by observer Thu Jul 05, 2012 8:26 am
Have to agree with Bernie here. Colangelo's logic and strategy were both flawed. You wanted Nash here because he wanted to be here, not because the GM backed the Knicks into a corner and potentially made that option for difficult for the Knicks and Nash. Nash was a free agent, eligible to sign with any team. Trying to limit his other options wasn't likely to make him happy.
In addition to getting stuck with Field's oversized contract, we also now have to wonder what the effect will be on team morale. Colangelo made some comments about possibly using the amnesty clause, although in fairness he did not name any player. That possible tactic would have been best left unsaid and a card better left down on the table not flipped up for the media. Now various guys will be wondering if they would have been released.
On the basis of production (last year) the Fields contract is pretty oversized. Great guy, though, and a good defender, and getting out of that logjam in NY might help his career.
Calderon must be feeling more than a bit concerned given all the talk about the need for Nash. Maybe it will light a fire under him.
I do respect Nash for taking less money, actually a lot less, to play for a team near his kids and also a team he thinks he fits better at this stage of his career. I think Nash has a great insight into where he's at in his career right now and where he wants to finish it -- on a deep playoff contender, not a rebuild. Colangelo might have given a tad more thought to that also and identified a number of potential free agent targets in his comments.
I don't think the Raptors are a player or two away from deep playoff contention, even if one of those players had been Steve Nash.
On another point, how can Nash be GM of Basketball Canada while he's playing for the next three seasons in LA?