By RANDY HILL
FOXSportsArizona.com
Jan. 25, 2011
The whimpering conclusion of what had the potential to be a rumor-stalling five-game trip has left the Phoenix Suns wide open for reckless speculation.
Instead of returning home as a serious threat to make a run at a playoff ticket, the Suns continued their awkward skip toward next month's trading deadline. Had they not executed a deft fourth-quarter fold in Detroit and that low-effort clunker in Philly, would-be Internet deal-makers might have left them alone for a while.
And so the debate continues: Is the franchise better served moving its (limited) primary assets as a method of rebuilding, or holding on for a playoff run seemingly incapable of ending anywhere near the NBA Finals.
But while the on-court roller coaster remains in operation, let's use this time and space to at least imagine a world in which management chooses to consider the long-range possibilities.
The obvious catalyst for an asset purge with presumed trade-market value is . . . drum roll, if you really need it . . . Steve Nash. Yeah, Grant Hill could help a lot of contending teams, but franchises currently fitting that description generally aren't eager to send back talented players, and their draft picks are low. But if you're presenting a kaboom scenario for the current roster, a late first-rounder isn't a bad yield for a 38-year-old small forward.
Anyway, back to Nash.
Did you notice the word "presumed" a couple of sentences back? Well, that suggests some healthy skepticism over whether the two-time MVP point guard can fetch anywhere near as much in trade as he's worth to the Suns on the floor, or as much as some alleged insiders believe he'd generate.
Nash is still playing at a high level. His offensive efficiency is pretty remarkable, unless he's blitzed on ball screens by committed, athletic defenders and coach Alvin Gentry doesn't flash a second post player to the elbow to relieve pressure on both Nash and the slip-screener. (By the way, Gentry is well aware of the tactic; in content on a hoops coaches' website, he once mentioned it as a reason to avoid blitzing ball screens.)
But we're not here for Xs and Os.
We're here because I don't see a terrific market for a soon-to-be-37-year-old point guard, no matter how well he can organize an offense.
While trading for Nash only seems to make sense for teams on the verge of legitimate contention, I asked around. Though far from a comprehensive study, I did check in with acquaintances who work as personnel sharpies for four NBA teams.
After reminding me that Suns management has been steadfast in its refusal to start shopping the sun, moon and stars of the franchise, all four said they believe a market for Nash would be modest. Aside from the Miami Heat (with nothing to trade) or Los Angeles Lakers (Phil Jackson has yet to use a conventional PG), contending teams are set at point guard and wouldn't be contenders if they weren't.
Contending teams also are far less inclined to give up a player with enough talent to make a deal worthwhile for the Suns. And as noted earlier in reference to Hill, their draft picks come late in the first round.
Unless they've gone absolutely nuts, teams that fall below the contending standard aren't going to pony up legitimately talented young players for an aging point guard. Bad teams do seek cap space, but they also want to keep their high draft picks. With the recent trend of game-changing free-agent candidates seeking to team up with their peers on superteams, cap-space hoarding is dicey. High draft picks
