Marc Stein: Stephen Jackson's slight edge over Boozer explained

[Spurs Brazil]

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/9938/stephen-jacksons-slight-edge-over-boozer-explained

Stephen Jackson's slight edge over Boozer explained

October 23, 2009 4:04 AM

By Marc Stein

First marquee player to be traded this season?

I went with Golden State’s Stephen Jackson when they asked me on ESPN2's NBA Fastbreak roundtable show Thursday night, even though Utah’s Carlos Boozer is in the final year of his contract and thus theoretically easier to move.

All the momentum that has built up in Oakland toward Jackson’s departure was the tiebreaker here. Everyone in the hoops universe knows that he wants to leave town and the Warriors have not tried to hide the fact that they've been seeking to accommodate that request by chasing what they deem to be a beneficial deal. The usual result when we reach those stages, no matter what other obstacles are in the way, is that a deal eventually gets done.

Yet sources close to the situation continue to insist that no deal is close for the Warriors with Opening Night just a few days away. Just as we said back on Oct. 9, it’s almost certainly too soon for Jackson suitors to feel the desperation required to convince one of them to go through with absorbing the three-year extension worth nearly $28 million that kicks in after this season for the 31-year-old . . . as well as Jackson's outsized personality. To this point, sources say, Golden State has only received proposals that are painful deals financially.

So the Dubs will open the season Wednesday against Houston hoping that coach Don Nelson is justified with his ongoing belief that he can work with Jackson for now and keep him sufficiently plugged in despite their recent sideline blowup.

Down the road? Cleveland and Denver, sources say, remain the two teams out there with the most certifiable interest in dealing for Jackson.

The Cavs, though, don't want to surrender Zydrunas Ilgauskas in a prospective deal because they want to keep all the size they can muster to throw at Boston, Orlando and the defending champs from L.A.

Nuggets general manager Mark Warkentien, meanwhile, reminded folks this week that the front-office team in Denver is not afraid to swing big with Chauncey Billups in place to police any chemistry risks in the locker room, telling the Denver Post: “If we get stuck, Big Bertha’s coming out.” The Nuggets, though, have also made it clear through a very measured summer of offseason tweaking that they are in no rush to take on any extra long-term money, which would suggest that Denver’s $8.7 million trade exception from the Billups-for-Allen Iverson swap will quietly expire Nov. 3.

Sources say that Dallas, already two-deep at versatile forward with Shawn Marion and Josh Howard, has informed the Warriors that they have "no interest" in adding Jackson to that mix despite Jackson's publicly stated wish to go to Cleveland, New York or one of the three Texas teams.

ESPN The Magazine's Ric Bucher reported on the aforementioned roundtable show that San Antonio has a level of interest in reuniting with Jackson as well, but that possibility -- while something that the Spurs have undoubtedly weighed after Jackson helped them win a championship in 2003 -- has likewise been downplayed this week as "remote."

The only other team we’ve heard mentioned as a potential Jackson chaser is Charlotte, although we’re obliged to note that the Bobcats weren’t on Jackson’s original wish list and don’t exactly seem like his kind of team.

[MaNu4Tres]

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=ykrb4z7

Have Finley coming back in 30 days. Throw in a 1st round pick and maybe Warriors respond.

[Mel_13]

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=ykrb4z7

Have Finley coming back in 30 days. Throw in a 1st round pick and maybe Warriors respond.

If you do that deal, I'd leave Finley alone and just keep Hairston.

I know it's heresy on this board, and I advocated for acquiring Jackson before the RJ trade went down, but I want no part of Jackson on this team right now.

[024]

Spurs don't need Jackson right now. Without even playing a game, spurs have no idea where they stand. On paper, they look like a perfect team with a nice balance of star players and role players. Making the commitment to absorb Jackson's contract right now won't make sense. Also, Jackson will have to take a reduced role with the spurs, most likely sitting on the bench the last five minutes of the game. Don't know if he'll be happy with that.

[xtremesteven33]

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=ykrb4z7

Have Finley coming back in 30 days. Throw in a 1st round pick and maybe Warriors respond.



Then you could say goodbye to resigning Manu....

[phxspurfan]

Welcome back, perimiter defense.

[MaNu4Tres]

Then you could say goodbye to resigning Manu....

If Spurs make a move for anyone to improve the team it won't be at Manu's expense.This year or next year or the year after. Holt and co are committed to being in the luxury tax at least the next two years. As long as Manu's health holds up Manu will retire in black and silver regardless of who gets brought in.

[PDXSpursFan]

Stephen Jackson is the last thing that this team needs now that we have RJ.

[MaNu4Tres]

If you do that deal, I'd leave Finley alone and just keep Hairston.

I know it's heresy on this board, and I advocated for acquiring Jackson before the RJ trade went down, but I want no part of Jackson on this team right now.

Why wouldn't you want Jackson on this team? Do you honestly think Jackson will bring the complaining baggage to Popovich? A locker room he knows about. He knows the Spurs mantra. Knows Tim Tony and Manu are the first options. He knows how they value having a family type of atmosphere. He knows Popovich's way of doing things.

Spurs window to have a significant chance to win the title will be closed in 2 years. If Jackson complies with the Spurs way of doing things. ( Something he has done and proved by earning Pop's trust in starting for the 03' Title team) Jackson would improve this team signficantly as the 3rd wing in the rotation. A RJ Manu Sjax rotation would be the best the Spurs have ever had. It's highly unlikely he would ruin the chemistry on the team. He's been through wars and respects Popovich, Tim, Tony, and Manu too much.IMO

I'm all for Jackson wearing silver and black again.

[kobyz]

the best deal with GS for Jackson will be this: http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=yl69qqv

you gets Jackson by dumping Bonner and Mason and on the way you bring third PG for insure.

[Mel_13]

Why wouldn't you want Jackson on this team? Do you honestly think Jackson will bring the complaining baggage to Popovich? A locker room he knows about. He knows the Spurs mantra. Knows Tim Tony and Manu are the first options. He knows how they value having a family type of atmosphere. He knows Popovich's way of doing things.

Spurs window to have a significant chance to win the title will be closed in 2 years. If Jackson complies with the Spurs way of doing things. ( Something he has done and proved by earning Pop's trust in starting for the 03' Title team) Jackson would improve this team signficantly as the 3rd wing in the rotation. A RJ Manu Sjax rotation would be the best the Spurs have ever had. It's highly unlikely he would ruin the chemistry on the team. He's been through wars and respects Popovich, Tim, Tony, and Manu too much.IMO

I'm all for Jackson wearing silver and black again.

I'm not.

There are only 2 scenarios in which, IMO, he would be worth the risk:

1. GS buys him out and he comes here for the minimum or the LLE.

2. Manu completely breaks down and we trade him for Jackson.

Otherwise, I'm not interested.

Like I said before, I know it's not a popular POV on ST, but I'd rather they go forward with team they've got and use their tradeable assets for a proven big, if necessary, or just let those contracts expire.

[Manufan909]

Why wouldn't you want Jackson on this team? Do you honestly think Jackson will bring the complaining baggage to Popovich? A locker room he knows about. He knows the Spurs mantra. Knows Tim Tony and Manu are the first options. He knows how they value having a family type of atmosphere. He knows Popovich's way of doing things.

Spurs window to have a significant chance to win the title will be closed in 2 years. If Jackson complies with the Spurs way of doing things. ( Something he has done and proved by earning Pop's trust in starting for the 03' Title team) Jackson would improve this team signficantly as the 3rd wing in the rotation. A RJ Manu Sjax rotation would be the best the Spurs have ever had. It's highly unlikely he would ruin the chemistry on the team. He's been through wars and respects Popovich, Tim, Tony, and Manu too much.IMO

I'm all for Jackson wearing silver and black again.

I think he's more concerned about Jack and Jeff butting heads. And how the hell would the SG/SF rotation work? Who starts, who comes in with Manu?

Personally, if the Spurs can get the numbers to work, fine by me. I haven't looked at the proposed trade yet, but I wouldn't want to lose any of Blair/Ian/Hill/Hairston. Bogans/Fin/RMJ/Williams/Haislip/Bonner, I'm fine with waving bye to.


the best deal with GS for Jackson will be this: http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=yl69qqv

you gets Jackson by dumping Bonner and Mason and on the way you bring third PG for insure.
No need for 3rd PG insurance, with Tony 35 mpg, Hill could play 25 mpg if the minutes were there, Manu could play 25 mpg if needed.

[BacktoBasics]

I don't think he's worth it considering he could be a chemistry deal breaker.

[SanAntonioSpurs23]

PG- Parker/Hill
SG- S-Jax/Manu/Hairston
SF- Jefferson/Finley/Bogans
PF- Duncan/Blair/Haislip
C- Mcdyess/Ratliff/Mahinmi

At least if you include Bonner in a deal we wouldn;t have to have him be the Spurs starting center :D

[MaNu4Tres]

PG- Parker/Hill
SG- S-Jax/Manu/Hairston
SF- Jefferson/Finley/Bogans
PF- Duncan/Blair/Haislip
C- Mcdyess/Ratliff/Mahinmi

At least if you include Bonner in a deal we wouldn;t have to have him be the Spurs starting center :D

Bonner is here to stay. They are currently talking to his agent about an extension.......


And here comes the Spurstalk riot....in 3....2..

[kobyz]

No need for 3rd PG insurance, with Tony 35 mpg, Hill could play 25 mpg if the minutes were there, Manu could play 25 mpg if needed.

maybe... but it will not hurt!

[kobyz]

PG- Parker/Hill
SG- S-Jax/Manu/Hairston
SF- Jefferson/Finley/Bogans
PF- Duncan/Blair/Haislip
C- Mcdyess/Ratliff/Mahinmi

At least if you include Bonner in a deal we wouldn;t have to have him be the Spurs starting center :D

that is a kick ass team, it worth the money!

[NFGIII]

If you do that deal, I'd leave Finley alone and just keep Hairston.

I know it's heresy on this board, and I advocated for acquiring Jackson before the RJ trade went down, but I want no part of Jackson on this team right now.

Agreed. Leave Finley alone and keep and develop Hairston.




Then you could say goodbye to resigning Manu....

:tu

The Spurs just added millions to their payroll putting them into the lux. tax situation for several years to come with the RJ trade and then they go ahead and add another 28 with SJAx? I think Holt ain't going anywhere near that deal at all. If they did where is the money to resign Manu? Just not there IMHO.


If Spurs make a move for anyone to improve the team it won't be at Manu's expense.This year or next year or the year after. Holt and co are committed to being in the luxury tax at least the next two years. As long as Manu's health holds up Manu will retire in black and silver regardless of who gets brought in.

Maybe so but it won't include SJax due to the fact that if Catapiller is sucking wind profitwise where would the money going to come from? Holt is a businessman but decided to loosen the purse strings this year and go for it understanding that there wont be many more qualilty years left in TD. "The future is now" sort of mentality.

[Baseline]

I think he's more concerned about Jack and Jeff butting heads. And how the hell would the SG/SF rotation work? Who starts, who comes in with Manu?

Personally, if the Spurs can get the numbers to work, fine by me. I haven't looked at the proposed trade yet, but I wouldn't want to lose any of Blair/Ian/Hill/Hairston. Bogans/Fin/RMJ/Williams/Haislip/Bonner, I'm fine with waving bye to.


No need for 3rd PG insurance, with Tony 35 mpg, Hill could play 25 mpg if the minutes were there, Manu could play 25 mpg if needed.

Good assessment. Fully agree.

[boutons_deux]

SJax thinks he's ENTITLED to start, would INSIST on starting.

[MaNu4Tres]

I'm not.

There are only 2 scenarios in which, IMO, he would be worth the risk:

1. GS buys him out and he comes here for the minimum or the LLE.

2. Manu completely breaks down and we trade him for Jackson.

Otherwise, I'm not interested.

Like I said before, I know it's not a popular POV on ST, but I'd rather they go forward with team they've got and use their tradeable assets for a proven big, if necessary, or just let those contracts expire.

We can agree to disagree on this matter.

I'd be all for bringing in Stephen Jackson or Andres Nocioni at the expense of Finley/Mason/ Mahimni plus 1st rounder ( if it needs to be added).

Quality big men in the NBA are scarce. Which is a reason for teams overpaying for big men with obvious deficiencies 8-10 million a year. ( Dalembert, Rasho's old contract, Beidrins, Dampier, Zach Randolph, Kaman the list goes on). And the best we could probably do in terms of trading for a big man would be Marcus Camby or Jeff Foster. It remains to be seen but all signs are indicating that DeJuan Blair is the real deal Hollyfield and will most likely see anywhere from 15-20 minutes a game. Same with Bonner. And Dice getting 18-25 mpg roughly.


Are Camby and Foster really good enough to where Pop would sit Blair, McDyess, Bonner in favor of them? The answer is no. Maybe Camby could two or 3 years ago no questions asked but that answer isn't a clear cut yes as it used to. Camby's role would be more limited.

Then you can rebuttal that by saying, " Well when we play the Lakers or teams with length that's where Camby or Foster can fit in. Then we would be more versatile on the front-line. "

That's why Ratliff was signed. There was a reason for that.

So my question continues, would Camby or Foster really be that much of a significant upgrade due to the limited floor time they would see anyway?

-Camby slightly, but not really he would share minutes with Dice/ Bonner/Blair therefore his addition wouldn't be as significant.

-Foster or any other middle of the road big man like Collison for instance...No. We have Ratliff for that role.

[kbrury]

If Spurs make a move for anyone to improve the team it won't be at Manu's expense.This year or next year or the year after. Holt and co are committed to being in the luxury tax at least the next two years. As long as Manu's health holds up Manu will retire in black and silver regardless of who gets brought in.

If we got Jackson we would be in the tax for the next 4 years if we resign Ginobili.

[MaNu4Tres]

If we got Jackson we would be in the tax for the next 4 years if we resign Ginobili.

So I guess if Duncan retires in two years, there's no way in hell a championship contending team would want Stephen Jackson's services for 1 or 2 years?

If we can get rid of Rasho's contract for 8 million per year I'm sure if it came down to it we could get rid of Stephen Jacksons.

All signs are indicating Holt and co. will be paying the luxury tax til Duncan retires. They will pay it the next 2 years for sure.

[jcrod]

I'd do Bonner and Mason for SJAX in a heart beat, throw in a furture first to sweeten the deal.

We need to win now, we have a two year window. SJAX would be the best perimeter defense player and clutch shooter. He can guard Dirk also.

[kbrury]

So I guess if Duncan retires in two years, there's no way in hell a championship contending team would want Stephen Jackson's services for 1 or 2 years?

If we can get rid of Rasho's contract for 8 million per year I'm sure if it came down to it we could get rid of Stephen Jacksons.

All signs are indicating Holt and co. will be paying the luxury tax til Duncan retires. They will pay it the next 2 years for sure.

Idk a 34 year old Jackson doesn't sound to enticing to me in a couple years. Lets wait and see how this team does before we start talking about more major trades.

IMO Id rather have a little flexibility in a couple years maybe resign Jefferson after he gets his major paycheck next season. If it looks like we still really need a trade I'd rather have Nocioni if SAC was willing or Camby then Jackson, at least Nocioni makes a little less and has a team option on his 4th year.

[Spursfan 87]

03 Jax was a different player and person, he is not a good fit for the spurs right now. Back in 03 Jax was a player trying to prove that he belong in the nba, he played the game the right way and for the right reasons. Right now he thinks he is an elite player in this league something that he is not.

And I agree with Mel the only way i would want Jack in the spurs is if he comes cheap or if manu gets hurt.

[Trimble87]

My gut reaction to a Jackson trade was "wtf why would we do that?" But I actually took the last hour or so to think about why we would do that and now I am 100% for this trade. Jackson was great for us during the 03 championship run and I think he still has a lot left in the tank. It also provides us with insurance shouild Manu or Jefferson get injured.

If we traded finley/mason/mahinmi and a pick then our lineup could look like:

Parker
Jackson
Jefferson
Dyes
Duncan

Hill
Manu
Hairston/Bogans/Finley (whichever one we keep/makes the rotation)
Blair
Bonner/Ratliff.

My next thought was "well shit now how do we split the minutes for the SG/SF rotations. Heres my idea given that there are 240 total minutes available per game and that SG/SF take up 96mpg and PF/C take up 96mpg. Obviously it wont always work out this clean but I think its a good starting point.

Parker: 33
Jackson: 30
Jefferson: 30
Mcdyess: 25
Duncan: 29

Hill: 15
Ginobili: 28
Hairston/Bogans/Finley: 10
Blair: 17
Ratliff: 8
Bonner: 15

pg: 48
sg/sf: 98
PF/c: 94


Who here thinks that lineup isnt a GREAT idea?! Manu sJax Jefferson Finley Hairston and Bogans call all play SG or SF. And I think all of our big men are interchangeable at C/PF. We get to limit Duncan and Manus minutes to keep them fresh in the playoffs and we have the deepest team in the league. Thats an 11 man rotation! Drop either Bonner or Ratliff and you open up more minutes for everyone else while still being 10 players deep. I'm excited just thinking about it.


*edit for clarity*

I have no delusions about this. I give this trade a .01% chance of actually happening. This was more for the people saying they wouldnt want it.

[completely deck]

Haha, look at what happens when someone says a team has "shown a level of interest" in a player. He's not coming over

[phxspurfan]

Hairston/Bogans/Finley: 10
Blair: 17
Ratliff: 8
Bonner: 15



No way in hell that happens. More like


Hairston/Bogans: cut
Finley: 25
Blair: DNP-CD
Ratliff: DNP-CD
Bonner: 25

[Mel_13]

We can agree to disagree on this matter.

I'd be all for bringing in Stephen Jackson or Andres Nocioni at the expense of Finley/Mason/ Mahimni plus 1st rounder ( if it needs to be added).

Quality big men in the NBA are scarce. Which is a reason for teams overpaying for big men with obvious deficiencies 8-10 million a year. ( Dalembert, Rasho's old contract, Beidrins, Dampier, Zach Randolph, Kaman the list goes on). And the best we could probably do in terms of trading for a big man would be Marcus Camby or Jeff Foster. It remains to be seen but all signs are indicating that DeJuan Blair is the real deal Hollyfield and will most likely see anywhere from 15-20 minutes a game. Same with Bonner. And Dice getting 18-25 mpg roughly.


Are Camby and Foster really good enough to where Pop would sit Blair, McDyess, Bonner in favor of them? The answer is no. Maybe Camby could two or 3 years ago no questions asked but that answer isn't a clear cut yes as it used to. Camby's role would be more limited.

Then you can rebuttal that by saying, " Well when we play the Lakers or teams with length that's where Camby or Foster can fit in. Then we would be more versatile on the front-line. "

That's why Ratliff was signed. There was a reason for that.

So my question continues, would Camby or Foster really be that much of a significant upgrade due to the limited floor time they would see anyway?

-Camby slightly, but not really he would share minutes with Dice/ Bonner/Blair therefore his addition wouldn't be as significant.

-Foster or any other middle of the road big man like Collison for instance...No. We have Ratliff for that role.

We'll have to agree to disagree.

My preferred deal is Bonner plus Finley/Mason for Foster and then plug Foster in Bonner's spot in the rotation for 20 minutes a night.

I don't see Foster as playing the same limited role that Ratliff is here for. Ratliff hasn't played more than 600 minutes in any of the past three seasons. Foster has played at least 1500 minutes every year for the past six seasons. Around 1500 minutes each for Foster and Blair, 2000-2300 minutes for Duncan and McDyess, and the rest for Ratliff, Ian/Haislip, and SmallBall. That adds up.

On a pure talent basis, Jackson is a clear upgrade over Mason/Finley/Bogans. I still believe greater questions exist at the PF/C spots than at the SG/SF spots and any trade should address the area of greater need.

That being said, if they were interested in Jackson I'd still wait. Let the situation in GS deteriorate, as it almost certainly will, and watch Golden State's price drop. If things get bad enough out there, maybe they'll have to throw in picks to get a deal done!

[SpurCharger]

I would Welcome SJax Back!

[Mr. Body]

Thank God this has no chance in hell of happening. He deserves to play with Zach Randolph somewhere where he can rack up stats and lose lots of games. Ya'll a bunch of retards for wanting this.

[kobyz]

if we made this trade: http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=yl69qqv
this is how the minutes will share:
PG - Parker(32) Hill(16) Acie Law(injury insure)
SG,SF - Jefferson(32) Manu(24) Jackson(20) Finley(12) Hill(8) Bogans/Hairston(injury insure)
PF,C - Duncan(28) Mcdyess(20) Blair/Haislip(20) Ratliff/Mahinmi(16) Jackson - small ball(12)

[Mel_13]

if we made this trade: http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=yl69qqv
this is how the minutes will share:
PG - Parker(32) Hill(16) Acie Law(injury insure)
SG,SF - Jefferson(32) Manu(24) Jackson(20) Finley/Bogans/Hairston(20)
PF,C - Duncan(28) Mcdyess(20) Blair/Haislip(20) Ratliff/Mahinmi(16) Jackson - small ball(12)

Sorry...

Not a good trade on the first page of the thread.

Hasn't improved on the second page.

[MaNu4Tres]

For everyone including Bonner in trade scenarios:

Pop values Bonner a lot more than the average Spurstalker. He won't be including in any trade for an average big man, much less at all.

Reason for that being: They are currently working on an extension with the red head. That speaks for itself.

Me personally I think Bonner for Foster is an upgrade to a degree. But it's not the average fan's or my evaluation of Bonner that matters. It's Pop's and he flat out loves Matty. And values his ability to stretch out the defense, his effort on defense and on the glass more than people assume. That's evident with them working on an extension and how he's scheduled to start again this season. That's why I still included him in the big man rotation if we were to trade for a big man.

I'm not sayin I wouldn't trade Bonner for Foster or for a simliar middle of the road player. I'm saying Pop and R.C wouldn't.

[Agloco]

Thank God this has no chance in hell of happening. He deserves to play with Zach Randolph somewhere where he can rack up stats and lose lots of games. Ya'll a bunch of retards for wanting this.


Sorry...

Not a good trade on the first page of the thread.

Hasn't improved on the second page.

+1 to both.....

Before RJeff I would have been in favor of another sparkplug like Jackson. Given that we have RJeff now though.......:td


Haha, look at what happens when someone says a team has "shown a level of interest" in a player. He's not coming over

Lol, yeah really. We also have a "level of interest" in Kobe, DWhistle and LeBron.......