wastro

I think something that's been overlooked in the Nash situation is that, if someone like Porter (who doesn't have a ton of money to throw away like PA) took over the team, Nash would fit in ... kinda.

Nash brought in Blake, Joel and Juan as role players - collectively, they made $5 million last year. It would be hard to argue that any of those players has been a "bust," considering what they made. It's the whole "bang for your buck" argument: overachievers making next to nothing vs. high-paid underachievers.

So with financial constraints, Nash has demonstrated he's able to bring in key role players. That ability to sign guys on the cheap and get the most out of them will help him out tremendously if and when he leaves Portland, especially as GMs realize that teams like SA and Detroit don't ride the back of one dominant superstar.

Nash would fit in if Terry ended up taking over; he doesn't have Allen's millions to throw away, so Nash's skills (bringing in good guys on the cheap) would be used best in that situation.

That said, role players don't win championships. Nor do they lead your team to .500. Millions were committed to three "stars" who were supposed to lead Portland back to glory. And there are all kinds of reports out there that Nash didn't have the final say in those signings.

If Nash wasn't overruled by the Three Amigos, I think this team would be in a much better position to win. With new management around him, Nash could probably be an effective GM. But, with new management not looking likely in the near future, he's as good as gone, and it doesn't matter who gets brought in to replace him - Kiki, Petrie, Pritchard or Isiah Thomas.

Patterson and Allen, as long as they're at the top, will look for guys who share their vision, NOT "Moneyball" devotees.