If no KG, then what about JO?

by panhandlelegend on Jul 13, 2007 7:32 PM PDT

So ESPN writes today that
"O'Neal is clearly available now that Indiana has decided it needs a major overhaul."
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writers/marty_burns/07/13/mailbag/index.html

It seems like we might be able to get him for a little less than KG, and he still would be a HUGE improvement for our team in the post. He's got a decent J from about 18, meaning he wouldn't be useless in nellieball. plus, he's signed for an extra year.
Since we already took 'em last year for our overpayed white-boys, is it too early to stick 'em up again? I was just thinking that we've focused so much on KG, but JO would be nice too.

it would have to include some sign-and-trade and maybe the contracts would be tough to equalize, what about Pietrus, Ellis, Foyle and Wright for O'neal? Hell, we'd even through in our O' :
the notorious, PO'B

This FanPost is a submission from a member of the mighty Golden State of Mind community. While we're all here to throw up that W, these words do not necessarily reflect the views of the GSoM Crew. Still, chances are the preceding post is Unstoppable Baby!

Tweet Comment 17 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I like JO and KG

Both are fantastic players, arguably. Jermaine isnt as explosive as KG, but if we can get a steal on him and not give up to much of our core now I rather go for JO. Kevin is a dynamic player all around, but I think Minny is asking too much and I hope Mullin talks to both teams and see what they want and make the best deal for our team. I really want to see a deal go down, and not give up too much because we have a fantastic core right now.

by ballin on Jul 13, 2007 7:42 PM PDT reply actions

yeah, but

if we faced Utah with our same respective rosters, I'm afraid to say it, but I think we lose four series' out of five. At this point, we just don't have a bruiser to bang with a boozer, and Biedrins isn't really gonna be ready to step into that role for a while. while we all might be optimistic about a Lasme, I think its more realistic to look for help outside the roster.

by panhandlelegend on Jul 13, 2007 7:45 PM PDT up reply actions

JO

Jermaine is pretty sick too. I dunno how willing the Pacers are to deal with us again after we robbed them at the trade deadline last season.

Or maybe they really like Dunleavy and Murphy and want more of our scrubs?

Foyle + Jasikevicius + POB for Jermaine O'Neal

by jlagace on Jul 13, 2007 9:55 PM PDT reply actions

hahahahah

by travisl212 on Jul 13, 2007 11:17 PM PDT up reply actions

chemistry

i think i recall reading that he and AL didnt really get along to well so that may not work out, unless it is a 3 team deal, or they want Al back
(unless of course my memory has gone, which is a definite possibility)

by azw on Jul 13, 2007 10:36 PM PDT reply actions

i thought that they

were really good friends and that was part of the reason why al went to indiana

by travisl212 on Jul 13, 2007 11:18 PM PDT up reply actions

i believe it was more on-court

issues as jared mentioned,one of them wasnt happy with the amount of shots they where getting because the other one was shooting too much, or something along those lines. i will have to see if i can find the article hopefully it is archived,it was probably around the time of the trade as i dont see why i would be reading a pacers article prior.

by azw on Jul 14, 2007 1:30 AM PDT up reply actions

I Believe The Pacers

wanted to get a real 5 and make JO a 4, with hopes of being more serious. In other words, they didn't think starting Al and JO at 4 and 5 respectively would make the team legit enough to contend.

by JohnColtrane on Jul 15, 2007 8:00 PM PDT up reply actions

uhhh

if we want JO so badly
might as well make west coast pacers...

by bun on Jul 14, 2007 12:26 AM PDT reply actions

JO

Even though, he is not as good as KG, I would love to see Jermaine O'Neal at Golden State this season. He would fit in quite well here and we wouldn't have to give up nearly as much as we would for KG. Plus, he has a couple more years playing time left in him. I would much rather get JO than KG, not because he's a better player because he isn't but because he is younger, would fit in well and we would have to give up quite a bit less to get him.

by zaki on Jul 14, 2007 3:43 AM PDT reply actions

Exactly

we might as well try and swoop up Artest while we're at it and he's available for pennies on the dollar. I mean, B-Diddy's no Jamaal Tinsley but still...

by WhatWouldTerryCummingsDo on Jul 14, 2007 3:43 AM PDT reply actions

yup

and isn't it time for Reggie Miller's obligatory comeback? I mean isn't coming out of retirement at least once sorta like how every single show you go to the band plays at least one encore? Reggie's three would be niice in nellieball.

but seriously, we need to find how to get some rebounds for this squad, or we'll have a tough time even getting back to the playoffs next year.

hahah... It still feels good to even say that

by panhandlelegend on Jul 14, 2007 7:18 AM PDT reply actions

I AGREE

We have been focused on KG too much that we're failing to consider JO as an option! Although it would be tough to pry him away from the PACERS since we already robbed them last year.

If the PACERS are willing and we don't give up too much for him, then I say the W's should think about.

"GO BIG or GO HOME!!!"

by scottiepimppen on Jul 14, 2007 8:29 AM PDT reply actions

JO would be nice

I never took this possibility too seriously because we just made a blockbuster with the Pacers. I don't know if they would deal with us again so soon after we uh...took advantage of them (to put it mildly). But if they are down and we can make an offer that works for them I would love to have him on the Ws. He could play center or PF for Nellie.

Looking at the rosters it would be kind of hard to make a deal work salary-wise without including players that we just got from them. That alone might make this a little unrealistic.

by olympicmike on Jul 14, 2007 11:46 AM PDT reply actions

Injury prone over-rated player.

J O'neal wasn't particularly effective in the last half of last season. In fact, he was downright terrible for stretches, shooting about 41% from the field and saw his rebound total drop by a board and a half a game. I believe he's heavily overhyped and, while better than most of our bigs, isn't close to the same class as Garnett.

He's sick, but sick in the sense of damn, that guy should see a doctor sick. He's a walking trip to the trainer's table. His boosters will say that his decline in the second half of last year was due to playing hurt, and it may be true. However, that's the one thing we can count on--he will get hurt. We worry that Baron's injury history suggests that he's difficult to depend on. O'neal's is just as bad. Over the last three years, O'neal has played in one more game (and about 18 minutes total) than Baron, and that includes playing hurt at the end of last year. Do we want another pivotal piece who is paid a max salary but is more likely to appear in 50 games than in 75 games? Big men who start accumulating injuries almost never get healthier as they age.

And he's not really shown that he makes his team better. Since he has missed so much time, there's some data about how the team does without him. Answer: their record without him is almost identical to their record with him. That suggests that his impact isn't really as great as his stats might superficially suggest.

No thanks. If O'neal could be depeneded on for a whole season, it would be one thing. If he cost us essentially nothing, it would be another. If, when he were healthy, he was a 50%+ shooter, it would be another. If his team looked better when he played, there might be some cause to want him. But he'll cost us plenty and there's no reason to believe he'd a) be healthy or b) help us win when he was healthy.

by jae on Jul 14, 2007 12:54 PM PDT reply actions

Injury prone no doubt

His offense isn't specular either. BUT I'd just throw in that by many reports he played phenomenal defense last season. Some argued he could've won defensive player of the year. I've always thought he should be a better rebounder and scorer, but if his D is as good as publicized, it's worth a try.