Ramon Sessions question

I have a question, I was hoping somebody on here might help me out with. I remember a few weeks ago, John Ireland saying that if Ramon Sessions had exercised his 4.5 player option for this upcoming season there would be, "no chance" that the Lakers would have traded for Steve Nash? Is that entirely true? I thought, even after Nash was traded for, the Lakers still WANTED Sessions back, but he was slighted by the Nash signing. Could someone maybe tell me if they beleive lakers management ideally wanted Sessions to exercise that PO to be the backup to Nash, or would management have not traded for Nash, and given the starting job to Ramon?
Do you think knowing what Ramon knows now, or if we were able to acquire Dwight earlier, before he declined his PO, that would have affected his decision at all to remain with the club?

We could have acquired Nash and kept Sessions, but I'm not sure whether the FO would be willing to pay for it.

We should trade Steve Blake for John Wall.

http://www.clublakers.com/nba-discussion/ramon-sessions-lakers-and-joining-bobcats-t135450.html

I believe the answers you seek may be here. I haven't watched it for a few days, but I believe Sessions says that the Lakers told him they were interested in keeping him, but that they were doing the Steve Nash negotiating while stalling him and his agent. So I could be wrong, but what I take from it is what once we got Nash we still would have kept Sessions if he wanted to stay.