.

[CelticG1]

It is easy to forget how good Nash is on offense since we always concentrate on his assists and maybe his FT shooting. He is a great scorer too who loves passing. Unlike Rondo, Nash has a better feel for when he needs to start shooting more.

I don't see why Nash can't work in our team defense.

I can.  He's never played defense in his NBA career.  He's not going to start at the end of his career.

I love how every trade on here is so pro - Celtics that it is incredibly pathetic...(And no i dont love it, thats sarcasm).

You make trades to better your team, no?...you can only do that if you get more than what you have to give. It's a blog...people throw out ideas...don't call it pathetic if you don't like it.

First of all, we don't have Scalabrine to trade so every trade in this blog looks weird.

You can't be serious about Nash not fitting on our team. He blows Rondo out of the water offensively, I don't care how bad he is a on defense. And he would be a back up. Not that this would ever happen anyway but wow if we had Steve Nash on this team along with the rest of our core that would be absolutely insanely good

[Finkelskyhook]

It is easy to forget how good Nash is on offense since we always concentrate on his assists and maybe his FT shooting. He is a great scorer too who loves passing. Unlike Rondo, Nash has a better feel for when he needs to start shooting more.

I don't see why Nash can't work in our team defense.

I can.  He's never played defense in his NBA career.  He's not going to start at the end of his career.

I love how every trade on here is so pro - Celtics that it is incredibly pathetic...(And no i dont love it, thats sarcasm).

You make trades to better your team, no?...you can only do that if you get more than what you have to give. It's a blog...people throw out ideas...don't call it pathetic if you don't like it.

First of all, we don't have Scalabrine to trade so every trade in this blog looks weird.

You can't be serious about Nash not fitting on our team. He blows Rondo out of the water offensively, I don't care how bad he is a on defense. And he would be a back up. Not that this would ever happen anyway but wow if we had Steve Nash on this team along with the rest of our core that would be absolutely insanely good

I'm guessing that our players and coaches would care how bad he is defenisvely.

If the Celtics had Nash during the Rivers years prior to Garnett he'd have fit in perfectly.  Those Westheadesque teams were good offensively and clueless defensively.  Nash would have made them very good offensively and would have fit in perfect defensively for them.  The first year of that era Nash would have gotten them past the Pacers into the second round.  They would have made the playoffs and gotten dispached in the first round every season after.

On this team Nash is the antithesis of what the team stands for.  This is a defensive team first.  Nash doesn't play defense.  Short of giving up J O'Neal, who will be "injured" until his contract year, we can't afford to give up any of our 4s or 5s who know our defense for a PG (who knows no defense).  No matter how great he is offensively.  It's also very relevent that Nash has enough in his tank to not accept a role behind Rondo.

Nash would have to do such a thing because he cares about championships.  I would contend that if he did, he'd make at least a pedestrian effort defensively because defense wins championships.

[Fafnir]

Since when is being a poor defensive player automatically equal not putting in the effort?

Nash is a poor defender because he lacks lateral quickness, strength, and the other tools to be a good defender. He also tends to overhelp.

With this current Celtics team he'd be amazing, the current core after all covers up very well defensively when Nate Robinson is on the floor.

[StartOrien]

Nash would have to do such a thing because he cares about championships.  I would contend that if he did, he'd make at least a pedestrian effort defensively because defense wins championships

Couldn't disagree more with you on this point (I'm assuming you meant he doesn't care about championships). He was the engineer of 7 seconds or less, a break-neck speed that pushes his body to the limit. With the amount of injuries he's suffered, I don't think there was any kind of conditioning Steve could do to work his body where he wouldn't need to take plays "off." Because of this, I think he was forced to conserve some of his energy and that needed to come on defense.

To me, it's not a matter of not caring about defense, but an understanding of what his body can and can't do.

[CelticG1]

It is easy to forget how good Nash is on offense since we always concentrate on his assists and maybe his FT shooting. He is a great scorer too who loves passing. Unlike Rondo, Nash has a better feel for when he needs to start shooting more.

I don't see why Nash can't work in our team defense.

I can.  He's never played defense in his NBA career.  He's not going to start at the end of his career.

I love how every trade on here is so pro - Celtics that it is incredibly pathetic...(And no i dont love it, thats sarcasm).

You make trades to better your team, no?...you can only do that if you get more than what you have to give. It's a blog...people throw out ideas...don't call it pathetic if you don't like it.

First of all, we don't have Scalabrine to trade so every trade in this blog looks weird.

You can't be serious about Nash not fitting on our team. He blows Rondo out of the water offensively, I don't care how bad he is a on defense. And he would be a back up. Not that this would ever happen anyway but wow if we had Steve Nash on this team along with the rest of our core that would be absolutely insanely good

I'm guessing that our players and coaches would care how bad he is defenisvely.

If the Celtics had Nash during the Rivers years prior to Garnett he'd have fit in perfectly.  Those Westheadesque teams were good offensively and clueless defensively.  Nash would have made them very good offensively and would have fit in perfect defensively for them.  The first year of that era Nash would have gotten them past the Pacers into the second round.  They would have made the playoffs and gotten dispached in the first round every season after.

On this team Nash is the antithesis of what the team stands for.  This is a defensive team first.  Nash doesn't play defense.  Short of giving up J O'Neal, who will be "injured" until his contract year, we can't afford to give up any of our 4s or 5s who know our defense for a PG (who knows no defense).  No matter how great he is offensively.  It's also very relevent that Nash has enough in his tank to not accept a role behind Rondo.

Nash would have to do such a thing because he cares about championships.  I would contend that if he did, he'd make at least a pedestrian effort defensively because defense wins championships.

So you are basically saying that Delonte/Nate would be a better back up PG combo than Nash because Nash is a poor defender? Dirk Nowitzky is a terrible defender, would you be against having him back up KG?

[Finkelskyhook]

So you are basically saying that Delonte/Nate would be a better back up PG combo than Nash because Nash is a poor defender? Dirk Nowitzky is a terrible defender, would you be against having him back up KG?

Both are strawman arguments.  Both have too much in the tank to accept such a role.  But for the sake of argument...I'd love to have Nowitski for my second unit.  He's a below-average defender..Not terrible.  A better rebounder than anybody on the second unit.  And a great offensive player.

There is nobody on the second unit who could help defend enough the opposing PG.  Nash would upgrade the offense and downgrade the defense about as much.  You can't hide Nash's defensive liability in championship rounds. I think StartOrien may be more right about Nash than Fafnir in that his disregard for defense is probably because of the energy he has to put forth offensively.  I'm thinking that you can't teach an old dog new tricks.  Nash isn't going to learn a new defense....Particularly one as complex at ours, in his late 30s.  He is who he is.

[StartOrien]

I don't mean to be rude, but that's crazy talk.

Steve Nash is still a top 10 pg in the league, statistically the best shooter in the history of the league and because of his defense (which can easily be hidden at his position) he's not an upgrade over Nate Robinson off the bench?

I don't even know if this really warrants elaborating but quite simply:

The difference between Steve Nash and Nate Robinson offensively is significantly greater than what Nate Robinson brings defensively. I mean, not even close.

[Finkelskyhook]

I don't mean to be rude, but that's crazy talk.

Steve Nash is still a top 10 pg in the league, statistically the best shooter in the history of the league and because of his defense (which can easily be hidden at his position) he's not an upgrade over Nate Robinson off the bench?

I don't even know if this really warrants elaborating but quite simply:

The difference between Steve Nash and Nate Robinson offensively is significantly greater than what Nate Robinson brings defensively. I mean, not even close.

Agree with your premise. However, the trade scenario takes Davis and Robinson off of the second unit.  Substitute J O'Neal, who will contribute little or nothing until his contract year, and the deal looks a lot better this year....(Although I think Bradley is going to be a very good player with time and shouldn't be a throw-in in a deal).  Davis knows the defense.  So you're adding a great, great offensive player who plays no defense and subtracting a PF who knows the defense and defends well. Along with a guard who knows the defense and at least tries.  Unless you think Harangody or some NBDLer is capable of playing as well as Davis in Davis' minutes, the starters, particularly Garnett, would be playing 40+.  Garnett in particular because somebody has to be an anchor in a defense that's essentially short a man.

Nash's defense can easily be "hidden" during the regular season.  His teams lose in the playoffs because defense matters in the playoffs.  

The perfect team for Nash would have been the Sixers team Iverson went to the Finals with. Substitute Nash for Iverson on that team and they are a championship team.  He'd be playing with the best defensive center of his era and for arguably the best coach of that era.  Mutombo was one of the best defensive centers ever.  A great defensive and rebounding power forward was among a perfect storm of role players.  Nash would have made most of the shots Iverson missed.  His defense would have been easily hidden by that group.  A genius like Larry Brown would have been dangerous with a PG like Nash....As long as Mutombo was the anchor.
 

[StartOrien]

Again, he's Steve Nash. We're talking about role players here, right? Steve Nash or role players?

I'll take Steve Nash, me and the Fat guy from Teen Wolf over Nate Robinson and Glen Davis.

[CelticG1]

Again, he's Steve Nash. We're talking about role players here, right? Steve Nash or role players?

I'll take Steve Nash, me and the Fat guy from Teen Wolf over Nate Robinson and Glen Davis.

Thank you, and here is a TP for the laugh