Does the Intelligentsia still demand we dump Jack for nothing?
Steven Jackson has been on his best behavior for the last 10 days. Undoubtedly, he has come to realization that the only way his situation improves (whether with the Warriors or another team) is to play the best basketball of his career. From my perspective, this is the best thing that could have happened to us given how bleak the picture looked only a week or so ago. Respected commentators on this site put forth a few trade proposals (for example: http://www.goldenstateofmind.com/2009/10/11/1079967/trading-jack-the-ultimate-price) that at the time, given his mental dysfunction, seemed reasonable but now seem prematurely myopic. I mean, really, doesn't keeping a Jackson who knows he is not the primary ball handler nor the #1 offensive option (neither of which he would be were his wishes granted and he magically appeared on the Cav's roster), make more sense than Eddie Curry? (A LOT more sense?) More sense than Peja? To me the answer is now pretty obvious, but let's see what the Hive Mind has to say...
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 |
16 comments
Comments
If we could tjust get of Jackson for
nothing (meaning we could just erase his contract from our books and let him be a free agent) we would have a long time ago. The thing to remeber is that Jackson has basically negative trade value so if we could get an expiring contract, that would be great.
Thing B
by warriorsscore110 on Oct 23, 2009 8:47 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
It’s not that his play won’t be good or great but he may be a detriment to the locker room and hinder the growth of our youth which is something we do NOT want on this team
WARRIORS BASKETBALL!!! Patiently waiting for a title...I may be waiting for a long time...
by JustSomeName on Oct 23, 2009 8:55 AM PDT via mobile reply actions 0 recs
obviously dumping him for nothing (letting him walk) isn’t going to happen. Neither us getting an expiring contract next year (although maybe one that expires 2-3 years down the line is, ergo Curry)
I sort of assume that “best behavior” involves playing well AND keeping his mouth shut.
Sittin in my scraper watchin Oakland goin wild, ta-dow!
by Supafishal on Oct 23, 2009 9:13 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
Pipe dream trade
Denver as a 8.4 million dollar trade exempt that expires on Nov 3rd. Could the Warriors swing a deal in the next week or so to send him to the Nuggets. It would sure up their bench and give them a defense guy to take the place of JR Smith or they could even play small with Melo at PF and Martin at C with Jackson at SF. And seeing how Billups turned their team of misfits into winners I’m sure adding Jackson’s hot temper won’t phase them that much. The only thing I can think of is Denver not wanting to take one more salary.
Here’s Marc Stein’s piece from Truehoop:
http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/9938/stephen-jacksons-slight-edge-over-boozer-explained
A Sonics fan without a team... but after 6 seasons now of GS Warriors season tickets have convinced me to adopt the boys from Oakland.
by mcwalter44 on Oct 23, 2009 9:17 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Renaldo Balkman, please.
Sounds like the Nuggets are going to let the trade exception expire. But IF they’re willing to take on salary, and IF they really like Jackson, I would love to see if we can’t pry Balkman. How many athletic, 24 y.o. defensive-minded combo forwards coming off seasons in which they averaged —
.585 TS%
9.4 reb/36
2.2 stl/36
1.6 blk/36
— are currently languishing at the back end of other teams’ benches? Downside is that Balkman lacks the “true small forward” skillz of Jack (specifically perimeter shooting and passing); but the emergence of Curry as a freaky-good playmaker would mitigate the drop-off in this area. We’d be left with a nine-man rotation consisting of:
• 2 initiators (Monta, Curry)
• 3 gunners/scorers (Morrow, Azubuike, Maggs)
• 4 defense/rebounding fools (Biedrins, Turiaf, Randolph, and Balkman).
That team would make me happy.
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Oct 23, 2009 9:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Make it so #2!
Sittin in my scraper watchin Oakland goin wild, ta-dow!
by Supafishal on Oct 23, 2009 9:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
chicken or egg?
jack has turned it around all the while claiming that he was always committed to winning with the warriors. did it take the fans on this and other blogs to change his attitude? did he lead by example by requiring the franchise and his teammates to strive to be winners? prolly not, but he does have the chance to spin that if the dubs win some games. funny, how this all works out.
"We're Menudo," -BB
by eshock on Oct 23, 2009 9:34 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
More Likely.....
that he finally figured out his chances of getting out of here were slim to none with his previous approach. So now, he’ll shut up and play ball in the hopes of enticing one of the contending teams to take a chance on him and offer the Warriors something in return to get him. Probably the first smart move of his all offseason.
by ajtrinc on Oct 23, 2009 11:35 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Kenyon Martin!
Yeah, this guy’s a punk, a dirty player, has no outside shot, is a poor rebounder, etc. But he can run the fast break really well, as long as his knees don’t buckle on him. I don’t know how in love Denver is with Martin, but I think with all things considered, Martin for Jax is pretty equitable.
http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=yfxhbnl
The annual salaries match-up perfectly and we dump Jack’s contract to Denver while giving them one year of back-up PG in Speedy and giving them Wright as an option to develop a PF.
For the Warriors, Martin would work well in the up-tempo system and his contract is the same length of time that Nellie is here. I think he’d be best as a back-up PF and occasional starter. I’m not sure if he’s a better alternative to Maggette playing the 4, but at least Martin gives the illusion he’s a PF, even though he rebounds and defends poor. But, at least we’d get some service out of the PF position with Wright’s injury and we don’t need to worry about developing him. He’s a vet and him and Nellie are perfect for each other.
Confident Marco Belinelli supporter
by Doctor Kajita on Oct 23, 2009 10:24 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Kenyon Martin
is perfect anywhere as long as he’s not on the Warriors. That guy just makes me cringe looking at him.
by VERY VERY BUSY on Oct 23, 2009 11:34 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And Jax doesn't?
Look, I get it, but if the Warriors are going to trade Jax, I think you need to compromise a bit. Even without the pre-season debacles, he would be extremely hard to move.
Confident Marco Belinelli supporter
by Doctor Kajita on Oct 23, 2009 11:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thug Life...
Billups
Jack
Carmelo
Martin
Nene
Assuming we traded Jack for Balkman.
Scary.
Sittin in my scraper watchin Oakland goin wild, ta-dow!
by Supafishal on Oct 23, 2009 12:25 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
The guy’s had, what, one genuinely good performance in the preseason? This is a huge turnaround?
I’d still dump Jack for a guy with a shorter contract. It’s nice that he’s keeping his mouth shut… maybe we could do a bit better than Eddy Curry after all. But Jack is not just a headache: he’s a non-star swingman on a team that’s overflowing with swingmen, and a guy with a terrible contract that will muck up our books for years. He’s simply not good enough to merit minutes over guys like Curry and Morrow, guys with higher upside who are relevant to our future.
We would miss aspects of Jack’s game. Our defense would get weaker, and our passing would suffer a bit. But overall, we wouldn’t miss him much. A Warriors team without Jack is a team that shoots much better and rebounds better, and has minutes for all of its promising young guys. I’d prefer that team, and it has nothing to do with what Jack is or isn’t saying.
by onlxn on Oct 23, 2009 12:29 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
but certainly you would agree that the air of desperation has at least lifted a bit? The sense of urgency has dissipated somewhat? As in, we don’t need to trade him for Eddy Curry.
Sittin in my scraper watchin Oakland goin wild, ta-dow!
by Supafishal on Oct 23, 2009 12:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
A Warriors team without Jack is a team that shoots much better and rebounds better, and has minutes for all of its promising young guys. I’d prefer that team, and it has nothing to do with what Jack is or isn’t saying.
I prefer that team as well. I’m still a proponent of trading Jack for just about anything, because I think we’re just a better team with his minutes going to Azu and Morrow. Not for Eddy Curry though. That never sounded like a good idea to me.
Don't worry about me Thurgood, I'll be fine. The robbery is what's important now.
by the guy on Oct 24, 2009 6:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think most people who understand the NBA realize that moving Jack for “nothing” hurts us short term. History has shown that most predominantly young teams usually don’t win in the NBA (see OKC).
Thing is, even with Jack (barring unforeseen injuries to top players on playoff caliber teams) the Warriors are probably a 9th seed at best. Getting Curry & Morrow minutes to get experience will probably benefit the team more than anything else. Unless you want to limit Morrow’s minutes (and therefore his numbers) to keep his contract in Buike territory.
Preferably for someone like Haslem who is expiring and is still at the level of an NBA back up big.
by homer simpson on Oct 23, 2009 1:17 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

by 
















