Many Lakers’ fans (or maybe they’re a very vocal subset) would just as soon forget Steve Nash’s entire tenure as a Laker. After all, over his three year contract, he was only really fully healthy for a single game. After breaking his leg in his second regular season game, and then having his recovery and rehab continuously lose out to setbacks, we never got to see what he could really offer. As I have written, fans (and, to a certain extent his teammates and the organization) have a right to feel frustrated about that. Not as frustrated as Nash, but that’s a different story for a different day.
Those days are in the past, though. Just as, it seems, Nash’s pursuit of ever playing in the NBA again is in the past. Today Steve Nash announced his retirement via a self penned column at The Player’s Tribune:
I’m retiring.
I heard someone once say there comes a day when they tell us all that we can’t play anymore. We’re not good enough. Surplus to requirements. Too slow, maybe. When you’re a teenager with outsized dreams and a growing obsession, and someone tells you this ain’t gonna last forever, it’s scary. I never forgot it.
So what did I do? Stayed obsessed. Set goals. Worked. Dreamed. Schemed. Pushed myself beyond what was normal or expected. I looked at my hero, Isiah Thomas, and thought to myself, “OK, I’m nowhere near the player he is but if I get better every day for 5 or 10 years, why can’t I be as good as him?”
The greatest gift has been to be completely immersed in my passion and striving for something I loved so much — visualizing a ladder, climbing up to my heroes. The obsession became my best friend. I talked to her, cherished her, fought with her and got knocked on my ass by her.
And that is what I’m most thankful for in my career. In my entire life, in some ways. Obviously, I value my kids and my family more than the game, but in some ways having this friend — this ever-present pursuit — has made me who I am, taught me and tested me, and given me a mission that feels irreplaceable. I am so thankful. I’ve learned so many invaluable lessons about myself and about life. And of course I still have so much to learn. Another incredible gift.
Nash went on to thank many of the people who helped him along the way, fittingly deflecting and giving credit to those around him just as he did all those years with the Suns and the Mavs. As for his time with the Lakers, Nash briefly touched on that part of his career too:
When I signed with the Lakers, I had big dreams of lifting the fans up and lighting this city on fire. I turned down more lucrative offers to come to L.A. because I wanted to be in the “fire,” and play for high risk and high reward in my last NBA chapter. In my second game here, I broke my leg and nothing was the same.
Last spring, when I returned to the court, I was given a standing ovation at Staples Center. It was a dark time in my career and that gesture will be one of my best memories. There’s been a lot of negativity online, but in my nearly three years in L.A., I’ve never met anyone who didn’t show me anything but love and support for my efforts. There’s a lot of class in Lakerland, and the organization and staff have given me unwavering support.
As I noted on twitter, That 2013 season will always be a huge what if for me. What if Nash never breaks his leg, what if Dwight didn’t return so early in the season, what if Kobe doesn’t play that insane number of minutes down the stretch of the season, what if, what if…
Of course, we can’t play that game. What happened, happened. And in the wake of all that is the team we see in front of us now. I will never blame Nash for any of that, though. What happened to him — and as part of the domino effect, the team — was unfortunate. But he’s not to blame. In a way, no one really is. There was always risk in acquiring him, but what has played out over the last three years is the worst case scenario for his time here. I’m sure as hell happy I’m not judged as a person based off the worst version of myself.
In any event, best of luck to Nash in his post basketball life. Things may not have worked out with the Lakers, but he had a great career and he was always one of my favorite players to watch. I will miss him.
Azzemoto says
The trade will haunt us for years. Go ride into the sunset.
Ko says
I have no blame it issues with Steve.
This is just another on long list of bonehead moved by inept Jimmy.
Signing 38 year old with history of back problems.
Getting zero for Dwight/Pau.
Signing &48 million deal for guy coming off the toughest if all BB injuries.
In the real world any CEO would have been fired.
But not in bazzaro world of Buss family. They get $1117 million profit!
rr says
UCLA in the Round of 16.
J C says
Nice write-up Darius.
I believe Steve gave us all he had.
Maybe this, his last season, the FO asked him to back off for the youth to be served.
Nash was one of a kind.
Understood the game like few others and made himself into an MVP despite being undersized. Kudos to him.
I’m sure he’ll surface again in the public eye in some capacity. I have know doubts he’ll excel in whatever endeavor he pursues.
jerke says
Was reported a week or two ago that LA fo persuaded nash not to retire way earlier in the season as they wanted his contract as a trade chip – hence why he was away and gone and not around the team – was already retired but kept on roster by FO for possible strategic use
Robert says
Nash: Not his fault. I am not bitter at Nash for the trade. However the fact that he has 2 MVP’s and Shaq and Kobe have one each, is a complete abomination. If you make a list of multiple MVP guys, Nash sticks out – as in “how is he on this list?”
jerke: If that is true, I guess we can add that to the list of trade chips we never used. We never seem to find the deal for our expiring contracts, our soon to be free agents, or our guys we should get rid of to tank.
Chris J says
I too have no ill will toward Nash, but maintain that deal was unquestionably the worst, most devastating trade in franchise history. “There was always risk in acquiring him” may be the understatement of the year, as the guy was well beyond old (in NBA terms) the day that deal went down, and had a long history of health issues even prior to the leg break.
The thing I never agreed with was even if things had gone differently and Nash managed to play 75+ games per year over the past three seasons, I never saw his presence as being the piece that would have put the Lakers back in the Finals hunt, not even with a healthy Dwight. The Thunder were still better; the Clippers, Grizzlies, Spurs and Warriors, too.
You have to mix in youth to stay viable — think Kawhi Leonard, alongside the Spurs elders — and God only knows what those draft picks the front office surrendered may have meant to expediting the turnaround.
They Lakers went all-in on a quest for No. 6 for Kobe, even against long odds. In this case, they took a huge beating and will be paying out the nose for a while longer as a result.
Jerke says
@Robert – yeah I don’t get it at all – there’s been more than a couple reports this evening corraborating that Nash wanted/was willing to retire in the fall but the FO wanted him to hang on and apparently he had no prob w them trading his contract as he would just medically retire as soon as he was traded. The FO could’ve taken a cheap look at a bunch of guys around the league using Nash’s $. I mean its not like you’re committed to keeping a tremendous amount of talented players already on the team. so what if you have to pay 10 mill to 2 guys for another year or 2 beyond this – at least you’re getting some sorta of assets on your roster and I hate this reliance that both the Lakers and Knicks have and are publicly fostering that they can make some big turnaround via free agency. It’s a different NBA, especially with the new cap coming (and all teams will have that money to spend) and reality is Lakers don’t have anything to build with or on. Contract offers are going to be the same all over the league and I can see both NY and Lakers being left picking up nothing but leftovers when all the prize players sign with better run organizations that have a plan and philosphy already in place
Jerke says
@robert re the mvp’s – not that i think Nash was undeserving when he won his two – he had MVP calibre seasons – as did Shaq/Kobe and one can say they were all worthy w/o denigrating any of their accomplishments. The issue those two years was more that Kobe/Shaq are very polarizing figures in the league and that led to vote splitting and Nash had the feel good story of those two years. Any of those 3 would’ve been good picks – the funny thing is that 06/07 was Nash’s best season and one where he could’ve been MVP w a lot less controversy except by that time people were over the novelty of his leadership/offence etc…
BigCitySid says
-“officially” retired…well put D.
– waiting for today’s write up on the Laker – Sixer game, should be interesting. a quick look at the league standings tells you this can be a very big game.
J C says
Here’s a nice piece of Nash:
http://www.nba.com/video/channels/top_plays/2013/01/07/steve-nash-top-10.nba/?ls=iref:nbahpts
Robert says
Chis J: You are probably correct, however I think the larger error was not holding on to DH, and not having that somewhat wired before the deal. Looking back, would this have gotten us a title, probably not due to injuries, but the whole plan was KB, SN, and DH for #6. Well – when you completely miss on the DH part- your plan is flawed and you don’t even need/want Nash. There was also the whole Phil/MD thing.
VETO: And for those “entitled” fans who think he VETO cost us – I ask how? Most of those who think the VETO cost us, also were glad to see DH go. So how does Chris Paul (who is also much slower now) get us a title with no DH (or a reduced DH due to injury) and an injured Kobe?
rr says
I went back and found, and re-posted, what I said about the Nash deal at the time they made it. I backed it, with the caveat that I was very concerned about the fact that the 2015 pick was included.
I think the FO knew/thought that getting Howard was imminent when they got Nash, so they saw Nash as the perfect guy to connect Kobe and Howard: Nash was an elder statesman/offensive genius from Kobe’s draft class, who was, actually, called, by some, The World’s Greatest Teammate. He was also simply known as a fun guy to play with and as everybody knows, Dwight Howard is all about fun. Those factors, plus the idea that Howard and Nash would make a great PnR combo, was why the FO pulled the trigger. And, when it wasn’t working under Mike Brown, they hired D’Antoni, in part probably because Nash’s dribble-heavy game didn’t fit the Triangle. So, I think the FO thought if they could have just gotten one good year/deep playoff run out of Nash, that would have connected Howard to the Lakers, and he would have stayed.
As to Paul, I think it is clear now that he was right guy, because:
1. He has the status and the personality to wave Kobe off and take over the offense when necessary had he been here.
2. He is Howard’s age/generation and his hard-edged persona would have balanced Howard’s cornball overgrown kid schtick. I think if Paul had been here, Howard would have stayed.
Now, of course, both of them are about to hit 30 and Howard in particular is in decline, so in the alternate universe where Stern didn’t veto the deal, we are all arguing about that. But those are First-World problems. In this universe, we have NBA Third-World problems.
Also, in retrospect, I think the FO should have tried to trade Pau for depth during the 12-13 season. I think they didn’t because they were worried about Howard’s back, but once D’Antoni was here, they should have rolled the dice on that too, IMO.
As to Nash, I always liked him, even though he was on teams the Lakers needed to beat, and I remain very disappointed that it didn’t work out for him here.
KenOak says
@Robert
The veto cost us because we would have gotten something for Pau. Also because CP3 is much better (and still playing) than Nash has been for the last 3 years. And because Kobe wouldn’t have had the leagues highest usage rate which IMO contributed to him tearing his achilles. Then, Dwight probably stays with a healthy Kobe and CP3
-CP3 instead of Nash
-Kobe possibly never getting hurt
-Receiving something for Pau
-Dwight staying instead of leaving
Robert says
KenOak: I was as upset as anyone else with the VETO. In fact it is what got me to start posting here (another reason for some to hate the commish). That said. I do not think it cost us a title. And this is in spite of the fact that I wanted DH, and wanted to keep him. Many on this board hated DH and said he was a baby and would never win a title. So for those people – the VETO did us a favor. Further, for the tank crew, the VETO also did us a favor, because it got us to the bottom quicker. If no VETO, we would have DH (a shell of his former self and a baby according to many), an aging, injured Kobe, and CP. Sounds like a 1st or second round exit to me. And my main issue is with those who think DH is worthless, yet the VETO cost us. the two are mutually exclusive.
KenOak says
@Robert
I tend to agree with you normally, but you’re looking at this through an “all or nothing” lens. One does not have to believe that Dwight is *worthless if they were happy when he left. They just believe that Dwight couldn’t win with the franchise on his shoulders. They just believe that Dwight didn’t deserve the keys to the Lakers proverbial castle. CP3 and DH, IMO, would have been good enough together to contend in the West. Just my opinion.
You also neglected to consider my other position -> which was that if CP3 were on the Lakers, alongside Kobe and Dwight, that Kobe wouldn’t have had to put in 40 minutes a game and injure himself. Yes, I am a believer that his high minutes and usage contributed to the achilles injury. I don’t think he would’ve had to shoulder the full playmaker and scoring load if CP3 were with us that year. Everything changes if the Veto doesn’t happen.
rr says
I very seriously doubt that Howard/Paul would have a title here, but I would include two caveats:
1. Kobe would not have been playing 47 minutes a game in 12-13 if Paul had been here.
2. The Lakers might have been able to snag some ring-chaser depth on the cheap.
CHearn says
I’ve always admired Nash for transforming himself into a prominent NBA player through sheer effort, willpower and work ethic. He was a pleasure to watch as a player with the Suns, even to the impairment of Lakers wins. That being said, his tenure with the Lakers was a disaster. I agree, it wasn’t Steve’s fault, if not for that broken leg he might have had enough to give the Lakers 20-25 minutes a game. The error lands squarely on the person diagnosing him as ‘all clear.’ The resultant byproduct of back injuries is leg injuries particularly as a person advances in age. Dwight Howard is much younger than Nash, and he’s encountering that side effect now.
Technically, Nash should have retired years ago, he pushed himself and his body as long as he could. I remember viewing him lying on rolled-up towels on the sideline for extended minutes his last year with Phoenix.
My harshest comments towards Steve Nash was in response to the vitriol aimed at Kobe. It was perplexing to me that Nash received little complaints when his efforts with the Lakers failed to net any noteworthy wins. In addition, when he failed to join the Lakers bench while injured he was not attacked.
I’m sure the Suns will have a retirement ceremony for his jersey next season, and maybe announce a day for a statute presentation.
Happy retirement Steve Nash, I’ll forget how you propelled your team to wins against the Lakers.
Calvin Chang says
Nashty – you’re the reason why I grew my hair out 8 years ago and looked like a caveman. Whenever I played, I always pictured the wind blowing through my hair when I ran for fast-breaks. Truth is, I looked like an idiot with long hair, but those were fun times.