it’s only been six (rather dissapointing) games. we’ll find out a lot on this upcoming road trip. cuz the truth is that winning cures all chemistry issues, and if we can just win..

Because young players are inconsistent and often don’t know how to win.

True.

Jackson has been in the league all this time, because he’s a good, consistent player.

False. Jackson has been in the league all this time because he’s a decent, consistent player. He is simply not much of an asset, and not particularly better than our other options at the wing. He does many little things better than guys like Morrow and Azubuike, but he does a lot of big things worse.

If all you ever do is play young players, you’ll never amount to much.

False. You may never amount to much, if your young players aren’t good enough… there’s certainly a risk of that here. But good young players can amount to plenty. Portland’s effective age last year was lower than ours. Didn’t matter… they were a good team.

It is true that many fans overrate the potential of young players. It is also true that many fans overrate the contributions of veterans. It is quite possible that Warriors fans collectively overrate guys like Morrow and Azubuike. But it is even more possible that Warriors fans have collectively overrated Stephen Jackson for several years now. There is no evidence, whatsoever, that he is an above-average, winning player.

here are some excerpts from the post game transcript:

-Q: Nelson said if that’s how you play after your lawyer criticizes him, then he wants that to happen every day…

-JACKSON: (Laughs) That was all on my agent. I can’t take any blame for that. He was upset with some things and he spoke his mind. We work good together because we both speak our minds.

But I would never bash coach in the paper like that. I never have. I’ve got a lot of respect for coach.

-Q: How has your team reacted to everything going on with you?

-JACKSON: I talked to them today. My team knows that everything that’s going on with me outside of basketball has nothing to do with me as a teammate on the court.

I’m the only guy on this team that’s having barbecues, that’s bringing guys to the house for football parties. I’m still doing that. It has nothing to do with my teammates. They know when the ball goes up, I’m giving 110%.

None of this is affecting them. They know it’s a business and they understand that. If you ask any one of my teammates, they know it hasn’t affected me being an uncle to the young guys and being a leader on this team. It hasn’t affected my play at all and it hasn’t affected my relationship with them.

-Q: So if you go, they can still use your house for barbecues?

-JACKSON: Oh yeah. That’s the thing. Before I got here, BD and J-Rich, they never did that. Then when me and Al got here, we started that up. And that’s why we had success.

That’s just me as a person. That has nothing to do with basketball.

-Q: What was your opinion about the substance of what Stevens said about Nelson on your behalf?

-JACKSON: I don’t think it was on my behalf, it was his opinion. I speak on my own behalf, as you all know. Fined for that. That’s how he feels.

I respect coach to the utmost. You’ll never see me saying anything in the paper to you guys about coach in any bad way. I have too much respect for him.

That’s Mark’s opinion. He feels like some things coach is doing are not right, but he’s my coach right now. I have to give him the respect and I have to continue to give him respect.

it’s pretty obvious that Mr. Spears already had a story in mind before writing his article and made the evidence match his thesis. this isn’t inherently wrong, but the article should be viewed for what it is: skewed by the author’s predetermined intention

they might luck into a series of favorable deals/trades that might lead to potential cap space which might lead to potential star power joining our team. but then we go and sign stack jack for 3 more years for… no sane reason, try to sign gilbert arenas out of panic, etc etc.

in a scenario where a franchise cannot be trusted to make rational decisions, i would rather have players i can trust (bd, jrich, barnes) and less salary cap room than a lot of unproven players (AR, Morrow, etc.) with potential and more salary cap room.

Totally agree. If Jack is subtracted properly, our roster situation is pretty nice. That doesn’t mean we’ll get good… coaching and GMing and health are all big question marks here. But we have a lot of youth and a bit of talent. That, in and of itself, is a positive.

but the actual money being paid by year is not too bad. there are people with far worse contracts (ie remember croshere after the pacers/lakers finals that fool got a near-max for one good series, or jerome james etc etc)

With Jack’s volume shooting, we still had one of the best offenses in the league, efficiency-wise.

What’s your source on this? Basketball Prospectus, John Hollinger (his ‘08-’09 numbers are currently down) and 82games.com all rated our ‘08-’09 offense somewhere between the 11th and 15th most efficient in the league. Above average, but hardly one of the best. And according to all three, 1) Stephen Jackson was not one of our eight most efficient scorers, 2) our offense was only very marginally worse when he was off the floor, 3) our defense wasn’t any worse when he was off the floor.

I’m not sure where you’re getting your numbers, but Jack was not a huge asset last season. And it was his career year. He’s really not nearly as useful as you seem to think.

Yes, I will agree he was a “turnover machine” when asked to do too much. One of the many reason why he should never be a 1st or 2nd option on any team.

I will have to disagree about his shooting…

Yes, in the Don Nelson offense its free reign when it comes to shooting, but he has consistently been one of the worst shooters in the league in respect to shooting percentage. Anyone that is only making one third of his shots from beyond the arc should not be taking that many threes! Don’t even get me started on his 2pt scoring which isnt much better.

Personally, I would rather have more efficient players like Monta & Morrow taking those shots.

The process behind the JRich trade was solid, though I think it’s fair to say the results have been bad for us simply because of Wright’s injuries. Using that to judge a trade is pointless, though, because it just as easily could have been JRich getting hurt…basically, there was no way of knowing how injuries were going to affect the end result, and we simply ended up on the unlucky side.

we didn’t lose much production but we lost depth. baron and stephen jackson each played over 40 games of 40+ minute games. in theory, it shouldnt have happened: we had pietrus, barnes, ellis and etc that should have resulted in little disparity of playing time after jrich left and before. but the reality was nellie kept playing the same players and they ran out of gas at the end.

stop making things so personal. i meant that you can’t say all the trades are bad examples and then use a different line of reasoning (ie “what could we have done” lol) for each in trying to discredit them. some of them work, you don’t need to win on EVERY trade to prove you’re smarter.

it’s just that it’s pretty clear what my thesis is: don’t trade jackson for the following reasons, 1, 2, 3, 4. I don’t get why i’m having to defend my second point as a thesis, or why the errors in some of the evidence defending that point somehow derails the thesis of my post

“Once in a lifetime” implies that we shouldn’t expect to see his equal in a lifetime. We have seen more than his equal. We have seen significantly better players.

Well, I think it’s more than fair to say Jack wasn’t ballhogging at all and was unselfishly creating for his teammates last game, and that’s why he racked up all those assists. As for Monta, it’s a good thing he’s getting a lot of shot attempts. I’m inclined to look at his career %‘s more than his % this year 6 games into the season, and his past shows him to be an efficient scorer. I’ve also seen Ellis average 20 points per game for a season while rarely having the ball in his hands as a creator (2007-2008), which looks like great proof to me he plays incredibly well off the ball and doesn’t need to hog it. Maybe so far this year he’s tried to do too much, that’s fine, like I said, we’re 6 games into the season – he should start figuring out what his best role on a winning team is. Given his past history of not dominating the ball, nor needing the ball in his hands often to be very effective, I think it’s completely unfair to call him a ballhog based on 6 games.