Jermaine O'Neal

by Iggy_Zohn on Mar 12, 2008 12:30 PM PDT Comment 67 comments

what do you guys think of this guy?

we know that mullin talked to bird about a trade for the 6'11" 260 f/c this trade deadline, but nothing happened.

would he fit in on the warriors?

reasons i think he might be

another pacer that comes over here. reunites with harrington and jackson in the front court. pacers were great when they had them. add them to monta and baron. that team scores 120 a game.

nelson signed for one more year, he's going to want to win now. o'neal is has been a perennial all-star, scores 20 a game.

cons

he's been injured the last couple years. he's about 30. he's more of a risk than biedrins.

does he give the warriors a better chance to win next year? i say yes. is it worth the risk? could we get him?

(this is not a biedrins bashing thread. i'm want to write a long manifesto for my blog about the warriors summer plans, and i'm tossing around ideas to make the warriors better next year,which i'm stating should be the goal, as long as nelson is the coach.)

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!

0 recs | Comment 67 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

u shoulda been on this blog months ago

when there was plenty of oneal talks...but anyway, the guys getting old, his knees are bad, plus we already got biedrins, wright, and harrington for the PF-C spot...i say lets save the money and go after someone that will actually improve our team

by 3Kings650 on Mar 12, 2008 12:47 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

without getting into the salary issues...

I would like to take a shot with him. It is a little wierd becoming the Pacers-West, but he is a great player when not injured.

He is a strong guy and a scorer and would be a great comlpiment to Biedrins in the back court.

Baron Davis
Monta Ellis
Steven Jackson
Al Harrington
Andres Biedrins...tough to beat that starting 5

Dammit Dampier!

by attatt on Mar 12, 2008 12:49 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

thats the starting 5 we already have...

by 3Kings650 on Mar 12, 2008 12:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Then we are set!!

by WilliamVanLandingham on Mar 12, 2008 2:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

There is a search function for diaries

If you want to know what people think about Jermaine O'Neal on the Warriors, you can start there since this has been discussed a few times.

Search function: http://www.goldenstateofmind.com/?op=search&offset=0&old_count=50&type=diary&section =&string=Jermaine&search=Search&count=50

A few results:

http://www.goldenstateofmind.com/story/2008/2/19/23382/2400

http://www.goldenstateofmind.com/story/2007/11/13/20830/174

http://www.goldenstateofmind.com/story/2008/2/20/12238/4738

by bloodsweatndonuts on Mar 12, 2008 1:04 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

thanks

after reading those, a few thoughts

who is hoof? he was basically arguing my points on biedrins a month before i got here. it would have been nice if he had backed me up in my other diaries.

i think it's valid to bring o'neal back up, for two reasons.

1. we're not talking about him in a trade deadline context. he's an unrestricted free agent this summer, right?

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?page=2008FreeAgents

we know more about brandan wright than we knew at the trade deadline.
we know nellie is the coach next season

i meant this to be a thread that speculates about what mullin will do this summer now that he definitely is going to be working to appease nelson and his style one more year, under the premise that the warriors aren't good enough to win the championship as is, probably won't have a legitamite shot for another 3 or 4 years AS IS, and nelson will be retired.

will nelson accept mullin to keep this status quo, especially if we lose in the 1st or 2nd round of the playoffs? will nelson support mullin giving a huge contract to ab? i know you guys do, i don't see nelson being happy about using a bunch of cap space on a guy he only plays 20 minutes.

so if we speculate that nelson becomes antsy with his team, which he does frequently, and he can sniff a championship NEXT YEAR, if you're mullin, do you make a move to appease your coach?

two moves that could do it, AND HERE'S WHERE I THINK WE SHOULD ARGUE. ya know, for fun.

also, excuse me, but i don't quite understand our cap situation of free agency. so go easy on me, i'm trying.

brand. there's a chance he opts out. will he be out of our price range if we let biedrins go? is a lineup of baron, monta, jax, wright, and brand, with harrington as the sixth man a title contender? i say absolutely yes, especially with nelly getting creative with a small team that can run, rebound, shoot, and block shots.

o'neal. he's a free agent too. he would be cheaper than brand, right? he'd be more of a convential center, but he can still move. i would prefer brand than o'neal. i think we could get o'neal cheaper because of the injury issues. it would be a risk, but so was baron and jax. that's how we've made this team, why not do it one more time for a chance to win next year, for nelson?

by Iggy_Zohn on Mar 12, 2008 3:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I never liked the idea of trading for him

but signing as an FA doesn't sound too terrible.

My concerns:

He didn't have a great year, so it is possible he doesn't opt out of his contract - he might not get as much in the open market.
He might be too expensive even after a substandard year. Signing him at the cost of monta or beans or both would be a mistake. He's more injury prone than baron. I'd do it if he'd take a HUGE paycut, which, unfortunately, probably won't happen.
Fit. Admittedly, I'm no JO expert. I've really only seen him when he plays the dubs. But my limited impression of him is that he'd much better in a more traditional team. The warriors would really have to make some changes to accomodate him or vice versa. Does nelly have the patience for that? Not too sure about that.

"To my dear brother, Noompsy."

by Tim N Chris Burger on Mar 12, 2008 6:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Something to note...

JO is starting to wear down physically at age 30, and is probably past his peak. That being so, it seems a bad idea to me to throw him into the most intense running offense he's ever seen.

Also, he's been known for not liking to play against opposing centers. That's why Jeff Foster's been on that team for so long. If JO came to us, he'd likely not want to play center, but rather his customary power forward.

by Zack Vank on Mar 13, 2008 1:07 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

asdf

Pros - Low post scorer.

Cons - His salary, we'll be trading him for basically Ellis and AB since we cant resign him, his age, he's more injured than BD, lets not reunite the malice at the palace team, he will hinder the development of both BWright and AB, he'll demand the ball and we already have enough people that demand the ball, the reason Al was expendable is because him and JONEAL play the same position, we can't have over 25 mil locked up in the PF position.

What more do you need?

by J Rich 4 MVP on Mar 12, 2008 1:17 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

well clearly

we couldn't sign ellis biedrins and o'neal this summer.

my idea was that we could take him instead of biedrins this summer, improve our odds to win next year, since it's nelson's last year and he's going to want to win now, not in the future, and ultimately mullin has been catering to nelson recently.

o'neal would play the 5 for us. he's the same height as biedrins, 30 pounds heavier, with a jump shot, more athleticism, more scoring.

cons - injury history. age

espn.com has him listed as an unrestricted free agent this summer. mullin already made one play for him at the dead line, so it's clear people in the front office are interested.

i think a starting five in 08 09 of

baron
monta
jax
harrington
o'neal

is better than

baron
monta
jax
harrington
biedrins

we'd be giving up a little for the future, but i say why not? let's win while we have nelson, and we have baron and jax in their primes, rather than hoping monta, wright, and biedrins and keith smart take us to a championship in 4 years.

god forbid we make a run at someone who is athletic and can score inside.

by Iggy_Zohn on Mar 12, 2008 2:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

O'neal's garbage.

For starters, we cannot sign O'neal at all. He's under contract with Indy through 2010 for big, big, big dollars. He is not going to be a restricted free agent. He will continue to be a high-flash-low-substance player who is an "all-star" largely because fans (and GMs) radically overvalue scoring average.

So to get him, we'd have to trade for him. And trading for him would be close to moronic.

For a post player he's a pedestrian average rebounder, a low percentage shooter and a guy who cannot operate in a running offense. He's also been hurt very often. If people worried about Baron before this season, JO has been no heathier before (and continues to be unhealthy this year). And since he's been hurt so often, there's a pretty good sample of what his absence means to Indy. By and large, they aren't any worse without him, indicating that his impact on games is pretty limited. Pay $20mil a year for a guy who hasn't actually improved his team's record, who, when you look beyond the superficial stats, isn't really that impressive, does not fit in with what the Warriors do on offense and is likely to spend as much time on the exercise bike as he is on the court? Pay big $$$ for that? No thanks.

by jae on Mar 12, 2008 3:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

In my opinion

JO has a ETO just like Baron, Marion, and Brand.

JO probably picks up his option next year because its probably the most money he'll get per season for the rest of his career.

I'd love to pull a Antonio McDyess--Detroit Pistons type deal that brings him in as a key reserve, scoring bench player. In an ideal world at best.

If he'd sign for the MLE after his big money contract comes up that'd be great. But the warriors probably would have to be close to title contention or right on the cusp for a high profile free agent to sign for less (similar to Phoenix, San Antonio and Dallas do).

Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.

by kenntoe on Mar 12, 2008 4:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think...

...Biedrins is probably a more valuable player than O'Neal right now, let alone going forward.

by Zack Vank on Mar 13, 2008 1:11 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

i dont like

o'neal, but youre forgetting the biggest thing he'd bring us-a better interior defender. o'neal has been a great defender against bangers like shaq since his days in portland. if he is healthy he could help us against the boozers and duncans and bynums who kill us. that said, i dont think he will be healthy, do not want.

passes it to the man...and boom goes the dynamite!

by sam23 on Mar 14, 2008 1:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

No No No

Just No...you really have no idea how a basketball organization works do you Iggy?

So far your suggestions have been Brand, Love, and now O'Neal.

These are all terrible options for the Warriors. Good teams don't have 4 scorers and that's what you seem to be suggesting. Good teams have a couple of main scorers and then quality role players. The Bulls, the Spurs, the Celtics, the Lakers, the Pistons...of all of the recent teams that won multiple titles which one had 4 high scoring players all together?

sarunas is my father

by williedillssf on Mar 12, 2008 2:03 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Jamison instead?

What would you say to bringing Antwan back to the Bay. He's an unrestricted FA this summer.

Not really a true scorer just a damn good scrappy player that picks up 20 points and 10 boards a game on a regular basis.

2007-08 STATS
PPG RPG
21.4 10.3

I would say that at 30 he could be considered a quality role player on this team.

He's making over $16 mil this year... Which makes it seem like it's not doable. However, I have the feeling that if the front office believes a potential signing woul bump us from a 7/8 seed to a 2/3 seed they might be willing to take the cap hit. Their willingness to pay Nellie another $5 mil to stay around for another year makes it hard not to believe that they are more open then ever to putting some money on the table this offseason.

I am not totally sold that Antwan could elevate our team to another level, but I think that considering other options that are being thrown out there ...Brand/O'Neal... he's at least worth some discussion. He's healthy and he's got some assets that could help us for sure.

"To be a great champion you must believe you are the best. If you're not, pretend you are." - Muhammad Ali

by Dubs Wise on Mar 12, 2008 5:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Harrington

makes Jamison redundant.

by dso on Mar 12, 2008 6:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I would take Jamison if he...

took a lot less money (not likely) and play the role he's perfect for, Garbage Man (also not likely). But like every other NBA player he wants to shoot three's and have plays run for him and also is another guy who demands a lot of shots taken. Can we change focus from offense, which we have plenty of, to defense which we lack in a huge way?

sarunas is my father

by williedillssf on Mar 12, 2008 6:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Jamison

is playing for that last big long term contract and from the looks of his play this year, he just might get it. I don't know if the Warriors are willing to break the bank for another scorer who can board, but doesn't really defend. his crazy, 'how did he just score doing THAT' form would be worth bringing back to the bay though...

by dj fuzzylogic on Mar 13, 2008 7:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

sign Jamison and trade harrington

by triplesix on Mar 13, 2008 12:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

The definition of the term

"lateral move."

OK, it may be a very marginal upgrade, but probably not worth the chemistry issues it might create.

In the category of "overpaid, undersized Nellieball PFs whom we like to discuss on this board" I'd probably rank them

Marion > Kirilenko > Artest > Jamison > Harrington > Dunleavy.

In two years Brandan Wright will probably be better than everyone on that list...

by Sleepy Freud on Mar 13, 2008 12:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

i agree

with everything you just wrote.

i'll just add that i think brandan wright will be playing adris biedrins minutes (meaning 25) a game next year. for what it's worth.

by Iggy_Zohn on Mar 13, 2008 4:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Must take issue...

So I've seen a couple posts now where you basically say that Wright makes Harrington unnecessary on this team, well at least he eventually will.

But they are such different players that I must say I don't agree with your logic. Harrington is used as a shooter on this team. A PF that is an outside threat which works to pull a defender out from under the basket.

I see a lot of promise in Wright, but as a shooter and a three point shooter at that... i don't think so. He's got a sweet touch but he's definitely going to be doing most of his scoring from inside.

Then there's ball handling... Harrington has some skills and is decent at taking his man off the dribble. You really think that's going to be part of Wright's game at some point?

I don't get your reasoning man. They seem like very different players to me and in no way do their skill sets make the other's contributions unnecessary.

Now in regards to Jamison. For one thing his rebounding avg shows that he's not just another Harrington. Granted they are of a similar build and their athleticism is very similar, but if we lose Pietrus and Barnes this offseason we could use another 6'9", athletic presence on this team.

Whereas Brand & O'Neal are big question marks because of their injuries & because of their potential to shake up the Dubs' style of play, someone like Jamison could help bolster our frontcourt with his hussle and skills.

Does it change your perspective if you were to think of it as an upgrade from Barnes/Pietrus?

"To be a great champion you must believe you are the best. If you're not, pretend you are." - Muhammad Ali

by Dubs Wise on Mar 13, 2008 5:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

actually

i've never said that wright makes harrington unnecessary. i've said that wright makes biedrins unnecessary. and i stand by that. i think nelson would agree with me, i think mullin would disagree with me. nelson wants players at all five positions that can score, something biedrins cannot do that effectively because he has not offensive game besides tips and dunks. mullin would say play them both. i say biedrins is a role player on this team (anyone beside baron monta and jax is a role player), and brandan wright will be able to do biedrins role offensively plus much more in a year or two, which is ultimately all that nelson cares about, which is ultimately how mullin makes his decisions.

by Iggy_Zohn on Mar 13, 2008 7:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think he was confused

Because i suggested trading Harrington away to make room for Wright.

But that's only a what if scenario. I'm partial to trading or keeping him because i do not see Harrington as a key cog to this team. Look at the numbers, its slightly better than MP and then Barnes. In a small sample size (taken with grains of salt) Wright has been as/or more effective at playing the 4. He may not be the 10+ rebound per game guy like KG, but he most certainly grab more than the 6 per game Al provides.

What i'm looking for is Brandan to gain about 10lbs of muscle in the offseason and work on that 15footer. If he can knock down that outside shot, i think Nellie will be forced to play him. Since he can then space the floor and draw his man out, we'll open up lanes, shots and have 4 scorers on the court alongside AB. He won't have the 3pt shot Al has, but we already have a glut of 3pt bombers.

Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.

by kenntoe on Mar 14, 2008 12:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Actually...

You are both incorrect & confused. I was responding to Sleepy.

From an earlier S. Freud post...

BWright will probably be better than Harrington by next year (if he isn't already)

http://goldenstateofmind.com/story/2008/3/3/201911/8612

Saw a similar line of thought here and thought that it didn't take into account how their skill sets differ greatly.

"To be a great champion you must believe you are the best. If you're not, pretend you are." - Muhammad Ali

by Dubs Wise on Mar 14, 2008 5:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I may be incorrect, but not confused.

We just disagree and value Harrington differently. I feel he's not in the Warriors future because he is not a key cog to the team like Baron, Stephen and Monta are. We can argue all we want, but at the end of the day it'll be hard to deny Wright a spot/chance to play extended minutes in the near future. And what spot is that at? The Power Forward spot.

We probably won't be doing anything insane this offseason as far as Beans is concerned. Plus we have no one to back him up. Unless we do something crazy like renounce Ab to sign Emeka Okafor (just throwing out names), then i bet we keep Beans because he is Mully's boy.

That has to mean that Al will be gone. Maybe not this offseason, but maybe by the trade deadline.

Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.

by kenntoe on Mar 15, 2008 12:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I may be incorrect, but not confused.

That has to mean that Al will be gone. Maybe not this offseason, but maybe by the trade deadline.

Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.

by kenntoe on Mar 15, 2008 12:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

i agree with you, but

jack could be a quality role player rather than a scorer. and i think nellie ball is a system where too many scorers isnt exactly a problem. i see the arguments against love and oneal, but brand would be a beast for us. i dont think its realistic (if he leaves LA pat riley is going to find a way to pair him with d-wade) but he would be perfect here.

passes it to the man...and boom goes the dynamite!

by sam23 on Mar 14, 2008 2:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

no because the real answer is

Elton Brand

by djchuckdeez on Mar 12, 2008 2:03 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

yep

but i dont see how would could get him.

passes it to the man...and boom goes the dynamite!

by sam23 on Mar 14, 2008 2:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Jermaine

He's been injured/declining and getting old. His salary is monstrous and absorbing it in a trade would also mean giving up good players as well. It's obvious that the correct answer is no. And your reputation here is so shot that you should just stop making posts for at least a few decades.

by dhp318 on Mar 12, 2008 2:09 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

yes

i agree, iggy just stop.

passes it to the man...and boom goes the dynamite!

by sam23 on Mar 14, 2008 2:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

He is more then low post threat

Did u forget when he started out with the pacers they use to call him the human eraser..He's a great shot blocker as long as a good scorer but with all that said i still wouldn't get him..Hes injury prone...But with that said so was baron when he was on the hornets...Nobody is talkin about gettin jamison back in a warriors uniform.. only downside to him is no defense..But a way better rebounder than harrington and consisent scorer...And he works well in the fastbreak... should we start a jamison back to the warriors movement?????????

by KINGMILES31 on Mar 12, 2008 2:09 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

O'neal? run?

And he works well in the fastbreak.

Hmmm. What's the best way to put this?

"No."

He's been unable to run for several years. One of the problems coaches have had in Indy recently is that O'neal seems unable and/or unwilling to run. The offense, when he's in the game, slows down considerably, and whatever defensive ability that he used to have regularly (something that comes out now about twice a month) does not counteract this.

by jae on Mar 12, 2008 3:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

from what i've read on the pacers boards

they think it's more of a issue of him not wanting to run.

he has been dogging it the last couple years. i think he would love to come to the warriors, reunite with jax and harrington, and have a chance to win a title, and do what nelson says, i.e. run again.

by Iggy_Zohn on Mar 12, 2008 3:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sure,

you might be right about him being too reluctant to run. If Shaq can all of sudden run with Phoenix I'm pretty sure Jermaine can. I'm not saying Shaq's helping the Sun's, but you can't deny that the guy IS running.

JO does provide a lot of what beans can't or just doesn't have yet which is obvious with JO being a multiple All-Star.

BUT, and this is a HUGE BUT, we'll need to retool our entire offense for him or he'd need to retool his game for us. He'd be a HUGE asset for us but only in our half-court and he'd be a liability for our runnin' and gunnin' style. While JO is athletic, he's nowhere near the reach and speed of Andris.

Now this post does seem perplexing to me because you we're complaining about financial security in the previous post. JO contract is huge, he's injury prone and we'd have to give up our young budding star (Monta, which no one can deny is worth every penny Cohan's gonna spend on him). We can argue how much Monta's gonna get, but it's not worth trading it to hold another financial burden for a guy that's injury prone and will not fit as well in a guard heavy system. And wouldn't you think that Larry Bird would ask for MORE than just Andris or Monta (like Wright or multiple draft picks)in a trade for JO especially seeing how well the previous trade went down?

A guy we would need in this team that fit's our system? Wright, he plays within the arc and his defense reminds me of AK-47. He will grab the rebounds and bother other speedy guards. We DO NOT need to even think about getting another huge body and I don't care who the hell it is unless it's Chris Bosh.

by gunwing54 on Mar 13, 2008 12:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

kings

was talking about jamison

passes it to the man...and boom goes the dynamite!

by sam23 on Mar 14, 2008 2:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Baron has...

...been pretty injury-prone with us, too. He's been good this year, but I suspect it may be more his toughness to play through pain than it is that he isn't as banged up as usual.

by Zack Vank on Mar 13, 2008 1:12 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

NO

i think we all need to cool it a little bit with trying to get some big name guy. the warriors have the 4th best record in the league since our 0-6 start. a huge part of that success is because of Ellis and Biedrins. jus cuz we dont have an all-star doesnt mean we need to trade to get one. in my mind, we have 6-7 great players, who are not all stars, but could start and make a positive impact on any team. basketball is a team sport and we have a very solid TEAM

by 3Kings650 on Mar 12, 2008 2:54 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

No thanks

Beans is a better defender than O'Neal. O'Neal won't get any better than he already is when not injured. As people have said time and time again, Beans is barely 22.

I don't think that we need a center that has a jump shot. If O'Neal is out there taking jump shots, who the hell is going to rebound for us? Harrington?! We have enough jump shooters. However, whenever Nellie wants to have a center that can drop a 3 (small ball), that is what Harrington can do for us.

by disguy on Mar 12, 2008 3:02 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

beans does not guard centers better than o'neal

beans is good, but o'neal is just plain bigger. he can body up centers better than biedrins. he's a worse rebounder, but brandan wright is a good rebounder. here's our team with o'neal

all five starters can shoot

wright, o'neal, baron, ellis can rebound

we have a player who can consistantly match up against the bigger guys in the west.

three point shooters - jax, baron, harrington

i think it's a better team next year, and ultimately i think that's what mulson cares about. there's been really no indication that the warriors front office has been content with building for the future and being merely competitve for now.

of course this all goes out the door if the dubs win the title this year. that could happen. just pray we don't meet the jazz/lakers/spurs in the playoffs.

by Iggy_Zohn on Mar 12, 2008 3:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

barons really not that good of a shooter

but i digress...

by 3Kings650 on Mar 12, 2008 4:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

"Just plain bigger"

Again, your obession with size -- in particular, girth -- borders on fetishistic. Basically, you're talking about pure aesthetics: if Biedrins is a much better defender and a vastly better rebounder, who cares how much "bigger" JO is?

I eagerly await your next diary on why we should go after Eddy Curry. Indeed Jermaine O'Neal at this point in his career is much closer to a worthless POS like Curry than to a dominant low-post player like Kevin Garnett. Given their ridiculous contracts, both JO and Curry are basically one-way tickets to suckville.

by Sleepy Freud on Mar 13, 2008 5:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

To elaborate a bit...

I've always thought the mainstream of Warriors Nation was a little myopic in our focus in acquiring a "big man." Assuming our goal is to break into the next echelon of real championship contender, what we really lack is another NBA superstar -- preferably one dominant enough to make Baron our second best player.

Now, it'd be great if that second guy also happened to be a big man (Garnett, e.g.) but if it came to it, a truly dominant small dude (say, Kobe Bryant, the other guy I was lusting after this off-season) would get us much closer to resembling an elite NBA team than a kinda-sorta star big schlub like Jermaine O'Neal.

Fortunately, that true second NBA star may be blossoming before our eyes in the form of Monta Ellis. Somehow, despite skinny pantywaist Biedrins manning the post, we've managed to compile a 56-23 record over our last 79 games (subtracting the six games we played without Action Jackson). This in the absolute buzzsaw of a Western Conference.

So while we sit around lusting after overpaid, lazy former-stars like JO to take us to the promised land, we may quietly be getting there on our own power, thanks to the fabulous Nellie/BD/Jax synergy and the natural development of Monta and AB. As CSNY sang "If you cant be with the one you love, love the one you're with..."

by Sleepy Freud on Mar 13, 2008 9:16 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

i cant believe

im going to say this but i agree with iggy. oneal does guard centers better. but biedrins is more athletic at this point and 8 years younger and a lot less injury prone. ill take beans.

passes it to the man...and boom goes the dynamite!

by sam23 on Mar 14, 2008 2:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

If the objective is guarding centers...

Let's get Ben Wallace. If the objective is finding somebody who isn't over the hill or overpriced, let's take Beans. Seriously, we can't affort JO, he'll be more expensive than Beans both from a financial standpoint and a chemistry standpoint. Is he larger? Yes. Can he stand up to a prototypical center better right now? Yes. Will he next year? Maybe. The year after? No f-ing way. What's it cost to bring him in? 12-15M/year. Should we be willing to pay him that much? No f-ing way. Could we even pay him that without going in to luxtax if we wanted? No f-ing way. Lebron James is better than BD, Kobe is better than Monta. Let's bring them in!

by Dubs fan in Boston on Mar 14, 2008 2:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

J Oneal, Elton Brand, etc

All unrealistic free agent options for us.

There's this thing in the NBA called the Salary Cap. We cannot go out and sign either of these guys because we won't have the $15+ mil under the salary cap for the league to let us. We can re-sign Ellis and Biedrins for whatever salary we want, regardless of the salary cap, because we have their Bird Rights because they've been on the team for a number of consecutive years.

So unless we're willing to trade away alot of our depth for these guys to match up the salaries, and the other team is willing to take on our crap in a sign-and-trade, there's 0% chance Jermaine O'Neal or Elton Brand wear Warriors uni's anytime soon.

by jlagace on Mar 12, 2008 3:22 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

no?

luxury tax

by dhp318 on Mar 12, 2008 3:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

theres also

the 10 million dollar TPE that we have, that will allow us to pull off a sign and trade for a big contract this summer.

passes it to the man...and boom goes the dynamite!

by sam23 on Mar 14, 2008 2:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

TPE expires

The TBE expires a year from when it was created, meaning it expires at draft time. Since the free agent signing period does not start until after this, it will not be there for a sign and trade.

If it is used (unlikely) it will be for a player currently under contract.

by jae on Mar 14, 2008 3:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

crap

i hadnt thought about that. doesnt it expire a few days after the draft though? i think thats when the jrich deal was actually completed.

passes it to the man...and boom goes the dynamite!

by sam23 on Mar 14, 2008 5:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

O'neal is an interesting thought...

and I think he would've fit right in back when he was healthy. But I think he's on a pretty steep hill downward, and at this point, Beans is already going to be more productive.

I could be wrong and O'neal could come back with a few more good years left in him, but I don't think it's worth risking 15+mil/year on.

by kinetic on Mar 12, 2008 3:32 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Why is everyone so quick to make changes?

We just made the playoffs last year after seemingly an eternity of mediocrity! I would HATE to bring in O'Neal and his injury filled bloated contract. I would not want to trade away Monta or Beans or Wright and I would NEVER give up on our current cast of Warriors. If we want to talk about getting better (as if a 50+ win season is not good enough for a 42-40 team last season) then lets talk about how much better we would be if we kept this squad together another year! Monta's ceiling certainly hasn't be reached and neither has Wright or Beans. No more movements. Let's keep this team together!

by mightymadskillz on Mar 12, 2008 3:35 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

AMEN

after bein a diehard warriors fan through all of the dark ages, id hate for us to be good for 2 years and then suck again for another 13. id rather develop a great team than to put together a mediocre one for a run at the championship

by 3Kings650 on Mar 12, 2008 4:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

wait, then i don't understand

why espn lists o'neal as an unrestricted free agent next year

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?page=2008FreeAgents

wouldn't that mean he's not under contract next year?

and would he command 15 mil on the market after two injured years?

by Iggy_Zohn on Mar 12, 2008 3:36 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

ETO

Note the letters "ETO" after his name. This means he as an "early ermination option." He can opt out of his contract if he wants to but only if he wants to. This makes sense only if he thinks that someone else will pay him more or he's so colossally miserable that he'd leave more than $15 million on the table to take the MLE that other teams can offer him to play somewhere else.

If he was young and healthy and really produced like people think he does, ETO might make sense. An early termination option makes sense if you're going to be able to command a longer term max contract. He can't and won't command that so, unless he loses his mind and his agent is totally unable to get him committed to the asylum he'd be fit to go to if he actually thought he could get the sort of contract he has now (which, FWIW, the Warriors couldn't come close to offering him) he's going to be back in Indy barring trade with someone foolish enough to trade for a broken down big man who, when he was better wasn't as valuable as many people seem to think he was.

I still can't get past the fact that for several seasons, he's often hurt AND the Pacers haven't had a substantially different record when he's on the sidelines. That's not my definition of a valuable player regardless of what the hype says.

by jae on Mar 13, 2008 9:51 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

NOOOO

Can't saty on the floor for more than a month.
NOOO!!!

by Oldscule on Mar 12, 2008 4:07 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

How about this

We don't add someone who is good when he is the 1st option on a team because...he will not be the first option here. Period.

The Warriors take 89.3 shots per game.

almost 50 of those are taken by Baron, Jax and Monta. Historically O'Neal takes between 12-16 shots a game to get the numbers he does. He will not get that many in our system or someone else will get less (I don't see that happening).

Forget another offensive option. We are the #1 scoring team in the NBA. Repeat. The #1 scoring team in the NBA. Let's add defense and rebounding without giving up any of our young studs. It can be done.

sarunas is my father

by williedillssf on Mar 12, 2008 5:59 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Sure ...

... if he wants to join the team as a free agent next year, at a much reduced salary, and come off the bench behind Biens.

by soem on Mar 12, 2008 10:48 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Iggy

Please explain how you propose that we get him. He is under contract. He may or may not have a player option to get out of his deal this summer (I can't find confirmation) but why would he? He is still owed a ton of cash on his current deal so why would he leave all that on the table to play here for $6mil (that is the most we could offer him)?

As I've told you before we can't just take the $10mil that we would be offering AB and pay it to someone else. If you are unclear on the rules of the CBA check it out here: http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm

I don't see anyway this happens, and for the record I'm not a big JO fan (JAE has schooled me).

by olympicmike on Mar 12, 2008 11:09 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

No good argument for JO

I don't see where O'Neal would be an upgrade at center, HE DOESN'T LIKE TO PLAY THERE! That is why the Pacers always needed a Jeff Foster and this season have used Troy Murphy at center when O'Neal is in the lineup.
I don't see why we would give up on a 22 year old center who is still improving for an over 30 year old declining center with bad knees. At that point you are gambling on him having one good year to get you deep into the playoffs. Plus, I don't know what Iggy has been watching, but Biedrins is much more athletic than O'Neal. I think he may have meant that O'Neal is more polished? Biedrins displayed again last night that he can take slower big men off the dribble and score, at this stage in his career I don't see O'neal doing that.
I agree with the few that have said we don't need to go out and get a big name. I think if we add some depth in the front court, we'll be a better team.

by tangel29 on Mar 13, 2008 4:49 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I'd rather have Marion

O'neal, like the other O'neal, is slow and old. Remember that he's been playing an NBA sked since he graduated from HS. That really makes him more like a 32 year old.

Marion is a much better fit. Once he realizes how much it sucks to be on a crappy team (after this year or next), he'll be humbled and willing to play the role he was born to play: versatile defender, rebounder, and the perfect garbage man. If we could clean up the roster and sign him up for 10M/season once Foyle comes off the books, go a little into the lux tax, but we'd have a sick lineup:

BD
Monta
Jax
Marion
Beans

We'd run the entire league ragged. A man can dream, right?

by Dubs fan in Boston on Mar 13, 2008 6:34 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

could not agree more

marion is the ultimate warrior fan dream :D

by farid on Mar 13, 2008 10:46 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Like the look of that.

We would definetly need to shed Harrington's contract to bring in Marion, but that would give us a definite upgrade at the 4.
I'll stop there since our cheapskate owner probably wouldn't be willing to pay the luxury tax. He's just willing to raise ticket prices.

by tangel29 on Mar 13, 2008 11:18 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

2 words...

Chris Webber!

"No Respect! I tell you man, No Respect!"

by oldskool on Mar 13, 2008 11:51 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

so i finally

wrote up my biedrins argument into a coherent column on my blog. thanks to all you guys that pointed out where my ideas were half baked. if you guys have any interest in reading me speak on the issue on last time you can check it out here:

http://cohn.pressdemocrat.com/default.asp?item=1963627&mode=

i argue against my dad (lowell cohn) who takes your side. the solution i finally came up with was that since nelson can't commit to any center and basically wants the position to play a role for him (as opposed to baron and monta and jax who play big minutes) you could use a center by committee system of croshere, perovic, harrington, and kevin love, with love fulfulling webber's role of a 20 minute player who won't get pushed around low and can pass (i.e. be the the second best passer on the team behing davis, and a passer from the elbow/low post) and shoot, croshere and perovic combining to fulfill biedrins' defensive role, harrington mainting his role, and wright taking over biedrins' offensive role, then using biedrins money to resign azabuike, pietrus (who is playing wonderfully recently, who is one of our best defenders, and who nelson is gaining more and more confidence in), and maybe barnes, or someone like maggette.

i didn't suggest jermaine o'neal, since you guys convinced me that was a pretty bad idea. of course, brand would be a better option than love, but that would take trading harrington plus pieces, and i don't know how realistic that is.

thanks again guys, you helped me out a ton. you guys know your shit.

by Iggy_Zohn on Mar 14, 2008 10:52 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs