| Sign Up | Google+

Sessions vs. Nate

To continue the discussion from last night and today's recap, I decided to try to make the argument that going after Ramon Sessions and letting Nate walk may be more beneficial than signing Nate to a long-term deal.

If you take a look at the stats, Sessions PER numbers this season are nothing to scoff at:

16.7 ppg, 6.4 ast, 4.4 reb, 1.4 stl, 45% FG

Those numbers are pretty much a wash when compared with Nate's:

17.9 ppg, 4.0 ast, 2.7 reb, 1.5 stl, 45% FG

PROS: Sessions turns just 23 in April and only made $424K this year. He's 6'3, and can play defense.  Not that Nate is the worst defender in the world, but his height is certainly a glaring flaw. 

CONS: Sessions is NOT a three-point shooter. In fact, he's just 6-33 for the entire season (Nte probably shoots 33 three-pointers a week).  Also, his dunks aren't as cool.

Considering that he made $427K this year, i'm assuming (emphasis on "assuming") that Sessions shouldn't demand much more than about $6M on a short deal, maybe three years or so at $2M per. That's a big drop-off from Nate, who should command anywhere from $5-7M per year. I'd like to re-sign Nate, but the organization has to keep the blueprints for 2010 intact. If you can get a player with similar production for one-third (or even one-fourth) of the cost, it makes sense.

It's at least something to consider.

 

                                                                                                                                                                                                               

Recent FanPosts

View All Fan Posts

The Next FanPosts

There are 10 Comments. Load Now. Loading

Shortcuts to mastering the comment thread. Use wisely.

C - Next Comment
X - Mark as Read

R - Reply
Z - Mark Read & Next

Shift + C - Previous
Shift + A - Mark All Read

Comment Settings

Live comment alert: Hide it!

Comments for this post are closed.

tracking_pixel_5351_tracker