# nash making me eat my words



## mff4l (Dec 31, 2004)

why couldn't he play like this in dallas? Gluck to you guys tonihgt man. We gotta win this game.


----------



## jibikao (Nov 14, 2004)

Nash did his best when he was in Mavs. 

I watched the playoff games. 

Nash was just frustrated sometimes when the whole team just watched him. There were so many times when Nash penetrated inside, none of the big guys could even catch the ball!! Bradley's reaction is just as bad as Dampier...if not, worse. Dirk rarely went inside when Nash was there...and Finely just stood on the 3pt line. 

The whole team relied on Nash way too much. 

I know Suns also relies on Nash a lot but at least they have great finishers and 3pt players that CAN also go inside like Q and Joe Johnson. And they respond to Nash REALLY well. 

Suns is really a superior fast-break/small ball team than the old Mavs, I hate to say it. The old Mavs had NO inside game at all. Both teams have about similar defense but offensively, Mavs just didn't have the edge. 


And of course Nash has plenty of motivation to bring up his lvl of game and he did. :clap:


----------



## Dissonance (Jul 21, 2004)

I don't think it was motivation. I just think it's a different supporting cast, different results. We may have a better TEAM, and starting 5. Also Amare Stoudemire. Pick and rolls to the inside instead of passing em out to Dirk. And I think Dallas relied on him to shoot too much as well.


----------



## Sedd (Sep 1, 2003)

mff4l said:


> why couldn't he play like this in dallas? Gluck to you guys tonihgt man. We gotta win this game.


How did you fell about him after last season before the FA period?


----------



## xray (Feb 21, 2005)

Sedd said:


> How did you fell about him after last season before the FA period?


We all knew the facts, but not the intagibles. Age and length of contract were a negative in light of recent history. The little dude was wearing down toward the end of the season - we reasoned - but perhaps the enviroment in Phoenix is easier on his body. 

Who knew ? :whoknows:


----------



## PHXSPORTS4LIFE (May 8, 2003)

bray1967 said:


> We all knew the facts, but not the intagibles. Age and length of contract were a negative in light of recent history. The little dude was wearing down toward the end of the season - we reasoned - but perhaps the enviroment in Phoenix is easier on his body.
> 
> Who knew ? :whoknows:



apparently he went out and shaq'ed up in the offseason. the concerns about his wearing down got to him and in the offseason he apparently underwent some really intense, rigorous training to prep for the full season better. it's paid off.


----------



## xray (Feb 21, 2005)

PHXSPORTS4LIFE said:


> apparently he went out and shaq'ed up in the offseason. the concerns about his wearing down got to him and in the offseason he apparently underwent some really intense, rigorous training to prep for the full season better. it's paid off.


Ok, so in the age of lawsuits, couldn't we sue him for lack of effort ?? :idea:


----------



## Sedd (Sep 1, 2003)

I was so excited when he signed with the Suns the first day of FA signing. I had no idea though we would be in this position.


----------



## jibikao (Nov 14, 2004)

Sedd said:


> I was so excited when he signed with the Suns the first day of FA signing. I had no idea though we would be in this position.


You are not the only one that "suspects" Nash. 

Many Suns fans were mad about this trade. I was digging out the old posts and many of them hated this trade. 

That's why Nash has a lot to prove. He has to overcome so many doubts: 

doubts from Suns fans
doubts from Mavs fans
doubts from the media and quite frankly, 

doubts from himself. He is too humble and it won't surprise me a bit that he once doubted himself if he could have this kind of performance. 

Now his hardwork has paid off and his confidence is swollen.


----------



## ChristopherJ (Aug 10, 2004)

jibikao said:


> You are not the only one that "suspects" Nash.
> 
> Many Suns fans were mad about this trade. I was digging out the old posts and many of them hated this trade.
> 
> ...


Nash wasn't traded, he signed as FA.


----------



## 1 Penny (Jul 11, 2003)

I think simply.... D'Antoni has constructed a team that can play the style of Nash.

Nash basically does most of the on court instructions, any star player in the league would be much better if the style of game their team plays is their strongest suit.


----------



## tempe85 (Jan 7, 2005)

KidCanada said:


> Nash wasn't traded, he signed as FA.


It's sort of a trade. You get one thing and give up something else. 

We could have used that money for other players such as...... I don't know Eric Dampier? :biggrin: Or we could have saved that money to get Idugale (however you spell that name)... which in retrospect WE SHOULD HAVE DONE ANYWAYS. Ugh... that Bulls trade was awful... but you know you can't win every trade so no big deal. 

Anyways it's a basic economic principal. The money we spend on Nash prevents us from spending it else where.. it wasn't a traditional trade but it was still a trade (or trade off) none the less.


----------



## jibikao (Nov 14, 2004)

KidCanada said:


> Nash wasn't traded, he signed as FA.


Ooops..what I mean is Suns spending so much money on an old PG. LOL Not a trade. My bad.


----------



## jibikao (Nov 14, 2004)

tempe85 said:


> It's sort of a trade. You get one thing and give up something else.
> 
> We could have used that money for other players such as...... I don't know Eric Dampier? :biggrin: Or we could have saved that money to get Idugale (however you spell that name)... which in retrospect WE SHOULD HAVE DONE ANYWAYS. Ugh... that Bulls trade was awful... but you know you can't win every trade so no big deal.
> 
> Anyways it's a basic economic principal. The money we spend on Nash prevents us from spending it else where.. it wasn't a traditional trade but it was still a trade (or trade off) none the less.


Well, I guess if you put it this way... makes sense to me. :clap: 

Mavs wanted to save money to sign Dampier... so technically, it's like you trade Nash for Dampier except it's not an actual "trade".


----------



## mff4l (Dec 31, 2004)

Sedd said:


> How did you fell about him after last season before the FA period?



how did I feel about him? Very disappointed. He shot 38 percent from the field. bibby torched him. Honestly I thought he was done but this year he's turned it around. I told someone on aim that I think this is just his year before game six was even played. It's like fate. He got married. Had twin girls. Nice contract. Good regular season. Mvp. Playing like the playoffs mvp and just being really blessed. God is watching over him.


----------



## mff4l (Dec 31, 2004)

tempe85 said:


> It's sort of a trade. You get one thing and give up something else.
> 
> We could have used that money for other players such as...... I don't know Eric Dampier? :biggrin: Or we could have saved that money to get Idugale (however you spell that name)... which in retrospect WE SHOULD HAVE DONE ANYWAYS. Ugh... that Bulls trade was awful... but you know you can't win every trade so no big deal.
> 
> Anyways it's a basic economic principal. The money we spend on Nash prevents us from spending it else where.. it wasn't a traditional trade but it was still a trade (or trade off) none the less.



sighs the mavs would have gotten damp anywaz man. They did a sign and trade to bring him in. That's how they were able to get damp. 

The mavs could have matched nash's salary because they had his larry bird rights meaning you can exceed the cap to sign him. 

but he gave cuban one chance and he didn't match it then bolted. That's what really irked me about the whole thing. He didn't even wait to see what was going to happen. If Mark would have looked at the market and changed his mind? He knows mark doesn't make rash decisions like that but nash just left the first chance he got. 

I honestly believe that if nash would have stayed with the mavs and all the trades the mavs made were done and they had terry as a backup? The mavs would have won the title. I still think we had a very good shot but we just didn't close out games. We blew a 16 point lead. We had a chance to win it and didn't call a timeout. I don't know what guys were doing out there.


----------



## jibikao (Nov 14, 2004)

mff4l said:


> sighs the mavs would have gotten damp anywaz man. They did a sign and trade to bring him in. That's how they were able to get damp.
> 
> The mavs could have matched nash's salary because they had his larry bird rights meaning you can exceed the cap to sign him.
> 
> ...


Because Suns showed MUCH LOVE towards Nash. Suns brought the GM, the coach and Amare to Dallas. Amare said "Steve, we really need you. I need somebody to feed me the ball." 

Nash was surprised/amazed by how much Suns wants him. Suns made an offer that it's just too good to refuse and all Cuban said is "Financially, it doesn't make sense to match Suns' offer...financially and the tax complications..blah blah blah." If Cuban cares so much about money, why can't Nash thinks about $$$ too? Overall, NBA is an entertainment and those professionals are there to make money.  

Overall, Nash had his revenge. I didn't expect this at all. Nash did have a few bad playoff games and ever since JJ went down, I was very worried about Nash's conditioning and how much pressure he was getting. Well, he took on the challenge and took Suns to WCF!!!! 

Mavs did have a great series though. If anything, they need to learn how to play in the 4th quarter. There's not one 4th quarter where they out-score Suns. The players looked frustrated and undisciplined. Mavs had so many chance to close this game. 

Give Mavs one more year before making any trade. Terry has been great in the playoffs so far. Dirk needs to adjust his emotion and leadership. Constantly yelling at your teammates like that in the public just doesn't look very good in the news.


----------



## Dissonance (Jul 21, 2004)

mff4l said:


> sighs the mavs would have gotten damp anywaz man. They did a sign and trade to bring him in. That's how they were able to get damp.
> 
> The mavs could have matched nash's salary because they had his larry bird rights meaning you can exceed the cap to sign him.
> 
> ...


Mavs couldn't have matched. He was an Unrestricted free agent. You can only match when a player is a Restricted FA. I've never heard of a rule where you're an UFA and it can be matched. Bird rights,I think are for when you resign someone you can make it 7 yrs and the other team can't make a 7 yr contract except the team resigning him. Has nothing to do with matching for an UFA as far as I heard. And Nash gave Cuban a chance when he wasn't a RFA to be able to match it. Get over it now. If you don't believe me check here...

http://aol.nba.com/news/Free_Agents-109163-571.html

http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/sports/basketball/10194152.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp

http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/?sty=29177


Oh and you can get rid of your signature because that's not true :biggrin:


----------



## LuckyAC (Aug 12, 2004)

It's sort of a match. You pay as much to ensure he stays on your team. 

They couldn't have actually forced a match by Bird Rights, but if Cuban had been willing to offer as much, Nash would have stayed with his old team.

It wouldn't be a traditional match but it would still be a match (or matching amount) none the less.


----------



## Dissonance (Jul 21, 2004)

LuckyAC said:


> It's sort of a match. You pay as much to ensure he stays on your team.
> 
> They couldn't have actually forced a match by Bird Rights, but if Cuban had been willing to offer as much, Nash would have stayed with his old team.
> 
> It wouldn't be a traditional match but it would still be a match (or matching amount) none the less.


Exactly, so he didn't have to give Cuban a chance. It was his choice to tell him and ask him if he were to match. Everyone acts like Nash turned on them and didn't give em a chance.


----------



## Tersk (Apr 9, 2004)

Co-sign


----------



## Kekai (Jan 12, 2005)

Theo! said:


> Co-sign


I don't want to rub it in Theo, but Suns beat the Mavs!!! 

:laugh:


----------



## mff4l (Dec 31, 2004)

dissonance19 said:


> Mavs couldn't have matched. He was an Unrestricted free agent. You can only match when a player is a Restricted FA. I've never heard of a rule where you're an UFA and it can be matched. Bird rights,I think are for when you resign someone you can make it 7 yrs and the other team can't make a 7 yr contract except the team resigning him. Has nothing to do with matching for an UFA as far as I heard. And Nash gave Cuban a chance when he wasn't a RFA to be able to match it. Get over it now. If you don't believe me check here...
> 
> http://aol.nba.com/news/Free_Agents-109163-571.html
> 
> ...


nope cause you still aint won nothing yet. My mavs already been here man. Win a ship then talk. LOL



http://www.dfw.net/~patricia/mavs/mavs-news/mavs-sal.txt

check 98-99 then look at nash's payroll jump t he next year.

the mavs had dirk signed to a 3 year deal with an option for a fourth then matched his deal. I forgot. Nash opted out of his contract. Even though the mavs overpaid him to be here in the first place. 


1/25 Dallas signed Steve Nash to a 6 year contract extension with a
player opt-out clause after the 5th year

it was like six years 42 million for a guy who would putting up like 8 points and 4 dimes a game. That was ridiculous. then when he finally starts earning his paycheck the wants to get greedy?

9 mil or 12? not a whole lot of diff for someone who only earned about 1/3rd of his nba contract. Dude just bolted but hey what else can you say. I like our team now. I can't wait til devin harris matures


----------



## Dissonance (Jul 21, 2004)

mff4l said:


> nope cause you still aint won nothing yet. My mavs already been here man. Win a ship then talk. LOL


Never said we won anything yet or were going to...except we did beat you guys with your deep bench. So, there. :biggrin:


----------



## mff4l (Dec 31, 2004)

dissonance19 said:


> Never said we won anything yet or were going to...except we did beat you guys with your deep bench. So, there. :biggrin:



LOL!!


----------

