Should Warriors Persue Livingston?
Tim Kawakami suggests that the Warriors strongly investigate the possiblity of signing former LA Clipper Shaun Livingston in his Talking Points Blog for the San Jose Mercury News. For the most part I agree with him that Warriors should make a run at him with a 2 year deal (perhaps a team option for 2nd year or maybe 3rd year). Check it out...
http://blogs.mercurynews.com/kawakami/2008/08/08/the-warriors-should-offer-shaun-livingston-a-low-level-2-year-deal-and-i-think-they-might/#more-1200
Here are some basic stats and comments on Livingston:
ESPN (Hollinger prior to 07-08 season)
| SEASON | FG% | FT% | P/40 | R/40 | A/40 | TS% | Ast | TO | Usg | Reb | PER |
| 2004-05 | .414 | .746 | 10.9 | 4.4 | 7.4 | 46.1 | 32.3 | 16.1 | 18.3 | 6.6 | 10.40 |
| 2005-06 | .427 | .688 | 9.2 | 4.8 | 7.2 | 46.0 | 35.6 | 14.5 | 15.2 | 7.0 | 10.26 |
| 2006-07 | .463 | .707 | 12.5 | 4.6 | 6.8 | 50.3 | 31.1 | 12.2 | 17.6 | 6.8 | 13.70 |
| 2007-08 (projected) | .459 | .726 | 13.7 | 4.2 | 6.4 | 50.64 | 27.67 | 11.36 | 19.1 | 6.47 | 14.76 |
|
------------ Draft Express (July 2008) BA Scouting Reports, Pacific Division (Part One) ----------------- Dime Magzine When first hearing that the Clippers inked Jason Williams to back up Baron Davis at the point, it made sense that L.A.’s management wanted to get an insurance policy given the uncertainty of Shaun Livingston’s robotic leg. But it turns out that the Clippers offered Livingston a one-year guaranteed deal, which he turned down. Thus, L.A. had to go elsewhere, and ended up with J-Will.
How could Shaun not be ready to make a commitment in his situation? Dude was only starting contact drills about a month ago, and hasn’t proved that he can endure the slightest bump. If you’re Livingston, do you take a guaranteed one-year deal or try to make more money off of the legacy of being a lottery pick?
|
|||||||||||
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!
1 recs |
61
comments
Comments
The Livingston thread was beaten to death a few times. Bad knees, bad back. Back combination. Not nearly the sort of player that much discussion seemed to make him into before he was injured.
At this point, they could only offer him the minimum. That’s all we have to work with since we’re over the cap. When Kawakami talks about the minimum “or a little more” I’m curious if he even thinks about the cap rules before he writes anything.
But 2 years at the minimum? eh.
by jae on Aug 8, 2008 2:53 PM PDT 0 recs
Jae read Kawakami post closer
He suggests Kosta Perovic could sign overseas, thus clearing up 1.7 million in salary cap space. Also, we haven’t signed Watson either. So if Livingston would take the minimum exception (900k) which I do not believe the Warriors have used yet. If Perovic leave then Kawakami suggestion has some merit.
Personally, I like the idea of the Warriors taking a chance on a guy like Livingston. If he doesn’t pan out then you can just eat his contract.
A Sonics fan without a team.. Though I'm auditioning GS Warriors this season.
by mcwalter44 on
Aug 8, 2008 3:00 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I read it. Deleting Kosta’s salary doesn’t free up any money under the cap. “clearing up to 1.7 million in salary cap space” makes it sound like if he were gone, we could immediately offer the same money to someone else. This is not true. It’s not even close to true. We do not get a dollar for dollar replacement by shedding Perovic’s salary. We get a bit more space under the tax threshold, but this doesn’t provide us with any additional tools to sign a player when we’re still over the salary cap. We can only offer more money if the reduction in 1.7 million puts us under the salary cap. It does not. It is irrelevant, completely and totally irrelevant to what we can presently offer.
by jae on
Aug 8, 2008 3:46 PM PDT
up
0 recs
what about.
trading Perovic for livvy straight up, with the intention of LA buying out Perovic for $00.
Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.
by kenntoe on
Aug 9, 2008 1:20 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Livingstone is not under contract. You cannot trade for someone who isn’t under contract unless he’s signed first. For him to be traded, it would have to be a sign and trade, but LAC renounced their rights to clear room for Baron, meaning that they’ve got nothing more than the min to sign him either.
by jae on
Aug 9, 2008 1:22 AM PDT
up
0 recs
We don’t have an MLE this year. If you go under the cap by more than the MLE, you lose the MLE.
by jae on
Aug 9, 2008 6:03 PM PDT
up
0 recs
oh drats.
I forgot they didn’t tender Livvy a QO.
Warriors, Stupidest franchise in the league.
by kenntoe on
Aug 9, 2008 7:33 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Jae, Read Kawakami post closer
He suggests Kosta Perovic could sign overseas, thus clearing up 1.7 million in salary cap space. Also, we haven’t signed Watson either. So if Livingston would take the minimum exception (900k) which I do not believe the Warriors have used yet. If Perovic leave then Kawakami suggestion has some merit.
Personally, I like the idea of the Warriors taking a chance on a guy like Livingston. If he doesn’t pan out then you can just eat his contract.
A Sonics fan without a team.. Though I'm auditioning GS Warriors this season.
by mcwalter44 on
Aug 8, 2008 3:01 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Huh?
We are well over the cap. Perovic leaving won’t change our ability to only offer him the minimum and nothing more. Am I missing something?
If he would take the minimum I would consider it just because of the upside, but you really risk letting him rehab on your dime and then losing him to another team if he makes a dramatic recovery. It’s hard to imagine a scenario where this makes any real impact on the team.
"...OlympicMike is clearly the Barack Obama of GSoM"-Sleepy
by olympicmike on
Aug 8, 2008 3:39 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I second Jae's proposition....
I’d take a flyer on this guy, he could thrive in an uptempo/fun offense like ours.
by Hayward's Finest on
Aug 8, 2008 5:45 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Was he all that great of a player to begin with?
i don’t know. Plus i saw the youtube video of him and his recovery. Didn’t look too promising. We have Williams, Buike, Bellinelli, Watson, etc. I don’t think we need this guy.
by Agent Zero on Aug 8, 2008 2:58 PM PDT 0 recs
eh...
Buike and Bellinelli would be projects at the point guard spot. Watson hasn’t been signed yet. Which leaves us with Williams as the only true point guard to backup Monta Ellis.
A Sonics fan without a team.. Though I'm auditioning GS Warriors this season.
by mcwalter44 on
Aug 8, 2008 3:02 PM PDT
up
0 recs
i don't suggest that bellinelli and buike play point
im just saying, combined with stephen jackson and corey maggette, we already have a lot of guys in the backcourt and we have a very good packup point and a nice 3rd point in Watson (assuming he is signed)
Bringing in Livingston was an idea that was thrown out a while ago under the assumption that monta ellis was only a shooting guard. Which of course he is not, so we don’t need livingston at all.
by Agent Zero on
Aug 8, 2008 3:16 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Still..
Livingston would be brought in as a backup… with the idea that he could be pair on the floor with Monta to run the point and guard the taller 2 guards in the league. At that’s what my think is. I agree that if we sign Watson that we won’t need Livingston for this season. However, he would be an interesting gamble to take.
A Sonics fan without a team.. Though I'm auditioning GS Warriors this season.
by mcwalter44 on
Aug 8, 2008 3:19 PM PDT
up
0 recs
true
an interesting gamble. i don’t think he can be effective in the league again (if he ever was considered an effective player)
Theres no question that he will never be the same player but how bad of a drop off will he be? i would be willing to sign him to the minimum but not much more than that.
by Agent Zero on
Aug 8, 2008 4:04 PM PDT
up
0 recs
sliding Jax to SG, with Maggs & KAz all available should be enough to defend opposing “big” guards – Livingston’s height and length don’t overcome his injury history, offensive deficiencies, and the lost production of taking any of the above off the floor for any significant minutes.
KAz or Belli at the PG would signal we are in desperate straights indeed
this is all pretty moot if, as you posted, Livingston isn’t expected back for the 07-08 campaign
by hardcore on
Aug 8, 2008 4:10 PM PDT
up
0 recs
When first hearing that the Clippers inked Jason Williams
Now that’s interesting.
Till I get free
I live my life in the Walmart
Cholesterol chasin me
by Skeptic con Urquell on Aug 8, 2008 3:02 PM PDT 0 recs
would we be signing him to play center?
if kosta leaves then beans would be the only true center on the team. i think that money would be better used on a big man. unless the plan would would be to go real small again and then we would have learned nothing from last year
by Rach on Aug 8, 2008 4:43 PM PDT 0 recs
livingston to play center?
lol i dont think so….more like PG or SG hahah
by gorillas on
Aug 8, 2008 5:07 PM PDT
up
1 recs
By and large, we had one center last year. Kosta was inactive for much of the season, and the POB was in a suit as often as he was in a uniform. Harrington got the minutes at center that didn’t go to Biedrins. Turiaf looks to play real backup minutes at center this year and while there are bigger centers, he’s the genuine article in a backup 4/5 combo. With Turiaf and Harrington around, it would take mammoth improvement from Perovic to break into a rotation. That he’s the only ‘true center’ seems less valid than that Harrington and Turiaf, even if they aren’t true centers, are probably more effective.
by jae on
Aug 8, 2008 6:01 PM PDT
up
0 recs
yes your right
by and large we had one center last year and by in large we got hammerd on the boards because of it. yes turiaf will help out on the boards when beans isnt on the floor. as for the rest of your reply im sorry but i dont understand what you are trying to say. i didnt fair very well in english class in high school. so if you wouldnt mind explaining the rest of your reply in laymens terms maybe i can better understand what you are saying. i realize that i may have not chosen the right words to express my opinoin when i used the words true center. i should have said rebounder. not to imply that kosta is a formindable or even average rebounder but just to use the opportunity of an open roster spot to aquire a big man that can rebound.
by Rach on
Aug 8, 2008 8:52 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I do not think that there is a rebounder available at the price we can pay (NBA minimum) who would improve on what we have to work with already. I really do not think that one who could also do any of the things that Nelson requires of a player are there. Whether or not Kosta is on the team is most likely irrelevant. He won’t play much, but neither would whomever replaces him.
by jae on
Aug 9, 2008 12:08 AM PDT
up
0 recs
SIGN HIM!!!!
I would totally sign him if I could.
He is cheap with a huge ceiling for potential. He might be a risk, but the upside is more than worth how little we would need to pay him.
However…
I don’t see this happening. Marcus Williams is our Back up PG, and I don’t see Livington agreeing to sign with us to be fighting for a #2 spot when he could be fighting for a starting job somewhere else.
by dancingchiapet on Aug 8, 2008 5:17 PM PDT 0 recs
Id wait a year
Before I’d sign him, lets see if he can even play in the league again, there is still a strong possibility his career is over. Hes probably only going to get a year or two year deal at most and if he proves to do anything maybe we consider going after him then, otherwise I want nothing to do with this guy, he makes Baron Davis look like Cal Ripken Jr.
by pbra17 on Aug 8, 2008 5:30 PM PDT 0 recs
whatt
isn’t cal ripken a baseball player..
i don’t understand your comparison
by yaydummy on
Aug 9, 2008 4:48 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Comparison of health. Livingston is such an injury risk, so fragile that his poor health makes Baron, a guy who, prior to last year, had been chronically injured for several seasons look positively healthy, like he would show up for work reliably, ready to contribute like Ripken, who played in a gazillion consecutive games.
by jae on
Aug 9, 2008 8:02 AM PDT
up
0 recs
he could turn out to be a top 10 PG in the NBA
It has become clear he needs to bulk up/ condition his body better otherwise his career is over. So why wouldn’t he do that given the ultimatum? Once he makes his body able to handle a full season he will improve even more. He’s only played partial seasons with a beat up body and still averaged about 5 assists in under 30 minutes per game.
If he comes back, in a year he could be starting somewhere doing 7 assists per game.
I hope he comes back and keeps playing, it would be very exciting for him to be in the mix in the coming seasons
by dancingchiapet on Aug 8, 2008 5:54 PM PDT 0 recs
The problems with expecting him to “bulk up” are many. He’s not a guy with a particularly big frame to begin with. He appears to be one of those guys who is naturally very thin, so I suspect his frame isn’t really suited to carrying much weight. It has also been severely compromised. Before the catastrophic knee injury (and remember: this is unlike most blowouts—there was legitimate fear that the leg might have to be amputated when the injury occurred) he had already had a problem with the other knee and had had a bad back. Young tall guys with bad backs don’t tend to be older guys with better backs and the back problem usually leads to knee problems (and knee problems can lead to back problems, etc, etc). He wasn’t the picture of health who had a freak injury. He was a fragile guy who had a freak injury.
Now a recipe for making knee problems worse is to ask the knee to support more weight. A recipe for making a back problem worse is to ask it to bear more weight. Getting him to “bulk up” will, in all likelihood, be a recipe for him to move between the weight room and the trainer’s table with few stops in between on a basketball court.
I don’t know about his conditioning. It may never have been a problem. It seems more like the problem was that he was six and a half feet tall with his body working as a lever arm against weak joints, joints that were congenitally weak. Conditioning only goes so far (as in not far at all) in preventing the sort of soft tissue injuries he’s had.
by jae on
Aug 8, 2008 6:08 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Anyone Else?
Think that Brandan Wright or Turiaf should start at the 4 instead of Harrington?
by boomdizzleness on Aug 8, 2008 7:48 PM PDT 0 recs
i have mentioned before
on another thread that if the roster stays the same i would start turiaf at the 4. i dont think that wright is physiaclly strong enough to handle the 4 spot position on a day in day out basis. if you wanted to start him it would really depend on the match up. as for al well we’ve seen what he can do and what he is capable of and i would rather have a different option at the 4 spot.
by Rach on
Aug 8, 2008 9:08 PM PDT
up
0 recs
turiaf
starting would help biedrins so much. if they both were on the floor at the same time, we would actually have some defense. GASP!
by boomdizzleness on
Aug 9, 2008 4:56 PM PDT
up
0 recs
i wouldn't
at the 4 and 5 in nellie’s offense, or at least the way it’s worked the past couple years, you need one rebounding scrappy garbage bucket guy (biedrins), and one guy who can stretch the d some with his range (in this case, harrington), it would be a problem if we had two guys standing around the hoop waiting to crash the boards with so many slashers trying to get there. they’d be taking it to the hole and finding two defenders waiting. monta and magette need harrington and jax to keep their guys away from the rim and in no position to defend it. i think that’s the main reason wright didn’t get playing time last year, and why people say nellie hates his game.
by cap'n hack on
Aug 9, 2008 3:49 PM PDT
up
0 recs
i think last season actually proves your theory wrong
you need one rebounding scrappy garbage bucket guy (biedrins), and one guy who can stretch the d some with his range
we did do that last year and we got crushed on the boards because of it. as for your for seen problem of having 2 guys around the hoop i dont see it as a problem more an opportunity. if the d were converge on the penetrator then he can dish to the open man or if the d stays with there man then the driver takes the shot. i think that nellie doesnt like bw game cuz he doesnt really have one yet. imo he wasnt drafted for his ability. he was drafted for his potential. right now he is just a tall kid with really long arms.
by Rach on
Aug 9, 2008 8:53 PM PDT
up
0 recs
uncertain about all that
i see where you’re coming from, but the idea that biedrins and turiaf on the floor at the same time improves the team offensively by opening up more passing options, seems very flawed. the open man on the wing is where the slashing pass tends to go, because it’s the easy pass. if three or four guys are in the paint and biedrins and turiaf are waiting for ellis to toss it their way on a drive, they’ll be waiting a while, because there’s a fair chance it never gets there. too much crowding makes even the short pass much more difficult. if that wasn’t the case, biedrins would have scored 25 a game, and post players would be even more valuable than they already are. so, i don’t see that working out offensively, which means we’ll have to endure more lopsided rebounding totals for another year.
wright has some game, we just have no way of seeing it on the bench. when he’s playing, i’ve seen some interesting stuff out of the guy, not sure how good he is, but there is something there. and the fact that he’s working on his jumper says a lot about playing for don nelson.
by cap'n hack on
Aug 10, 2008 11:13 AM PDT
up
0 recs
starting at 4
I like Harrington starting at 4 bc it gives the opponents so much more to deal with (Harrington’s offensive skills, three point range), opens up more for finishers like Monte, Mggette, Biedrins inside. Then Wright comes off the bench for energy, shot blocking etc. When (if) Wright develops more offensive skills then maybe he should be the starter. Harrington has – let’s face it- been something of a disappointment ( I thought he, not Jackson, was the key to the deal – totally wrong on that) but he does have 18 ppg NBA skills and he gives Ws one more guy who if he gets off early could get us off to a great start. Nellie will probably go according to match ups unless someone really stands out (even Biedrens didn’t always start last year- only the big three were always in the starting lineup). I’d guess unless Wright makes collosal strides that he and turiaf will be bigger versions of Pietrus, BArnes etc and will start when Nellie likes the match ups.
by gsfool on Aug 9, 2008 12:19 AM PDT 0 recs
Style not substance
Why won’t the Livingston meme die?
He’s a steal at the minimum - 10%
He should be an elite point guard some day - 10%
He’s tall and rangy - 10%
He plays WARRIORS STYLE - 70%
People want him because he’d look so fly running our offense with a nice big ‘fro, or at least the cornrows, all wangy and plastic fantastic, like some second coming of an anorexic Magic Johnson bringing it up the court. He’s just SO OAKTOWN, you can see it in every move he makes. We know what Warriors ball looks like, and he plays it.
None of JAE’s incisive reasoning can deny what we understand in our hearts. If this man plays again in the NBA, he belongs here.
by Ormolov on Aug 9, 2008 4:39 PM PDT 0 recs
I may not agree with you
...that he should be a Warrior, but the ‘fro would bring some swagger to the Bay.. Does anyone else still miss Baron? Like, they just wanna wake up and realize that it was all a dream, and Baron is still our PG.. i’m gonna miss all his intangibles… we will never hit a game winning shot again.. nobody to hit a dagger 3 against the Fakers, and blow kisses to the crowd.. sigh…..
screw cohan, screw mullin, screw baron
by DMJR on
Aug 9, 2008 5:47 PM PDT
up
0 recs
questions
would he be allowed to play in sunglasses? can he grow a fu manchu? would he be willing to make three ‘fake shot into a no look pass per game? would he be willing to take at least one ‘fake pass into a no look shot’ per game?
by cap'n hack on
Aug 10, 2008 11:20 AM PDT
up
0 recs
pursue
not “persue”
Left hand, right hand, it doesn't matter. I'm amphibious.
by Kobe on Aug 9, 2008 8:46 PM PDT 0 recs
you mean peruse
Till I go pee
Live life at KMart
Foot in mouth chasin me
by Skeptic Con Urquel on Aug 10, 2008 7:56 AM PDT 0 recs
"Peruse"
Is actually one of the most misused words in English, as its dictionary definition is the opposite of what people generally mean by it: “to examine or consider with attention and in detail.”
Hence, the Warriors should peruse Livingston. And if their docs think his knee isn’t about to collapse like a house of cards, they should probably pursue him.
New English word: to peruse and pursue = “to persue.” You heard it on GSoM first.
Don't mess with ^^^^ !!
by Sleepy Freud on
Aug 10, 2008 3:57 PM PDT
up
0 recs
thanks for the english lesson
That’s not Sleepy, that’s jae giving lessons as bizarro sleepy. See the chinese thingy? it’s not quite right.
Till I get free
I live my life in the Walmart
Cholesterol chasin me
by Skeptic con Urquell on
Aug 10, 2008 8:52 PM PDT
up
0 recs
"persue"
Ok, I’ll co-sign on this, but only if the p is silent.
"...OlympicMike is clearly the Barack Obama of GSoM"-Sleepy
by olympicmike on
Aug 11, 2008 1:39 PM PDT
up
0 recs
if he signed with us for a minimum contract, I see no harm in it. As I see it, we only have one real legitimate distributing point guard in Marcus Williams. Even then, he was demoted to 3rd string back in New Jersey, so who knows if he’s even going to contribute here. Making a low risk move to bring in a tall pass first guard to pair in the backcourt with Monta Ellis? Sure why not.
by YaHeard on Aug 11, 2008 11:56 AM PDT 0 recs
YaHeard... that's my point with this post
We all know that Marcus Williams is already a gamble, so why not roll the dice on another player if he’s going to be player #13, #14, or #15 on the roster meaning he’d be in street close most of the time anyways. I’d love it if we could get Livingston for two years… work with to rehab more this season giving him the 2009-2010 season as his make or break year.
Then again, what do I know…. I’m the same guy that love the J-Rich trade that landed up Wright and who thinks that Randolph going to be a stud.
A Sonics fan without a team.. Though I'm auditioning GS Warriors this season.
by mcwalter44 on
Aug 11, 2008 1:14 PM PDT
up
0 recs
From the team’s perspective, if he’s in the sort of health where we’re talking about a year of rehab before he gets to the marginal place where he might be able to produce, why sign him now? He will eat up a roster spot. If you’re concerned that there’s a shortage of distributors this year what sense does it make to sign someone who can’t be pressed upon in an emergency? Seems like they could wait a year, let him rehab on his own dime and see what’s what in a year.
by jae on Aug 11, 2008 1:22 PM PDT 0 recs
Hum... you could wait
But perhaps he’d want to stick with whatever team gives him a break or he signs a two deal with some else and blows up and meets his potential. I think he’s a great low risk high reward player. Also, if you think players 13, 14, & 15 on are going to make a difference in winning THIS YEAR, then you’re severely mistaking. However, I do appreicate your take. It is the cautious, conservative approach to rebuilding the Warriors.
A Sonics fan without a team.. Though I'm auditioning GS Warriors this season.
by mcwalter44 on
Aug 12, 2008 2:27 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I think he’s a great low risk high reward player.
Don’t you think the Clips doctors checked his health out before waiving him? They know him a lot better than anyone here so I’d be surprised if he makes a full recovery. If he never recovers to be better than Montay and MWill then he’s not much good to the Warriors.
Till I get free
I live my life in the Walmart
Cholesterol chasin me
by Skeptic con Urquell on
Aug 12, 2008 3:05 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Signing him now for rehab suggests that he’s worth a 1.5mil retainer on the possibility that he’ll ever play effective basketball again while taking up a roster spot that could actually be used for an injury replacement. Honestly, I don’t think that he showed that he’s worth that, given that he wasn’t the picture of health before the injury.
I think people are seeing “6-7 point guard” and not looking as closely at what he was actually doing on the court, what sort of contribution he was actually bringing. It’s similar to the attention Crittenton brought for reason of being tall much more than being good.
by jae on
Aug 12, 2008 3:39 PM PDT
up
0 recs
hes
probably gonna go to Europe like all other players these days. How come no nba player can go to the philippine basketball association though? if they did that would be awesome! i would be rocking my coca cola, magnolia. phone pals, red bull, or other team if they go there.
So I don't have a signature well these words would do! Who knew that upgrades can have downgrades too!
by 24k state fan since 87 on Aug 12, 2008 2:20 AM PDT 0 recs
I would
probably consider him to be signed as a 3rd option at the 1 and possibly a backup at the 2. I’d sign him over watson, even if he is injury prone. If he goes out, that only opens up what little playtime he will have to other players like Buike and Nellie. I just like his upside, should he return to a somewhat healthy player. I don’t think he’ll ever develop into the superstar the Clips wanted him to be, but maybe, just maybe, a good role player. He fits our style of play and being that he is 6-6/ 6-7, he can cover both the 1 & 2 spots.
- iBall, do you?
by iBallGSW on Aug 15, 2008 8:47 PM PDT 0 recs
Exactly my point with this post
He’s a low risk, high reward guy.
A Sonics fan without a team.. Though I'm auditioning GS Warriors this season.
by mcwalter44 on
Aug 16, 2008 1:11 PM PDT
up
0 recs
low risk?
How exactly is a guy who wasn’t regularly healthy before he had a potentially career ending injury “low risk”? How does someone with two bad knee fit “our style of play”? How is a guy who was never much of a shooter supposed to cover the 2-guard spot?
I really think people are looking far too much at “6-7 point guard” and not seeing a guy who was something of a question mark before the injury and really wishing him into being a player different from the one he was.
The risk is that he takes up a roster spot when it’s not known that he can even play if pressed upon in an emergency. Remember that with present contracts as paid, Livingston in means Watson out. Given that the team has a converted 2 as their starting 1 backed up by exactly one guy who has experience running the point, that’s something of a risk.
by jae on
Aug 16, 2008 2:49 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Jae... I disagree
Watson was pick up off of the D-League scrap yard. Therefore, the Warriors would have the option of finding a Watson caliber player if Livingston is a burden to the roster. I don’t think he would be, even if doesn’t play much year one. The key is to get a two year deal with him. If you don’t, then your right because he becomes a much higher risk if you only have him for the 08-09 season. That said, I still think you’re getting a very talent player the lowest value that you could ever get him at. Plus, I’d rather have him on the roster than Perovic or Watson.
A Sonics fan without a team.. Though I'm auditioning GS Warriors this season.
by mcwalter44 on
Aug 16, 2008 11:44 PM PDT
up
0 recs
why pay him this year?
he’s not going to play much, if at all, due to that knee, and if he does, he certainly won’t be full speed. i loved the idea of going after him until it became more evident that he wasn’t going to be back this year in any meaningful sense. i don’t see the point of paying someone, even if it is just the minimum, not to play this year. the two year deal is only even remotely considerable if it seems like the guy will get back to 100% by the start of next season, and stay healthy. livingston’s a likable guy and i wish him the best, but i don’t want to waste even a minimum contract on him this year..
by cap'n hack on
Aug 17, 2008 2:28 AM PDT
up
0 recs





