Romes Sessions.
Uh oh. Not again.
I myself have been tired of talking about bringing Ramon Sessions to the Warriors, but this time I think it could be a possibility.
Just heard he is a restricted free agent. Heard he has been for awhile or something. The Bucks are idiots for not resigning this guy and the Warriors would be stupid not to sign this guy.
Eh. I forgot. The Warriors are being run by a bunch of idiots.
Well. If a miracle happens and we signed Sessions, I will be more cheered up from all the Warriors drama and torture we have gone through ever since the J-Rich trade ....all the way to the Chris Mullin firing.
I am still a firm believer that Marco Belinelli could be a Stud PG for the Warriors, but I think there is drama going on between him and the organization that we might not know about. I also think the Warriors just don't have that much hope with him in succeeding with us. Blah. Whatever.
At this point, I really don't care what other possible PG's are out there in the draft. Ricky Rubio? Yes. But I doubt there is a way we could get him. The other rookie PG's still have to prove themselves in the NBA and I would rather have Sessions or Marco Belinelli running the 1 for us simply because they have already proven themselves or have gone through a grind's experience in the pros.
Ramon Sessions. Sign him. Now.
GSoM. Your thoughts?
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 |
34 comments
Comments
Sessions seems popular on GSoM, but
one of the reasons we were able to snatch Turiaf was we could offer more than the LAL could match with their cap last summer; the reverse is true for us this summer -don’t think we can offer much that they wouldn’t be able to match (admittedly not a capologist, and hopefully someone else can verify/correct that)
and this maybe wrong too, but just don’t see Marco as PG – either starting or backup; imo he’s potentially a dynamic 6th-7th man at SG … probably for another team unless the logjam in front of him on GSW clears
by hardcore on Jun 3, 2009 7:52 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for your input hardcore.
You said:
“and this maybe wrong too, but just don’t see Marco as PG – either starting or backup; imo he’s potentially a dynamic 6th-7th man at SG”
I agree that his natural position is at SG, but what he showed last season impressed me enough to give him another opportunity at PG. If we were weak at the 2, then obviously I would want him playing there with significant minutes, but since we have Monta and a logjam with the wings, I would love to see what kind of progress Marco has if given the keys at the 1 before the start of the preseason.
We have complained that we need a Big Guard at the PG because of Monta’s liability on defense and many have suggested some good ones, but every time I hear those suggestions, I’m like, "Why go through the trouble acquiring these possibly suggestions when we should give Belinelli another chance since he is on the pine most of the time?"
6’5 is a big guard that would complement Monta well. Marco can play aggressive defense and defend the bigger guards that Monta can’t or has trouble with. Last season, he guarded Kobe for gaught sake and did a very good job in defending him. He even was complimented by Kobe in Italian for doing a good job. That should be credited for something because Kobe is one of the best players in the league.
Marco has very good vision and can run the floor well. I wouldn’t have a problem at all with him handling the rock and controlling the team.
Lastly, he is another pure, sure shot guard next to Anthony Morrow. Imagine having those two on the floor at the same time having both of them on fire. Straight up lights out and opposing teams wouldn’t know what to do with them.
As far as not being able to offer much for Sessions, maybe a sign and trade would work?
Romes Mac Mojous
by ROMESdavidWOOD37 on Jun 3, 2009 9:01 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
what would we give the Bucks in a sign and trade?
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 3, 2009 9:07 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not an expert with the negotiation portion of it all,
…but maybe Marco Belinelli and Brandan Wright.
As much as I am a big supporter of keeping Marco and as much as I am enraptured by the front court of a Wright/AR/Turiaf/AB, I think I would be willing to let both go.
Seems like the Bucks don’t care much for keeping Charlie V. either, so I would work something out to where a trade of Sessions and Charlie V for Belinelli and Wright would happen.
I think both parties would benefit from it.
Just from my speculation that Marco is a forgotten player on the Dubs and BWright is expendable. As much as I think Marco could succeed with us at point, he may have a better chance of exploding into a superstar stud with the Bucks. He could play backup PG next to Ridnour, play SG or SF next to Redd. Compliment the team as a facilitator and be a dynamic sure shot duo with Mike Redd. He could login as much as 25-37 minutes a game easily that he deserves just as Pietrus was granted the opportunity with the Magic.
I think Rocky Belinelli could average 19.0 PPG, 3.7 RPG, 5.0 APG. Heck. He could average that with us if given consistent playing time.
It just amazes me of how the Warriors can’t seem to utilize the talent we have on our squad and effectively. This is where I bash Nellie.
Why is it he was so high on Marco to draft him, then turnaround and break his freggin ego and confidence for him to rot the pine his rookie season?
Why is it Troy Murphy can average 14 11 and 2 with the Pacers and not in Nellie’s system?
Why does Nellie insist Pietrus is a pure Power Forward for his system and ends up being a stud as a SG with the Magic?
Al Harrington drops consistent numbers with the Knicks and not with Nellie?
I’m sure there are more, but who the hell is next?
Marcus Williams? I still feel like he could have been a serviceable PG for us.
Shall we get rid of Monta and AR next to see what the hell happens?
[ throws Mike Dunleavy brick at a window ]
Romes Mac Mojous
by ROMESdavidWOOD37 on Jun 3, 2009 11:21 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He could login as much as 25-37 minutes a game easily that he deserves just as Pietrus was granted the opportunity with the Magic.
Why does Nellie insist Pietrus is a pure Power Forward for his system and ends up being a stud as a SG with the Magic?
Pietrus got fewer minutes per game with the Magic this year than he did for us in 06-07. He also shot a much worse percentages from the field and from 3 pt range than he did that year. Per 36 he had fewer turnovers and slightly more assists, but scored fewer points and pulled down fewer boards. The idea that Pietrus has flourished outside of Nellie’s system is a bit of a myth and just goes to show what a little team success in the playoffs can do for a player’s reputation. The same goes for Harrington who obviously didn’t have playoff success behind his “improvement” in the eyes of some fans after leaving, but he’s still basically the same player putting up very similar numbers. The biggest difference between Harrington’s ‘06-’07 here and his time in NY is that he’s getting more minutes per game and thus putting up even more 3’s. He’s not scoring any more efficiently or distribute the ball any better, he’s still a similarly awful rebounding PF and he didn’t suddenly become a really good defensive player.
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 3, 2009 12:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
well,
Nelson reportedly never saw Marco; Mullin drafted him …
Troy Murphy was a double-double player for us … both before and after Nelson arrived
Pietrus was a PF for us because the only other alternative was Matt Barnes …
The Harrington trade still chafes, but he’s not been as consistent in NY as they’d like either – but they didn’t acquire him for consistency, they off-loaded Crawford’s contract in an effort to be a player in the 2010 FA frenzy …
back to Marco
Barring a major trade, I’d rather see us start:
Monta, Jax, and either KAz or Maggs
than:
Marco, Monta, Jax – regardless of position
My guess is Jackson is actually going to continue to handle the ball quite a bit either way (though not nearly to the degree he did last season), and he can guard the big guards. My preference of KAz > Marco is based upon his track record, and you could be right that Marco could explode into a star and justify Mullin’s faith in him … like you, I’d like to see Marco playing alongside another pure shooter (Morrow) who could benefit from the drive and kick-outs Nelson briefly implemented last season …
by hardcore on Jun 3, 2009 2:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good points hardcore.
The Pietrus rant I kinda take back because we were just overcrowded with the swings and maybe nellie really wanted him to play but that was the best he could do for him during the time. PF was “Nellie’s” solution for him to get some burn on the court. Even if it took Pietrus getting beat up by Amare or Milsap type players.
Regardless, pietrus is in a better situation now being well comfortable at the 2 with the Magic. I really enjoyed watching him play for us and just like chris mullin, I know he truly appreciated the Warrior fans and loved being a Warrior. I wouldn’t be surprised if he got shanked and he bled Warriors blue.
You said: My preference of KAz > Marco is based upon his track record, and you could be right that Marco could explode into a star and justify Mullin’s faith in him … like you, I’d like to see Marco playing alongside another pure shooter (Morrow) who could benefit from the drive and kick-outs Nelson briefly implemented last season …
+1 to that. I am also a big KAZ fan. Heck. If Kaz has been working on his handles and trying to run the floor, I would love to see Kaz run the Point honestly.
I am so glad we resigned Kaz last year and I hope he stays a Warrior for along time. I appreciate his guts, 3PT shot, overall game, everything he brings to the team, humbleness, physical play, and truly defining the word that is stitched across his jersey.
Romes Mac Mojous
by ROMESdavidWOOD37 on Jun 3, 2009 10:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sessions-yes
Belinelli-no. Definitely not as a PG, probably more valuable to us as a trade chip than at SG considering he could be as low as 5th on the depth chart there.
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 3, 2009 9:05 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for your input sam23.
What’s your take on why he wouldn’t work for us at PG?
He has only played about 19 games to prove he can run the point.
In my opinion that isn’t enough to prove the Marco Belinelli Point Guard project as a failure.
Give me a whole season of mediocre or garbage play.
Romes Mac Mojous
by ROMESdavidWOOD37 on Jun 3, 2009 11:25 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He has only played about 19 games to prove he can run the point. In my opinion that isn’t enough to prove the Marco Belinelli Point Guard project as a failure.
Yea maybe, but he has never really shown anything to make us think he can run the point. I just don’t understand why anyone thinks he can. While playing off the ball he looks like a decent passing SG, but nothing that should make you think “hey this guy could be a good PG.”
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 3, 2009 12:19 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I think he can run the point on our team,
mostly due to the lack of credible PG’s on the team. Marco is probably our best passer, or at least as good as Jamal or Jack. I was at the Milwaukee game where he tore it up. The Boston game is the defining moment in his career, and it was also one of if not the biggest W last year. In all honesty, we don’t really need a PG on this team. We put up tons of points last year. We almost beat New Orleans last year on opening night, and Jack ran the point all night. I think everyone would agree that Marco is a better PG than Jack…
My point is this, Nellie doesn’t coach the sort of team that requires one player to dominate the ball and constantly feed others. Even when Baron played PG, while he did handle the ball the most, it was commonplace to see Jack, Monta, or even my boy Matt handle the ball at any given time. I don’t mean just handle the ball for a short time either, all of them had handles, all of them could pass, it allowed Nellie to coach mismatches on O.
Our weakness was, not (even with Monta gone) offense, it was D. Running Maro as a PG gives us an interesting dynamic, and he can D up hella better than Jamal, Monta, and any player in the draft. What rookie PG comes in the league and plays great or even good D right away? 1 in a million. That player is not in this draft. Everyone on our team looks to score, it was that way when Baron was here, we just need that one guy who is gonna look to pass more than shoot, Marco has shown the desire and ability to do that better than anyone else. I’m not necessarily advocating him in our starting backcourt, but I think he should get some serious burn at PG. He really is a terrific compliment to Monta though
by myk on Jun 3, 2009 9:21 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
+1
I’m not necessarily advocating him in our starting backcourt, but I think he should get some serious burn at PG. He really is a terrific compliment to Monta though
Highly agreed with that for sure.
Romes Mac Mojous
by ROMESdavidWOOD37 on Jun 3, 2009 9:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He doesn’t play better defense than Williams, Holiday or Harden. Westbrook came in a played solid defense last year, I don’t think Holiday is nearly as good defensively but I’d much rather see a Monta/Williams or Monta/Harden backcourt getting the majority of the minutes that Jacks sits than a Belinelli/Monta one.
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 4, 2009 6:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
last I heard...
Sessions was looking for a big payday this offseason. Well for that matter, which free agent isn’t right? I guess the question really comes down to whether or not we would be able to afford him with our limited capspace. If Crawford opts out, things could change though. If we could get him for like 5-6 mill a year, I would say do it. Not sure if that is an accurate estimation of his potential salary.
by Sharunas Marchulenis on Jun 3, 2009 9:08 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Yea I think Sessions’ financial value is pretty tough to gauge, especially this offseason when we aren’t really sure how the economy is going to affect player salaries. But Crawford opting out doesn’t really affect the amount of money we have to spend this offseason.
Thing A
by sam23 on Jun 3, 2009 9:23 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Is Sessions a RFA?
Hoopshype indicates that Sessions is unrestricted. The Bucks won’t be able to offer him more than the MLE, and neither will we; a few teams will be able to offer him more than that, but I kinda doubt that he gets those offers this summer. He’d probably be best served signing a smaller one year contract with the Bucks so that he can qualify for the Bird exception next year, which would allow the Bucks (or the team they trade him to) to go over the cap to re-sign him. But I’m probably missing something here.
by ffgolden on Jun 3, 2009 9:59 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
How about a sign and trade?
Bucks can resign Sessions and we can package Watson and the 7th pick for Sessions and the 10th pick and draft Terrance Williams?
WARRIORS BASKETBALL!!! Patiently waiting for a title...I may be waiting for a long time...
by JustSomeName on Jun 3, 2009 10:03 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
We could maybe even give them crawford instead. Not sure how the salaries would match up, but if they toss in Charlie V then I’m all for it!
WARRIORS BASKETBALL!!! Patiently waiting for a title...I may be waiting for a long time...
by JustSomeName on Jun 3, 2009 10:05 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
This thread is a little old now, but it has some nice insights.
Brewhoop on Sessions to Warriors
Chris Cohan and Robert Rowell? Oh no hide the children!
by Nuck Chorris on Jun 3, 2009 10:28 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Thanks Nuck.
I remember you posting this in Brewhoop Land.
hi five.
Romes Mac Mojous
by ROMESdavidWOOD37 on Jun 3, 2009 10:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think a sign and trade would be the most likely scenario.
The lack of commitment shown by the Bucks’ FO is telling of the conflicting agendas. The Bucks are pretty limited in their Obviously Sessions should be kept over CV, but either would have to be replaced with a comparable player or it would look bad for the franchise. CV has garnered a following, but Sessions is the flashy new flavor. Its one of those good-bad situations because Sessions turned out to be a surprise and CV has developed pretty well, but it came at a bad time. Effectively the players on the bucks have outplayed the available cap space. Considering Ridnour is pretty imbedded with the team the Bucks would love to have a stronger bench with Sessions occasionally playing off-guard. Though it appears the secret is out regarding his ability to distribute.
Even though with an offer of 7 million per year the bucks would have a hard time matching such an offer. As it stands their salary is a tentative 64 million dollars for 09/10. That includes a $4 million qualifying offer to CV. Even without CV, is sessions someone the bucks really want to throw 8 or 9 million at just to keep? Especially since it would mean severely limiting their off season options and prevent the Bucks from bringing in a seasoned vet to increase ticket draw. They would basically be parading the same product on the floor minus CV. That would not be good for ticket sales. Since CV can’t command much on the open market compared to other bigs the qualifying offer gives the Bucks significantly more flexibility in the off season. The Bucks are between a rock and a hard place because the fans clearly want Sessions, but that might not be the best move to build a better team or improve the product on the court.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
I was going to make a separate post about this, but I feel it applies directly to the Warriors being players in signing a decent RFA.
When the dispute between Darius Miles and the Blazers was in full heat I was rooting for Miles all the way. Not only because it was cool to see him come back, but because the Blazers are in the Western Conference and contend for the lower playoff seedings.
Thinking about it now. If the Blazers had that extra dough they would be more inclined to sign someone like Jamal Crawford great friend of BRoy’s and wants to win now). That would give the Warriors the cap room they need to be real offseason players. As it stands the Warriors are about as well of as he Bucks. That is, stuck with about 7 million dollars to play with and build on the youth movement. Granted Rowell has been lying about salaries to the fans (See Rowell Converence Call Subject: Stephen Jackson’s Salary) so W’s are probably worse off than we already imagine. While there is still a chance that Crawford opts out, the odds are severely diminished with the addition of Miles’ salary against the Blazers’ cap. Ironically karmic I suppose.
Damn you Miles!
Chris Cohan and Robert Rowell? Oh no hide the children!
by Nuck Chorris on Jun 3, 2009 2:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If the W’s really want Sessions then giving him an MLE deal might be enough to get him—especially if the Bucks draft a PG. Since he’s an Arenas RFA no one can offer him more than the MLE in the first year and the Bucks can’t offer him more, either, so it’s not like huge dollars will be needed to sign him. I don’t think he’s going to be a superstar but he could certainly turn into a Rod Strickland-type and has already shown some very impressive stuff for us.
by Frank Madden on Jun 3, 2009 2:55 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Hey Frank!
Frank Sums it up:
Sessions is RFA
Bucks still don’t have much flexibility beyond MLE
Chris Cohan and Robert Rowell? Oh no hide the children!
by Nuck Chorris on Jun 3, 2009 2:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Alright
Is it time for a Ramon Sessions Movement ?
by ARandolph on Jun 3, 2009 3:06 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Im down
Oakland Raiders Fan
Golden State Warriors Fan
San Francisco Giants Fan
San Jose Sharks Fan
MMA Fan
USC Trojan Fan
by i love sports101 on Jun 3, 2009 6:29 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
It's okay, we all know you want Sessions because he could be called Romes.
Haha. j/k man. Yeah, he’d be a hella good pick up
by Golden Boy on Jun 3, 2009 9:32 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
lmfao
Hahah. Naw. That was the name of my team name in Yahoo Fantasy Hoops for the past two seasons.
Ya. It be great to pick him up. if not, I’m interested to see what the Dubs do about the 1.
Romes Mac Mojous
by ROMESdavidWOOD37 on Jun 3, 2009 9:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Drama between Marco
And the Warriors organization???? What…….? did Nellie bang Marco’s mom or something, what kind of drama is going on.
by pbra17 on Jun 3, 2009 9:56 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
My bad. It's just my point of view.
Ain’t tryna start any gossip, just putting my shoes in Rocky Belinelli’s shoes.
I read somewhere that during his rookie year he was very frustrated with the Warriors because he felt like he could have highly contributed to the team. His confidence was shut down by Nellie and Keith Smart (being the players’ type of coach) had his back and told him to hang in there.
Same thing happened with Monta and Nellie in the 07 playoffs where Nellie was a punk to him by completely ignoring him. I don’t have a problem with Nellie being harsh with unproven players, but have some damn communication with ALL your players for gaught sake. Whether it is negative or positive. In my opinion, you don’t give the silent treatment to players with talent like that. You coach them. Interact with them and let them know what they need to do to be a better player. Not play mind games and let them figure it out, especially if you are a barely 21 years old or so.
Romes Mac Mojous
by ROMESdavidWOOD37 on Jun 3, 2009 10:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
would be nice to have him before the draft so that we don’t have to draft a pg.
by bushido on Jun 3, 2009 10:44 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Blair perhaps?
Romes Mac Mojous
by ROMESdavidWOOD37 on Jun 3, 2009 10:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I love blair but 7 is way too high for him. HE just seems like a beast in the paint. I dont think he can do anything else but defend and rebound which is just fine with me. 7th is just too high.. trade down with someone who really wants Flynn?
by bushido on Jun 4, 2009 12:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs





















