Chris Broussard: More SJax rumors

[Mel_13]

By Chris Broussard

For now, this is a rumor because I haven't verified it with sources close to the situation, but I've been told by a few people around the league that the Stephen Jackson trade talk is heating up. I'm told that Golden State is mulling several offers, and one person told me he expects something to happen within the next few days. I don't know the particulars of any supposed offers, but I'm told Cleveland, Denver, San Antonio, New Orleans and the Los Angeles Clippers are all interested in Jackson.

Golden State wants Zydrunas Ilgauskas from Cleveland, but the Cavs aren't willing to give him up because they need him to back up Shaq. The Warriors would like Manu Ginobili from the Spurs, but I can't see the Spurs parting with Manu. I'm told the Warriors' discussions with Denver were brief because Jackson's $7.65 million salary doesn't fit under their $7.4 million trade exception.

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop

[2slowman]

I like sjax, but not for that price.

[HarlemHeat37]

Golden State is definitely bluffing here..everybody knows they don't have leverage here, if they don't move him, he's going to be a distraction all year..if anybody is even willing to take his long contract, they'll dump him instantly IMO..

[ducks]

sj healthy
manu better not as healthy

[phyzik]

Golden State is definitely bluffing here..everybody knows they don't have leverage here, if they don't move him, he's going to be a distraction all year..if anybody is even willing to take his long contract, they'll dump him instantly IMO..

exactly... They will eventually fold and accept the best offer that's on the table, whatever that might be.

[ducks]

sa is interested just to try to get gs more value for sj

[phyzik]

Im more curious on what S-Jax's expectations are if he where to be traded.... Does he expect to start or can he accept a role off the bench?

[MaNu4Tres]

No way I'd trade Jackson for Manu.

I agree with Harlem that Golden State is bluffing.

They will most likely have to accept expirings and maybe a 1st when it's said and done. That will probably be the best the Warriors can do. IMO

[Ed Helicopter Jones]

I heard someone mention SJax to Cleveland on the radio. That could be scary were it to happen.

[Bruno]

My guess for the Jackson trade is Jackson and Claxton for Peja.

[MaNu4Tres]

If we could send out Mason/ Finley( the only way I see us trading him is if its set up to where he comes back in 30 days/ and Mahimni for Jackson. It would improve our chances at number 5 immensely. I'd even throw in a 1st round pick.

[MaNu4Tres]

My guess for the Jackson trade is Jackson and Claxton for Peja.

Why would Golden State do that?

The only reason I can see is for the salary dump because of the cluster of wings that already exists there. ( Morrow, Maggette, Azubuke, Ellis).

And that salary of Peja's doesn't expire til the Summer of 2011.

If Claxton's deal had 3 or 4 more years left like Jackson's then I would somewhat understand, but his is up after this year.

[spurs_fan_in_exile]

I heard someone mention SJax to Cleveland on the radio. That could be scary were it to happen.

Indeed. Wasn't Mike Brown the one that really helped keep a leash on him in SA? And if they saw what I saw last season they know they are in desperate need of a clutch shooter.

[TIMMYD!]

If we could send out Mason/ Finley( the only way I see us trading him is if its set up to where he comes back in 30 days/ and Mahimni for Jackson. It would improve our chances at number 5 immensely. I'd even throw in a 1st round pick.

Hell Yeah.:lobt:

[EricB]

You can want Manu all you want Golden State. :lol

[EricB]

I still think Don Nelson would love to have Matt Bonner in his system.

Bonner, and probably George Hill and something else would get it done.

[Flux451]

didn't check the technicalities, but JAX for Fin/Mason $ sounds good.

[celldweller]

I still think Don Nelson would love to have Matt Bonner in his system.

Bonner, and probably George Hill and something else would get it done.

lol, George Hill, not going anywhere. :lol

[EricB]

lol, George Hill, not going anywhere. :lol


He's going somewhere before Ginobili is.

He most likely had it not been for their last minute pullback would be a Clipper right now.

[celldweller]

didn't check the technicalities, but JAX for Fin/Mason $ sounds good.

and Bogans for good measure! :lol

[EricB]

didn't check the technicalities, but JAX for Fin/Mason $ sounds good.

I bet it does.

Golden State would need a tranquilizer from laughing so hard however.

[celldweller]

He's going somewhere before Ginobili is.

He most likely had it not been for their last minute pullback would be a Clipper right now.

True, but that was then, this is now. Hill has emerged as a much better player. I think SA will hold on to him as long as he continues to improve. (unless he pulls a Beno)

[TIMMYD!]

Hill will be a beast three years from now.

[celldweller]

I bet it does.

Golden State would need a tranquilizer from laughing so hard however.
Throw them a bone - IAN.

[MaNu4Tres]

I wonder what Clippers are offering.

Camby and protected 1st rounder for Jackson?

[EricB]

True, but that was then, this is now. Hill has emerged as a much better player. I think SA will hold on to him as long as he continues to improve. (unless he pulls a Beno)

Preseason and playoffs are two different things.

We shall see if he has really improved.

[EricB]

Throw them a bone - IAN.

3 players for 1.

awesome.

[celldweller]

I wonder what Clippers are offering.

Camby and protected 1st rounder for Jackson?

I'm thinking Camby is off the table thanks to B. Griffins injury.

[celldweller]

3 players for 1.

awesome.

:lol Then we can bring back Williams.

[TIMMYD!]

:lol Then we can bring back Williams.

:lmao

[MaNu4Tres]

I still think Don Nelson would love to have Matt Bonner in his system.

Bonner, and probably George Hill and something else would get it done.

Why would GS want Hill so bad when they have Monta Ellis and Curry running the point already?

Not to mention C.J Watson as their 3rd PG respectively.

[MaNu4Tres]

I'm thinking Camby is off the table thanks to B. Griffins injury.

It's only for a month and DeAndre Jordan had a damn good pre-season.

Clippers trying to get him some more minutes wouldn't surprise me.

[DJB]

I highly doubt that we are involved in these talks.

[celldweller]

:lmao
:lmao
There talking about it right now (after the break) on 760.

[CGD]

I see no real incentive for any "would-be" GS trade partner to show their hand this early in the game. It would be smarter to see where your team is closer to the Feb trade deadline. With that said Denver is one team that is known for making big moves early in the year.

BTW has anyone seen Jax's contract? It's a terrible long term deal. I see a viable trade working if GS swaps bad long-term deals with another team in the same range (plus maybe a low salary player here or there to make the numbers match).

[celldweller]

I highly doubt that we are involved in these talks.
Your right, it's all BS. We all know Pop to good. :pop:

[HarlemHeat37]

I still think we could potentially give Golden State the best offer..

Bonner would be a very attractive player to Nelson, and he's also an expiring contract..Mason would also get PT and fits their system very well, and he's also an expiring contract..throw in a future 1st rounder if we can..

Since it's not my own $, I'm all for it, but I'm not the one that would be taking on the long contract..

[MaNu4Tres]

BTW has anyone seen Jax's contract? It's a terrible long term deal. I see a viable trade working if GS swaps bad long-term deals with another team in the same range (plus maybe a low salary player here or there to make the numbers match).

It's not terrible. Long yeah. Terrible no.

7.6 million this year and 8.2 next year is great value for the type of player Stephen Jackson is.

If it were to come down to it and we needed to get rid of it in 3 years that shouldn't be a problem.Especially to a contender. We did get rid of Malik and Rasho's horrendous contract you know.

[MaNu4Tres]

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine

We could add a 1st rounder or /and Splitter if need to be.

Finley would come back in 30 days as well.

Would put the Warriors at around 44 million next year with money to throw at a max level player in the summer of 2010.

[celldweller]

He's going somewhere before Ginobili is.

He most likely had it not been for their last minute pullback would be a Clipper right now.
What timing, they just announced on TICKET 760 that the Spurs picked up George Hill's option for the 2010-11 season. :toast

[EricB]

Why would GS want Hill so bad when they have Monta Ellis and Curry running the point already?

Not to mention C.J Watson as their 3rd PG respectively.

Don Nelson.

That plus George HIll is twice the player CJ Watson is.

[EricB]

I still think we could potentially give Golden State the best offer..

Bonner would be a very attractive player to Nelson, and he's also an expiring contract..Mason would also get PT and fits their system very well, and he's also an expiring contract..throw in a future 1st rounder if we can..

Since it's not my own $, I'm all for it, but I'm not the one that would be taking on the long contract..

Yeah, I could see them liking mason but I dont know.

If they wanted Ian I could see the Spurs doing it, but then your front court depth gets really thin.

[EricB]

What timing, they just announced on TICKET 760 that the Spurs picked up George Hill's option for the 2010-11 season. :toast

Good for George.

Doesn't mean he can buy a house.

[MaNu4Tres]

Why trade so you can have 4 point guards? If Warriors want value in a player back, I see them wanting a big man WAY ahead of having the dilemna of finding 4 pg's playing time.

I see Warriors trading Jackson for a big man or for cap relief as soon as next year that along with a pick maybe.

[EricB]

Why trade so you can have 4 point guards? If Warriors want value in a player back, I see them wanting a big man WAY ahead of having the dilemna of finding 4 pg's playing time.

I see Warriors trading Jackson for a big man or for cap relief as soon as next year that along with a pick maybe.


You do understand Don Nelson coaches them right?

[vander]

manu for SJax + first round draft pick?

[kbrury]

Oh god we better win tonight or the trade talks will never end.

[Mel_13]

Oh god we better win tonight or the trade talks will never end.
:lol

We could start 10-0, the trade talks won't end until the trade deadline.

[EricB]

Oh god we better win tonight or the trade talks will never end.

Why be closed to a trade?

You always want to be open to trades.

If Golden State got drunk and stupidly accepted Bonner Mason and a pick for Jackson then you accept and laugh.

[crc21209]

I still think we could potentially give Golden State the best offer..

Bonner would be a very attractive player to Nelson, and he's also an expiring contract..Mason would also get PT and fits their system very well, and he's also an expiring contract..throw in a future 1st rounder if we can..

Since it's not my own $, I'm all for it, but I'm not the one that would be taking on the long contract..

Agreed. Nellie would absolutely LOVE Bonner in that system. Bonner + Mason or Fin maybe + a 1st round pick and cash?

[The Truth #6]

We can't afford the amount or length of that contract. This would be a good time to try and get him back considering GS doesn't have much leverage but that would totally screw with out chemistry at this point.

[MaNu4Tres]

You do understand Don Nelson coaches them right?

Yeah I understand that. But he's been going with Anthony Randolph a lot at his 4 spot opposed to going really undersized with Maggette at the 4. Their SF/ and SG position is fine as it is with Azubuike, Marrow, Maggette.

I just think they if they would want value in a player back for Jackson it would be for a big man. Just my opinion.

[kbrury]

Why be closed to a trade?

You always want to be open to trades.

If Golden State got drunk and stupidly accepted Bonner Mason and a pick for Jackson then you accept and laugh.

Im not against trades but Im just afraid of the trade ideas we might see in response of a loss.

[The Truth #6]

It might be in our best interest to hold on to our expiring contracts and see if Splitter is coming next year before committing even more money, especially with RJ's crazy contract.

[MaNu4Tres]

As it is right now,

the only way I see us including Bonner in a deal for Jackson is if we get a big man in return.

Bonner
Mason
Finley
Mahimni

1st rounder and or Splitter

for

Jackson
Turiaf

[EricB]

Yeah I understand that. But he's been going with Anthony Randolph a lot at his 4 spot opposed to going really undersized with Maggette at the 4. Their SF/ and SG position is fine as it is with Azubuike, Marrow, Maggette.

I just think they if they would want value in a player back for Jackson it would be for a big man. Just my opinion.

I said Bonner and Hill :)


I agree though I gaurantee he salivates at playing Bonner next to Randolph and Biedrins. Bonner in GS would work out great though. Not alot of pressure to perform, run and gun let it fly.

Bonner would find IMO a permanent home in GS as long as Nellie is there.

[EricB]

Im not against trades but Im just afraid of the trade ideas we might see in response of a loss.

They could win 25 in a row and the day after a loss, "This team needs a trade ASAP!"

[EricB]

As it is right now,

the only way I see us including Bonner in a deal for Jackson is if we get a big man in return.

Bonner
Mason
Finley
Mahimni

1st rounder and or Splitter

for

Jackson
Turiaf

Wow thats alot of players for just 2.

Considering I think Bonner and Finley or Mason's contracts are all that would be needed to get within the 125% rule.

[HarlemHeat37]

My best scenario would be waiting until the deadline and see what the team needs..I'm just saying if Holt is willing to pay Jackson's contract long-term, I have no reason not to like it..our wing players would be completely unstoppable, it wouldn't even be fair to the NBA..

I personally don't feel like any player can come in and mess up the chemistry of this Spurs team with guys like Pop and Duncan, especially when it's a guy that has won a title here, and still appears to have great mutual respect with Pop and Timmy(along with the rest of the core)..

[EricB]

My best scenario would be waiting until the deadline and see what the team needs..I'm just saying if Holt is willing to pay Jackson's contract long-term, I have no reason not to like it..our wing players would be completely unstoppable, it wouldn't even be fair to the NBA..

He would be gone by then.

I'd say the number 1 team vying for his services other than the Spurs (if they are) would be Cleveland.

[HarlemHeat37]

He would be gone by then.

I'd say the number 1 team vying for his services other than the Spurs (if they are) would be Cleveland.

that's part of the reason I would be for this trade..we won't have time to wait until the deadline..I'm not going to be heart-broken if we don't get him, but I'd definitely be hoping for it if the possibility came up in the FO talks..

[HarlemHeat37]

Giving up Hill would just be silly..Golden State doesn't have that type of leverage right now..

[baseline bum]

I love Stephen Jackson and he's one of my all-time favorite Spurs, but no way in hell I'd be for giving Manu up even with all the question marks surrounding him this season. Absolutely no chance.

[EricB]

that's part of the reason I would be for this trade..we won't have time to wait until the deadline..I'm not going to be heart-broken if we don't get him, but I'd definitely be hoping for it if the possibility came up in the FO talks..

With you 100%.

I think adding Jackson to the team would honestly make me feel better about the team's chances.

[Bruno]

Given their respective contracts, I rather have Foster than Jackson...

[MaNu4Tres]

Wow thats alot of players for just 2.

Considering I think Bonner and Finley or Mason's contracts are all that would be needed to get within the 125% rule.

It would be within the 125 % rule, I just think Spurs would want a big man in return if they were to part with Bonner for Jackson. As much as I hate to say it, Bonner had a damn productive year last year and validated that he is indeed an NBA player, a rotation player at that. Without him at the expense of another wing would only put our roster at three proven nba commodities on the front court. And one of them can only play limited minutes ( Ratliff). Spurs front-line would be really thin.

Finley would be coming back after 30 days if he were to ever be included in a trade. imo

Therefore it would be 3 for 2

[Mel_13]

Giving up Hill would just be silly..Golden State doesn't have that type of leverage right now..

Agreed, I wouldn't add any premium (Hill, pick, Splitter rights) to expiring contracts in any offer for Jackson. I'd also wait for the deadline. If Cleveland comes up with a deal sooner than that, fine. They're not coming out of the East anyway.

[EricB]

They are I just think Spurs would want a big man in return if they were to part with Bonner for Jackson. As much as I hate to say it, Bonner had a damn productive year last year and validated that he is indeed an NBA player, a rotation player at that. Without him at the expense of another wing would only put our roster at three proven nba commodities on the front court. And one of them can only play limited minutes ( Ratliff). Spurs front-line would be really thin.

Finley would be coming back after 30 days if he were to ever be included in a trade. imo

Therefore it would be 3 for 2

I think if that trade were to be done.

I have a feeling that Haislip would be called upon to pick up the Bonner slack and Finley most likely would stay in GS and not be bought out.

[EricB]

Given their respective contracts, I rather have Foster than Jackson...

Oh please....

Name me the playoff series Jeff Foster has won because he was a big reason, and then do the same for Jackson.

Jackson wins.

Period.

[MaNu4Tres]

I think if that trade were to be done.

I have a feeling that Haislip would be called upon to pick up the Bonner slack and Finley most likely would stay in GS and not be bought out.

Haislip is not an NBA player. If Haislip were called upon to shore up front-line duties we would be in trouble regardless of the addition of Jackson.

[EricB]

Haislip is not an NBA player. If Haislip were called upon to shore up front-line duties we would be in trouble regardless of the addition of Jackson.

Based on NBA preseason?

Uh, ok...

If he weren't an NBA player he wouldn't still be with the team.

[Mel_13]

As it is right now,

the only way I see us including Bonner in a deal for Jackson is if we get a big man in return.



On this much we agree. Any early season trade involving Bonner must bring back a big as part of the deal.

[MaNu4Tres]

giving up hill would just be silly..golden state doesn't have that type of leverage right now..

+1

[MaNu4Tres]

Based on NBA preseason?

Uh, ok...

If he weren't an NBA player he wouldn't still be with the team.

He was a gamble. A low cost, high reward gamble.

He's still on the team because he was given a guaranteed contract.

If it weren't for that contract, Marcus Williams may still be a Spur.

[Bruno]

Oh please....

Name me the playoff series Jeff Foster has won because he was a big reason, and then do the same for Jackson.

Jackson wins.

Period.

I can name playoff series Jackson has lost because he was a big reason. For example, the last playoff series he played...

Jackson's contract is atrocious.

Period.

[EricB]

He was a gamble. A low cost, high reward gamble.

He's still on the team because he was given a guaranteed contract.

If it weren't for that contract, Marcus Williams may still be a Spur.


Doubtfull. Pop likes Haislip. he's shown good things in practice. He also has not been as bad in games as the chicken littles in this forum love to make out.

[baseline bum]

On this much we agree. Any early season trade involving Bonner must bring back a big as part of the deal.

Bonner's worthless. Trading him for a pound of fajitas would be a good deal.

[MaNu4Tres]

Jackson's contract is atrocious.

Period.


We can get rid of Jackson's after two years.

Shouldn't be a problem considering we got rid of Rasho and Malik's.

That being said 7.6 this year and 8.2 next year is not atrocious for Stephen Jackson.

[koriwhat]

Doubtfull. Pop likes Haislip. he's shown good things in practice. He also has not been as bad in games as the chicken littles in this forum love to make out.

dude i went to most of the preseason games and haislip imo is not nba ready at all. did you go to the games? oh again, talking out your ass like always.

[Mel_13]

Doubtfull. Pop likes Haislip. he's shown good things in practice. He also has not been as bad in games as the chicken littles in this forum love to make out.

Well time will tell, but I'd bet that Haislip's contributions this year will be similar to the contributions of Sean Marks. Practice big who allows Pop to run full practices without wearing out Duncan, McDyess, and Ratliff.

[EricB]

dude i went to most of the preseason games and haislip imo is not nba ready at all. did you go to the games? oh again, talking out your ass like always.


Did I go? No. I've seen video of some of the games. I'll take Pop's opinion of players over your middle school mental level.

[baseline bum]

I can name playoff series Jackson has lost because he was a big reason. For example, the last playoff series he played...

Jackson's contract is atrocious.

Period.

Jackson is a big guard/SF who can score, doesn't wilt under pressure, plays good d, and has a couple more good years left (which coincides with the 2-3 year max window this team has to do anything). Paying his year 4 salary would suck, but who cares about 2012-13? The show will be over by then and it will be time to play for lottery balls again.

[EricB]

Well time will tell, but I'd bet that Haislip's contributions this year will be similar to the contributions of Sean Marks. Practice big who allows Pop to run full practices without wearing out Duncan, McDyess, and Ratliff.

I don't disagree.

I would not be suprised however to see his role expand next year after he has readjusted to NBA level.

[DAF86]

I bet it does.

Golden State would need a tranquilizer from laughing so hard however.

Finley and Mason for Sjax doesn't work salary wise but Mason and Bonner for Jackson does work and I'm sure that if Golden State doesn't get anything better would go for that just to get rid of Jackson's horrible contract.

[EricB]

Jackson is a big guard/SF who can score, doesn't wilt under pressure, plays good d, and has a couple more good years left (which coincides with the 2-3 year max window this team has to do anything). Paying his year 4 salary would suck, but who cares about 2012-13? The show will be over by then and it will be time to play for lottery balls again.

Plus expiring contract they will try to unload.

Agreed.

[baseline bum]

Finley and Mason for Sjax doesn't work salary wise but Mason and Bonner for Jackson does work and I'm sure that if Golden State doesn't get anything better would go for that just to get rid of Jackson's horrible contract.

That would be sweet. I'd hate to lose Roger, but no way you don't do that deal.

[EricB]

Finley and Mason for Sjax doesn't work salary wise but Mason and Bonner for Jackson does work and I'm sure that if Golden State doesn't get anything better would go for that just to get rid of Jackson's horrible contract.


They might. If they did great, if not, oh well.

[MaNu4Tres]

Finley and Mason for Sjax doesn't work salary wise but Mason and Bonner for Jackson does work and I'm sure that if Golden State doesn't get anything better would go for that just to get rid of Jackson's horrible contract.

Finley/ Mason/ Mahimni works salary wise. You don't have to include Bonner.

[EricB]

Finley/ Mason/ Mahimni works salary wise. You don't have to include Bonner.


Man. I'd agonize on it, but I'd do it.

Your back court depth though would take a hit.

Guessing they would bring back Marcus Williams...

[benefactor]

If the Spurs are willing to take on the money...Mason/Bonner for Jack is absolutely a no-brainer. GS will actually get players that are rotation players in return, so it really wouldn't be a straight offloading of a problem player for them.

[benefactor]

Make not mistake...they are gonna want Bonner.

[MaNu4Tres]

Man. I'd agonize on it, but I'd do it.

Your back court depth though would take a hit.

Guessing they would bring back Marcus Williams...

Not really.

We'd have

Starters
Sjax playing 30 minutes
RJ playing 32-34 minutes

Bench
Manu 25-28 minutes
Hairston or Bogans 10-12 minutes

That is 5 deep on the wing. Not even mentioning George Hill getting possible time at the 2.


And I'm willing to bet if Finley is including in any deal it would be pre-arranged to where he comes back.

[Bruno]

Jackson is a big guard/SF who can score, doesn't wilt under pressure, plays good d, and has a couple more good years left (which coincides with the 2-3 year max window this team has to do anything). Paying his year 4 salary would suck, but who cares about 2012-13? The show will be over by then and it will be time to play for lottery balls again.

When you look at Jackson, you see some big shots in 2003 and against Mavs in 2007.

When I look at Jackson, I see also all the inconsistency on and off the court. For example, just after being great with Mavs, he was horrible against Utah. His FG% was 28% in that series.

And not caring about 2012-2013 is quite irresponsible.

[HarlemHeat37]

Looking at some other teams, I think Jax could be available for a while..

Cleveland's only asset in this deal is Ilguaskas and his expiring contract, and it doesn't appear like they'll be moving that..losing Ilgauskas leaves them with very little size off the bench..

The Hornets could be a possibility in a package for Peja's contract, but would their cheap ownership be willing to pay Jackson for that long?..

Denver doesn't appear to have the assets..

I can't imagine the Clippers doing this, it wouldn't make any sense for them from both financial and basketball perspectives..

[celldweller]

Man. I'd agonize on it, but I'd do it.

Your back court depth though would take a hit.

Guessing they would bring back Marcus Williams...
:lmao

[DAF86]

Finley/ Mason/ Mahimni works salary wise. You don't have to include Bonner.

I'd rather include Bonner. Our wing rotation would get too thin if we trade both Mason and Finley.

[MaNu4Tres]

Paying his year 4 salary would suck, but who cares about 2012-13? The show will be over by then and it will be time to play for lottery balls again.

Did we pay Rasho or Malik all of their 6 and 7 year contracts?

Oh yeah thats right we traded them away. Oh I forgot we were able to do that. Wow.

[MaNu4Tres]

I'd rather include Bonner. Our wing would get too thin if we trade both Mason and Finley.

Scroll up to post 95.

[yavozerb]

I'd rather include Bonner. Our wing would get too thin if we trade both Mason and Finley.

And our frontcourt wouldn'y get thin by trading both bonner and mahinmi..let this trade go, seriously..

[Thompson]

Is this Ilgauskas's last year? Maybe if Cleveland loses a couple more games they'll get desperate enough to trade him for Jackson, Z can demand a buyout (who wants to play in Golden State?) and come to the Spurs for a real chance at a ring. I wouldn't mind having him.

[EricB]

When you look at Jackson, you see some big shots in 2003 and against Mavs in 2007.

When I look at Jackson, I see also all the inconsistency on and off the court. For example, just after being great with Mavs, he was horrible against Utah. His FG% was 28% in that series.

And not caring about 2012-2013 is quite irresponsible.

Lottery team.

Who gives a shit.

[DAF86]

Scroll up to post 95.

What happens when one of them gets injured for some games?

[yavozerb]

THIS IS NOT GONNA HAPPEN :bang..that is all

[Bruno]

Lottery team.

Who gives a shit.

San Antonio is a so big market and the owner is so rich that it doesn't matter at all to have an ugly team with a high payroll....

[EricB]

THIS IS NOT GONNA HAPPEN :bang..that is all

According to?

[Bruno]

Throwing contracts out of the equation Jack can help us win a championship over the next 2 to 3 years more than foster.

Well, if you throw contracts away of the equation, you left the real world.

[celldweller]

THIS IS NOT GONNA HAPPEN :bang..that is all

I think down deep inside they all know it. :lol

But if it did.........Look Out!!! :wow

[EricB]

San Antonio is a so big market and the owner is so rich that it doesn't matter at all to have an ugly team with a high payroll....

Lottery team.

Players like him will be dumped.

You need to enter the reality world.

[DAF86]

And our frontcourt wouldn'y get thin by trading both bonner and mahinmi..let this trade go, seriously..

Who said anything about trading Mahinmi? and Jackson is more of a frontcourt player than Bonner.

[Bruno]

Lottery team.

Players like him will be dumped.

You need to enter the reality world.

Sure, it's so easy to dump a bad contract.

And you're talking about reality world...

[Dro210]

Please refer to the sig....


Also... Jack's contract is not bad at all. ~$8 mil for a guy of his caliber is not near a bad contract. If you want to see a bad contract, look no further than our boy Richard Jefferson... and I don't see too many people complaining about that one right now.

[Bruno]

One of the things the Spurs front office is best at is moving bad contracts. Rasho, Rose, Butler etc.

They just give up 2 first round pick and Scola to move Rose and Butler.

[EricB]

Sure, it's so easy to dump a bad contract.

And you're talking about reality world...


It is.

Richard Jefferson
Malik Rose
Rasho
Butler


how many more examples do you need?

[Mel_13]

One of the things the Spurs front office is best at is moving bad contracts. Rasho, Rose, Butler etc.

Only Rasho was moved without giving up valuable assets. Moving Rose cost two 1st rounders and moving Butler cost Scola's rights.

[EricB]

They just give up 2 first round pick and Scola to move Rose and Butler.


They got back Matt Bonner draft picks for Rasho.

[MaNu4Tres]

San Antonio is a so big market and the owner is so rich that it doesn't matter at all to have an ugly team with a high payroll....

You act as if Jackson has 8 years left on his deal.

These next two years doesn't really matter because we will have a high payroll and will be over the luxury tax regardless of getting Jackson or not and we will be a championship team. So we won't be an ugly team with a high payroll, that is the REAL WORLD.

The last 2 years Spurs only have 29 million on the books for the 2011/ 2012 season, which will be Duncan's last year. If Spurs are in rebuilding mode I'm sure Spurs can trade Jackson to a contender at that time for an expiring and a contract of a young prospect for 2-4 million along with a pick. I'm pretty sure R.C could pull that off if he can convince people to take on the contracts of Rasho and Malik.

[Bruno]

They got back Matt Bonner draft picks for Rasho.

Finding twice a GM as dumb as Colangelo won't be that easy.

[EricB]

Finding twice a GM as dumb as Colangelo won't be that easy.

For a team wanting cap space the following year why not?

[DJB]

If we could send out Mason/ Finley( the only way I see us trading him is if its set up to where he comes back in 30 days/ and Mahimni for Jackson. It would improve our chances at number 5 immensely. I'd even throw in a 1st round pick.

Losing too much depth on the perimeter.

[MaNu4Tres]

Losing too much depth on the perimeter.

Refer to post 95.

[MaNu4Tres]

Finding twice a GM as dumb as Colangelo won't be that easy.

Jackson is 10 times the player Rasho is for similiar money. It should be easier.

[DAF86]

Refer to post 95.

Refer to post 106.

[Bruno]

Scola was a mistake but Butler needed to be traded away. The Rose trade helped us win a championship. The Spurs only have Tim Duncan for a little while longer, Jacks long term contract would be worth a championship.

Adding Jackson doesn't guarantee a championship.

[baseline bum]

When you look at Jackson, you see some big shots in 2003 and against Mavs in 2007.

When I look at Jackson, I see also all the inconsistency on and off the court. For example, just after being great with Mavs, he was horrible against Utah. His FG% was 28% in that series.

And not caring about 2012-2013 is quite irresponsible.

In 2012-13, assuming Tim retires, I want this team going into the lottery. You can't win without franchise players, and being in the lottery is by far the Spurs best shot to do that. There's no way the Spurs are going to be able to follow the Lakers model and pluck a Shaq from a small-market team and trades are only going to get you players with issues. Exactly one team in the last 30 years has won without a first-ballot HOF superstar lead player. Being stuck in mediocrity is the worst possible outcome for this team after Duncan retires.

[DAF86]

I say, if you planned to go balls out to get a championship this or next season then go really balls out to make that happen.

[EricB]

Adding Jackson doesn't guarantee a championship.


Standing pay doesn't either.

[MaNu4Tres]

Refer to post 106.


6 deep on the wing is plenty of depth. Just as much depth than the other contenders offer.

Jackson
Jefferson
Manu
Bogans
Hairston
Hill

And possibly Finley

Would make it 7

Orlando
Carter
Pietrus
Barnes
Lewis
Reddick


Cleveland
Lebron
Parker
Moon
West
Gibson

Lakers
Kobe
Artest
Sasha
Walton
Morrison
Brown

Celtics

Pierce
Allen
Daniels
House
Giddons
Walker

You get my point. 6 deep is enough to get through the season.

To answer your question

We can make an entire forum on What if's.

[Bruno]

In 2012-13, assuming Tim retires, I want this team going into the lottery.

I also want it. I don't consider Parker as a player able to be the franchsie player of a contender.

When you rebuild, it's way better to have cap space than to pay $10M for a 35 years old Jackson. You can keep the cap space open if the team struggle financially or you can use it to get assets. With cap space, Presti got 3 first round picks with Kurt Thomas.

[quentin_compson]

Manu for Jackson is a nice joke.

Some of the other scenarios developed here might be interesting, though. Considering it's Nellie we would be trading with I agree that he would be high on Bonner. That way we might lose only one wing player (probably Mason Jr.). I really think Bonner and Roger could be good players in Nellie's system.

Jax is only 31, so I guess it shouldn't be that hard to trade his contract in 2 or 3 years.

Considering recent trades like the ones that brought RJ to San Antonio or Marion to Dallas, I wouldn't be that surprised if Jax was offered for expiring contracts and maybe some picks (depending on how bad the Warriors want him gone, of course).

[baseline bum]

When you look at Jackson, you see some big shots in 2003 and against Mavs in 2007.

When I look at Jackson, I see also all the inconsistency on and off the court. For example, just after being great with Mavs, he was horrible against Utah. His FG% was 28% in that series.

And not caring about 2012-2013 is quite irresponsible.

When I look at Jackson, I see a big guard who can get easy baskets cutting to the hoop and catching passes from Duncan (like he did all the time for the Spurs in 03). I see a long 2/3 who can be thrown against Dirk. I see a guy with great size who can always get his shot off. And yes, I see a guy who has consistently been a big performer in the toughest pressure moments. Jackson is a versatile player who would give this team some really incredible size that would be tough to match up with.

[FkLA]

Why why why do people keep calling SJax's contract atrocious or horrible? Find me another player that is coming off of a 20-6-5 season and that is a good defender that will make under 8 mill this season. A player of his skillset and talent is usually making twice that, just look at guys like RJ and Rashard Lewis.

And yea the contract is for four years but who cares, we're all in right now. I could care less about the four years from now. As a fan using his contract as a reason to not want him is just stupid leave that to the owner. I wouldnt trade Manu but Mason+Bonner is a no brainer if the Warriors bite.

[Agloco]

My guess for the Jackson trade is Jackson and Claxton for Peja.

This is one of the last things the Spurs need. :wow

[baseline bum]

I also want it. I don't consider Parker as a player able to be the franchsie player of a contender.

When you rebuild, it's way better to have cap space than to pay $10M for a 35 years old Jackson. You can keep the cap space open if the team struggle financially or you can use it to get assets. With cap space, Presti got 3 first round picks with Kurt Thomas.

That's true, but it's not like he's on a 7 year deal or something. One year of being a cap albatross after Tim retires is something I'm willing to accept to try to make the best effort to win at least one more in the final 2-3 years of this team's window.

[MaNu4Tres]

The acquisition of Jackson would also force Kobe to play at both ends of the floor for every minute he plays.
A rotation of Jackson/ Jefferson/ Manu would make that happen.

I'm all for making Kobe carrying the load offensively and having to guard somebody at all times.

The same can't be said when Mason and Finley get quality playing time.

[EricB]

This is one of the last things the Spurs need. :wow

Yeah that would actually vault New Orleans back into relevancy for coming out of the west IMO.

[MaNu4Tres]

that's true, but it's not like he's on a 7 year deal or something. One year of being a cap albatross after tim retires is something i'm willing to accept to try to make the best effort to win at least one more in the final 2-3 years of this team's window.

+1

[picnroll]

Bonner is a big?

[benefactor]

Bonner is a big?
He's like having a seven footer in GS....

[Ice009]

I think if the Spurs can get Jackson for Mason Jr., Finley, Mahinimi, 1st round pick you do it right now. I'm actually not sure about trading Bonner, but I would probably include him to with any of the players mentioned above. For some reason I am starting to see some value in Bonner as a 3rd or 4th big.

I've wanted Jackson back since after the 2004 season and think this would make us so dangerous.

No way I give Goldenstate Manu or Hill for him though. As for Splitter's rights that would require that Goldenstate give us a very good big back as well.

[Ice009]

It helps though. It isn't like we are talking about a Vince Carter contract here. Jack put up similar numbers to Jefferson last season and he has half the price tag per season. A 20 point per game scorer and a long athletic defender for 7 million a year is a good deal.

His defense alone is an upgrade over the players we'd be trading for him.

So Bruno said he could shoot 28% in a series. I doubt that happens here as he should get better looks. If anyone of those other guys shoot 28% in a series they still wouldn't provide the defense and intangibles that Sjax would.

I really think Bonner would be a pretty good fit there, but I'm not so sure I want to include him in a trade with out getting any sort of big back.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

When you look at Jackson, you see some big shots in 2003 and against Mavs in 2007.

When I look at Jackson, I see also all the inconsistency on and off the court. For example, just after being great with Mavs, he was horrible against Utah. His FG% was 28% in that series.

And not caring about 2012-2013 is quite irresponsible.

Screw FG%, the bottom line is that number goes up to about 70% in the clutch. When you look at SJax you see one series of bad FG% numbers. I see one of the clutchest mofos in the league. Um, yes please.

[exstatic]

lol, GS. Nellie would have Ginobili under the knife and out for the year by January playing him 40 minutes a night.

[MrChug]

I like sjax, but not for that price.

Word to that.

[kbrury]

Hey guys Spurs game is on just wanted to let you know :king

[DynastySpurs210]

Trade Manu

[Crookshanks]

Forget SJax - we don't need a headcase like him. This year's team is going to be great - without adding SJax.

[itzsoweezee]

Don't screw this team up!

Leave well enough alone. The roster is legit. No need to fix something that isn't broken.

[Crookshanks]

And if there were even rumors of trading Manu, San Antonio fans would riot!

[CGD]

It's not terrible. Long yeah. Terrible no.

7.6 million this year and 8.2 next year is great value for the type of player Stephen Jackson is.

If it were to come down to it and we needed to get rid of it in 3 years that shouldn't be a problem.Especially to a contender. We did get rid of Malik and Rasho's horrendous contract you know.

Look again. You forgot the $9,256,500 in 2011/12 and $10,059,750 in 2012/13. Thats too long a commitment for a player that will be in his mid-30s, and who we assume will continue to put up current numbers.

[EricB]

Look again. You forgot the $9,256,500 in 2011/12 and $10,059,750 in 2012/13. Thats too long a commitment for a player that will be in his mid-30s, and who we assume will continue to put up current numbers.

Right cause were all worried about the big cap space in 2012

Fuck that.
Win now.

[TDMVPDPOY]

Right cause were all worried about the big cap space in 2012

Fuck that.
Win now.

i take on jax contract too if i were GM

we done worst than this like rewarding malik rose a 6-8m contract, rashos contract at the time

[CGD]

Chalk it up to a difference of opinion I guess. I just don't see many GMs willing to take on long-term deals for aging role players in this economic climate.

Yeah Holt spent cash this season, but really the Spurs' financial hit is this year, and to a lesser degree the next (certain players come off the books next summer, but Spurs will have to negotiate new deals for many).

If after playing the Lakers once or twice this season it looks like we still need a piece, then we can go after someone via trade before the Feb deadline. Not sure we need to tweak at this point (if at all).

[CGD]

i take on jax contract too if i were GM

we done worst than this like rewarding malik rose a 6-8m contract, rashos contract at the time

And we shipped him off to the Knicks shortly after...

[Man In Black]

I like where we're at. I don't need the Spurs to live in the past. I like this forward thinking team and no fan hard-on for SJax will derail that.

I think the world of SJax but this team doesn't need him more than he needs this team to get a ring. REALITY!

[Buddy Holly]

Adding Jackson doesn't guarantee a championship.

Nothing guarantees a championship. But adding him in place of Bonner and Finley or Mason sure helps our odds.

[Buddy Holly]

If we can get Jax for Bonner and Finley and spare change, I say yes yes yes.

[EricB]

I like where we're at. I don't need the Spurs to live in the past. I like this forward thinking team and no fan hard-on for SJax will derail that.

I think the world of SJax but this team doesn't need him more than he needs this team to get a ring. REALITY!

Its not living in the past if you can upgrade the wing position like Jackson would.

[FeZZy]

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



BOSS:ihit

[MI21]

I like the defensive versatility, clutch 3pt shooting, passing, cutting off of Duncan and general nastiness that Buckets would bring to the Spurs :hat

With the roster shaped how it is at the moment though, there doesn't seem to be room. It would probably involve trading a big, so in that case the Spurs would need a big back. But if there is a realistic way to get a Ginobili, Jefferson, Buckets swingman rotation, I'm all for it.

[EricB]

I like the defensive versatility, clutch 3pt shooting, passing, cutting off of Duncan and general nastiness that Buckets would bring to the Spurs :hat

With the roster shaped how it is at the moment though, there doesn't seem to be room. It would probably involve trading a big, so in that case the Spurs would need a big bag. But if there is a realistic way to get a Ginobili, Jefferson, Buckets swingman rotation, I'm all for it.

Jefferson Jackson start
Ginobili comes off the bench.

Problem solved.

[TDMVPDPOY]

u know why i do it,

ginos contract is off next near, offer him MLE or lower

parker is off the books the following year,

then you have duncan, rj, mcdyness the year after also....11/12 alot of money of the books....

[redzero]

The Hornets should get him instead. S-Jax on the Spurs is redundant.

[MI21]

Jefferson Jackson start
Ginobili comes off the bench.

Problem solved.

Yeah, I realise that.

Just saying that if Finley and Mason aren't given away in the deal, it could create a bit of a logjam at the swingman spot.

[cdcast]

If they can get SJax for 1. Mason, Finley, and Ian OR 2.Bonner, Finley, and Ian,
you make that trade NOW. Just no Hill.

For the Spurs, it's all about the next 2-3 years. They can't afford to stand pat.

[Mel_13]

Excerpt from Mark Stein's article today:

Our evening check, via NBA front-office sources, likewise suggested that Golden State is still getting largely unappetizing offers for Jackson. The Warriors are undoubtedly prepared to move Jackson but have said from the start that they won't rush the process just for the sake of making a deal.

* Charlotte is the only other inquirer we’ve pinpointed so far, but I’ve been strongly cautioned that there are other teams with serious interest in Jackson that have yet to be publicly identified.

* Yet I was also told in strong terms that neither San Antonio nor the Los Angeles Clippers are on that list.

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/10119/the-overnight-latest-on-stephen-jackson

[wildbill2u]

It's appropriate that this discussion is coming at Halloween time. The 'bring back Jax" movement has more lives than Jason. :rolleyes

[z0sa]

No thanks. Good player, not good for our situation.

[K-State Spur]

I like the defensive versatility, clutch 3pt shooting, passing, cutting off of Duncan and general nastiness that Buckets would bring to the Spurs :hat


Don't forget turnovers, bad shot selection, and possible attitude issues with not being on the floor at the end of tight games (and he wouldn't).

He DEFINITELY would be a good upgrade for the right price. But you're description of him makes it sound like he would be PERFECT. Which isn't the case, there would still be hurdles to overcome.

[Whisky Dog]

I'm sure the Spurs have offered Bonner, Finley, Ian and probably Mason in some combinations but the Warriors declined. No way the Spirs blow up this team's chemistry after one or two games unless things start going bad.

[benefactor]

Do it.

[celldweller]

Do it.

Immediately! No really!

[mabrignani]

He's going somewhere before Ginobili is.

He most likely had it not been for their last minute pullback would be a Clipper right now.

pop loves hill too much. hes his project point guard

[Ice009]

I'm sure the Spurs have offered Bonner, Finley, Ian and probably Mason in some combinations but the Warriors declined. No way the Spirs blow up this team's chemistry after one or two games unless things start going bad.

YEP. I say do it NOW if it's available for any of these combinations listed above.

The thing is if the Spurs have already asked and the Warriors turned down all that what can you really do? Do you want to add someone like Hill. I think you gotta draw the line there, but Jackson I think would be so good on this team.

[HarlemHeat37]

there's very little chance Golden State turned it down IMO..

Golden State isn't holding shit right now..the guy doesn't want to play there and he's causing trouble, he has a bad contract, they already have depth where he plays, they have young guys coming up..if somebody is willing to take his contract, they'll make the deal..

[Ice009]

there's very little chance Golden State turned it down IMO..

Golden State isn't holding shit right now..the guy doesn't want to play there and he's causing trouble, he has a bad contract, they already have depth where he plays, they have young guys coming up..if somebody is willing to take his contract, they'll make the deal..

Well if that is the case WTF are the Spurs doing? Seriously would anyone that is competing for a Championship want Finley, Mason Jr. or even Bonner over SJax? What contending team would do that?

Do you think they should pull the trigger if all it would take is any combination of those players listed Harlem? Take the money side out of it, would you do that trade right now?

[Ice009]

I'm just going to add that if the Spurs can pay RJ 15 million then they sure as fuck can pay SJax 7 mil for what he brings to the table.

Sure the length of the contract sucks and that is probably a reason that Jefferson's is easier to take, but I don't see why they couldn't trade Stephen after 2-3 seasons to a team looking to clear some cap space.

[Bruno]

Excerpt from Mark Stein's article today:

* Yet I was also told in strong terms that neither San Antonio nor the Los Angeles Clippers are on that list.

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/10119/the-overnight-latest-on-stephen-jackson

Nice to see Mark Stein ending these wild speculations.
I would be really surprised if Spurs are interested in Jackson.

[Ice009]

Nice to see Mark Stein ending these wild speculations.
I would be really surprised if Spurs are interested in Jackson.

Yeah I read that the other day and I don't like it.

Why is it wild when the Spurs are willing to pay RJ 15 million a season and aren't willing to take on SJax at 7 mill if all it takes is any combination of Finley, Mason Jr. and Bonner.

Why would they not seriously consider this unless GS completely shot it down and said no.

[Mel_13]

Broussard now with this to say:

I've fleshed out the Stephen Jackson scuttlebutt I mentioned on Wednesday, and let's just say I'm glad I prefaced it with "this is a rumor,'' not news.

San Antonio, New Orleans and the LA Clippers have not had any conversations of substance with Golden State concerning Jackson. Cleveland definitely has interest, but is unwilling to give up Zydrunas Ilgausksas and is taking a "wait and see'' approach. Denver had interest but doesn't have the goods to get anything done.

While there's a possibility that something could happen soon, the Warriors have been told by several teams that the market for Jackson could improve after Dec. 15, when players who signed as free agents this past summer are able to be traded. Golden State's thinking is that the market could be even better near the Feb. 18 trade deadline.

While the Warriors are looking to trade Jackson, they are taking a patient approach. They're not going to give him away for chump change, even if it means keeping him the entire season. They realize he may act up from time to time, but they also believe that he's going to play his tail off whenever he's on the court, no matter how upset he is.

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/10182/10182

[Ice009]

I really do think the Spurs need to at least talk to the Warriors about him if they haven't at all.

[Bruno]

Yeah I read that the other day and I don't like it.

Why is it wild when the Spurs are willing to pay RJ 15 million a season and aren't willing to take on SJax at 7 mill if all it takes is any combination of Finley, Mason Jr. and Bonner.

Why would they not seriously consider this unless GS completely shot it down and said no.

The length of the contract is the killer.

[EricB]

Pull the trigger.

By the end of the contract the team is so bad it won't even matter.

Win now damnt.

[EricB]

Pull the trigger.

By the end of the contract the team is so bad it won't even matter.

Win now damnt.

[Ice009]

I'd actually agree with T-Park on this one ;).

I say do it.

[Russ]

If I'm RC, then I call GS and say, "Look you've beaten us down. You got us -- we'll do it. Jack for Mahinmi." :)

[Ice009]

If I'm RC, then I call GS and say, "Look you've beaten us down. You got us -- we'll do it. Jack for Mahinmi." :)

lol.

Did anyone watch the Celtics game today? They wiped the floor with the Bulls. 28 or 30 point win. Of course I do recognize it was a back to back for the Bulls and they were in Boston, still it was an impressive win.

Spurs really need to do it if the can upgrade to Jack for Finley, Mason Jr., Mahinimi or Bonner.

[intlspurshk]

S JAX is not the answer now. Maybe he was but no longer fit this SPURS team

[Blackjack]

Pull the trigger.

By the end of the contract the team is so bad it won't even matter.

Win now damnt.

It sure is easy to spend other people's money, isn't it?;)

[Blackjack]

S JAX is not the answer now. Maybe he was but no longer fit this SPURS team

Actually, I think he'd fit quite well considering..

Hypothetically speaking, there's no reason you couldn't have a starting-five that consisted of Jack and RJ as your wings. Jack has the three-point shot to play off the doubles and the drive-and-kick game and RJ has enough all-around game to compliment Tim, Tony and Jack.

One of the dilemma's I've found with the RJ acquisition, is the ability to find a defensive-minded two-guard with a quality three-point shot. If RJ were more of a dead-eye shooter from the perimeter, his counterpart's three-point shot wouldn't be much of an issue and it'd be much easier to play him alongside someone like Hairston.

I know Pop's intentions were for RJ to come in and be the 'stopper', but I've just never understood the rationale in acquiring a quality, yet over-priced talent and asking him to be something he's not. I mean, you're going to pay someone that amount of money and ask him to sacrifice a lot of the game that netted him the contract?

It just doesn't make much sense.

Having said that, as I've gotten a bit sidetracked, Jack and RJ could work. Neither is a stopper but both are solid defenders that could play an interchangeable role. They've both got ideal size and compliment each other quite well on both ends of the court in their individual styles. It'd actually give Pop the personnel to a give those Boston defensive wrinkles he tried to implement last year another shot.

If you could start those two and bring Manu off the bench, I think I'd like their chances; those three and Hairston as your fourth wing, would pretty much give you everything you need at that swing to get it done.

Hypothetically speaking, of course...

[CGD]

this is the the truth, who cares about his bad contract.

Peter Holt

[phyzik]

I want Captain Jack back.... as long as it doesnt break what we have done this pre-season. Get rid of Bonner, Finley and Ian plus whatever else is needed (cash, picks, ect) and I'll be a VERY happy camper.

It seems ALOT of people on this site dont remember how clutch this motherfucker was back in 03. Nevermind how clutch he was in the biggest 1 vs 8 seed upset in NBA playoffs history... Everyone likes to give all the credit to Baron davis but Buckets was a HUGE reason for that upset.... I would even argue more-so than Davis.

[lennyalderette]

Golden State is definitely bluffing here..everybody knows they don't have leverage here, if they don't move him, he's going to be a distraction all year..if anybody is even willing to take his long contract, they'll dump him instantly IMO..
+1
lol theyre trying to see if they can pull some bullshit, and rip a team off. those dumbasses think their going to get an amazing player for a person whos ruining their team? shoot we should send mahinmi finley and bogans, and if we have to

[lennyalderette]

ginobili, lol j/k theres no way

[lennyalderette]

the only way we should trade is if we can get sjax 4 giving up mahinmi +finley+bogans. that should do it, remember were doing them a favor!!! and i think they would want mahinmi more than anything, he doesnt need to play d he just needs to get alleyoops!! hes young tall and looks athletic (wink,wink)for nelsons dumbass. and maybe they can renegotiate his contract if he wants to help us out

[exstatic]

Yeah I read that the other day and I don't like it.

Why is it wild when the Spurs are willing to pay RJ 15 million a season and aren't willing to take on SJax at 7 mill if all it takes is any combination of Finley, Mason Jr. and Bonner.

Why would they not seriously consider this unless GS completely shot it down and said no.

If you look at what Jackson did to GS, you have your answer.

[Ice009]

If you look at what Jackson did to GS, you have your answer.

Is Goldenstate San Antonio?

[Mel_13]

From David Aldridge today:

No truth -- none -- to a report linking the Spurs and Warriors in a Manu Ginobili-Stephen Jackson deal, a non-story flatly shot down by both sides, and with some heat which I am not at liberty to reproduce here. Ditto to the supposed connections of the Warriors and Clippers and Warriors and Hornets for Jackson. Other than that, though, the story was right on the money. Discussions have and do continue between Golden State and Cleveland, though there doesn't appear to be any Warriors interest in Zydrunas Ilgauskas nor any interest on Cleveland's part in trading him. Denver is trying, too, but has offered nothing of real value the Bay's way. It should surprise no one that teams are balking on swallowing Jax's escalating loot ($8.45M next year; $9.25M in 2011-12; $10M in '12-'13) into uncertain, new collective bargaining agreement territory.

If the Warriors don't deal Jackson by Dec. 15, when players signed over the summer are eligible to be moved, don't be surprised if they hold onto him until just before the trade deadline. That is, barring another Jax outburst

http://www.nba.com/2009/news/features/david_aldridge/11/02/aldridge.mmpg/

[Ice009]

What does he mean by heat? I wonder who the Heat was from. Spurs side I guess?

[SpurNation]

Talented or not...do the Spurs want his phsychotic behavior on the team? If anybody knows Jax it's this staff.

They can make it to the finals without him though he is definately a talented player. But the arguement isn't whether he's talented or not...it's how he would effect the chemistry of this team. He's already proving to be not worth the effort in Golden State even though he's talented as all get out.

Something should be noted and recognized of that fact. Obviously the Spurs do recognize that both through past experience and current situations.

[CGD]

Broussard looks like a fool.

[Ice009]

Talented or not...do the Spurs want his phsychotic behavior on the team? If anybody knows Jax it's this staff.

They can make it to the finals without him though he is definately a talented player. But the arguement isn't whether he's talented or not...it's how he would effect the chemistry of this team. He's already proving to be not worth the effort in Golden State even though he's talented as all get out.

Something should be noted and recognized of that fact. Obviously the Spurs do recognize that both through past experience and current situations.

We had chemistry last season too and where did that get us. The issue with the Spurs about SJac cannot be chemistry could it. He's played on the team before so the Spurs know him quite well.
Didn't Pop also say last season or the year before that not everyone has to be a Choir boy to play on the team?

I would like people to stop going on about it unless they heard it directly from the Spurs they don't want him for chemistry reasons. Surely it would have to be his contract? or maybe the want a big man more? or GS want too much for him.

[SpurNation]

We had chemistry last season too and where did that get us. The issue with the Spurs about SJac cannot be chemistry could it. He's played on the team before so the Spurs know him quite well.
Didn't Pop also say last season or the year before that not everyone has to be a Choir boy to play on the team?

I would like people to stop going on about it unless they heard it directly from the Spurs they don't want him for chemistry reasons. Surely it would have to be his contract? or maybe the want a big man more? or GS want too much for him.

Maybe so. But it doesn't mean they are interested in Jax anymore so than when he first left.

And definately not worth giving up Manu. But...if the team would think he would be worth it in a trade for Mahinmi/Mason and or Finley...I wouldn't scorn that decision either.

But I'm not going to fret over it not happening.

[exstatic]

Is Goldenstate San Antonio?
Is that even a relevant question? He's shown that he'll use a team for money, and then throw them in front of the bus. I'd like Jack 2003 back, but I don't believe that person exists any more. The Spurs were able to control him, because he was cuttable, not making much money. That's not the case any more.

What does he mean by heat? I wonder who the Heat was from. Spurs side I guess?

Can you read? Both Broussard (retraction) and Aldridge are saying SA is NOT TALKING TO G.S. You wishing it will happen won't make it so.

[Ice009]

Is that even a relevant question? He's shown that he'll use a team for money, and then throw them in front of the bus. I'd like Jack 2003 back, but I don't believe that person exists any more. The Spurs were able to control him, because he was cuttable, not making much money. That's not the case any more.


Can you read? Both Broussard (retraction) and Aldridge are saying SA is NOT TALKING TO G.S. You wishing it will happen won't make it so.

I'm not wishing anything mate and yes Goldenstate thing is relevant. I am saying
that SJax wants to win and that is what he cares about right now so I don't think we will have ANY problem at all with him here playing up. If you think otherwise that is your choice.

I said the SPURS need to talk to Goldenstate about him as I think he would be a great addition and help a lot. I'm not up late at night wishing we got him on the team. I would just like to see the Spurs look at all available options like SJax who wants out. If you can improve the team a great deal by making a trade why not do it or at least look into it???

Personally I do want him on the team if all it takes is some of those players, but I am OK with us not getting him and looking at other options like a big man instead.

[mountainballer]

let's look at the facts:
Sjax has been on the market for several weeks, no matter what has been announced or disclaimed every other day.
but no deal happened.
why not? we know most points, but again:
-his deal runs till 2013 and is structured very cap unfriendly and will pay the then 35 years old Jackson 10 million per. even a team in win now mode will hesitate to swallow such a contract.
-Sjax has a history of getting into trouble. even if he didn't in the last years, pictures of him getting into the stands or reports of him firing a gun during a fight are still in the mind of most GMs. (fans tend to call a guy reformed if there are now shocking news for 3 weeks)
-Sjax has a reputation of being disloyal. this point is constantly ignored on this site, but it might be the major reason why GSW didn't find a taker till now. a guy who signs a big extension and immediately turns around, starts to whine and demands a trade (to a winning team).

what do teams see:
-a good player (good but not good enough for a franchise player), who thinks be is better than he really is and always feels he deserves more (money, respect, minutes, shots)
-a great athlete, but turning 32 this season. the critical point for all players who's game is based on athleticism.
-he might be available for a not so big price, but the risk for the taker is quite high.

Cleveland currently is the team that has a big need (considering the precarious West situation), is in the win now mode and is willing to burn as much money as needed to keep Lebron and/or win the ring. they won't be willing to give up any player, who might be needed down the road (like Z. they know they will need size against the Celtics and Magic, but Shaq is old.)
my guess is, they constantly offer the smallest possible package (like West+Hickson+J.Williams), knowing that there isn't much competition for Sjax.
and the Warriors will scatter rumors that there are many interested parties, like Spurs, Hornets etc. to get a somehow interesting offer.
naive "newsbreakers" like Broussard are just tools in this game.

[Spursfan 87]

lets see how we fare against the lakers and dallas before talking about jax

[Ice009]

lets see how we fare against the lakers and dallas before talking about jax

They are actually the two teams I am thinking about when talking about acquiring him. His perimeter defense could be a great help against those teams.

Anyway, I like your suggestion. Let's see how we match up with the good teams first.

[SpurCharger]

Sjax Is A Good Player.... But Not better Then Manu.... Finley/Mahinmi/Mason...... but nobody else...

[galvatron3000]

Duncan
Mcdyess
Jackson
Jefferson
Parker

Ginobili
Hill
Blair
Hairston
Ratliff
Finley

Haislip

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

Duncan
Mcdyess
Jackson
Jefferson
Parker

Ginobili
Hill
Blair
Hairston
Ratliff
Finley

Haislip

This team would have to rely too much on small ball, I thought that was a big time no-no to most people. Looks good on paper, but I don't think it'd work and I don't for a second think the Spurs have even the smallest interest in trading for Jax.

[I. Hustle]

:lol Has this thread really gone this far?

How can you people really be arguing over S Jax?


You guys are idiots.

[MajorMike]

Ok, let's look at this from a slightly different point of view.

The only thing I look to is this... the Spurs know their clock is ticking. Duncan has two or three left at championship level. TP has two years left on his deal. RJ has a 15 mil PO next year. Manu is in the final year of what has been a dissapointing extension due to injuries. Manu doesn't HAVE to sign back with the Spurs; the Spurs will likely not give Manu the same money he got before if he isn't back to his All Star/6th-man level. The only 3 players we know FOR CERTAIN will be back next year are Tim, TP and Dice. Realistically I would expect RJ not to turn down a 15 Mil option (if his time here sucks he isn't going to get 15 Mil elsewhere and if he is an All Star he is going to want a long term deal at the 15 Mil level and I don't see that happening).

Let's face it; this is the last rodeo for the Tim-led Spurs. If Manu isn't the cog that is going to drive the train he is going to be traded. With an expiring contract and his pedigree there are a bunch of teams that would LOVE to get him. If the Spurs have shown anything, it is that no matter who you are you are not safe from being traded or cut (Elliott, Kerr, Malik, Bowen, Barry - some of the most beloved Spurs, ok so not all the greatest but the idea is still there).

For the first time ever Holt went over the cap; he knows the clock is ticking. This is the time to get another ring or it ain't happening. TP is not a certainty to re-up, nor is Manu or RP. The current roster is not going to win it all. You can aregue and holler all you want that it can be done, but not in the state they are in. Manu isn't 2003 or even 2005 Manu. Mason and Finley aren't going to lock up Kobe/Dirk/LeBron/Pierce on D like Bruce did. We are destined to be the biggest threat to the Lakers and nothing more at this point. Now we obviously do not know about player progression; I mean, who knew in 2001 that TP was going to be an All Star? Hell, Speedy got more crunch-time play in the 2001 Finals than TP did. So that mean, yes maybe Blair and Ian could rise to be that Pau or similar not quite an All Star but a great complimentary player. At this point, I don't ever see Ian being that.

The point is, Holt knows what we all know - time is winding down. There is a major rebuilding upcoming. He is doing things he hasn't done before. Our Euro picks haven't panned out after Manu and TP like they were supposed to. Something else needs to be done. That something may be bringing back an attitude in the hopes that Pop and Tim are the ones that can reign him in.

All I am saying is that I don't believe that we can say there is no way we will trade Manu and no way we would bring in a big contract and no way we will bring SJax back, because a year ago we would have all said there is no way Bruce gets traded and Holt goes over the cap - but it happened. Everyone being indignant about how the Spurs are this way and Holt is that way and Manu is this to the city and all that stuff - you might as well can it because there are only 4 people on the bench that we know will for certain be there at the end of the year: Tim, TP, RJ and Pop.

We all want All Star Manu to be there, but I truely believe that average Manu will not.

[MaNu4Tres]

Ok, let's look at this from a slightly different point of view.

The only thing I look to is this... the Spurs know their clock is ticking. Duncan has two or three left at championship level. TP has two years left on his deal. RJ has a 15 mil PO next year. Manu is in the final year of what has been a dissapointing extension due to injuries. Manu doesn't HAVE to sign back with the Spurs; the Spurs will likely not give Manu the same money he got before if he isn't back to his All Star/6th-man level. The only 3 players we know FOR CERTAIN will be back next year are Tim, TP and Dice. Realistically I would expect RJ not to turn down a 15 Mil option (if his time here sucks he isn't going to get 15 Mil elsewhere and if he is an All Star he is going to want a long term deal at the 15 Mil level and I don't see that happening).

Let's face it; this is the last rodeo for the Tim-led Spurs. If Manu isn't the cog that is going to drive the train he is going to be traded. With an expiring contract and his pedigree there are a bunch of teams that would LOVE to get him. If the Spurs have shown anything, it is that no matter who you are you are not safe from being traded or cut (Elliott, Kerr, Malik, Bowen, Barry - some of the most beloved Spurs, ok so not all the greatest but the idea is still there).

For the first time ever Holt went over the cap; he knows the clock is ticking. This is the time to get another ring or it ain't happening. TP is not a certainty to re-up, nor is Manu or RP. The current roster is not going to win it all. You can aregue and holler all you want that it can be done, but not in the state they are in. Manu isn't 2003 or even 2005 Manu. Mason and Finley aren't going to lock up Kobe/Dirk/LeBron/Pierce on D like Bruce did. We are destined to be the biggest threat to the Lakers and nothing more at this point. Now we obviously do not know about player progression; I mean, who knew in 2001 that TP was going to be an All Star? Hell, Speedy got more crunch-time play in the 2001 Finals than TP did. So that mean, yes maybe Blair and Ian could rise to be that Pau or similar not quite an All Star but a great complimentary player. At this point, I don't ever see Ian being that.

The point is, Holt knows what we all know - time is winding down. There is a major rebuilding upcoming. He is doing things he hasn't done before. Our Euro picks haven't panned out after Manu and TP like they were supposed to. Something else needs to be done. That something may be bringing back an attitude in the hopes that Pop and Tim are the ones that can reign him in.

All I am saying is that I don't believe that we can say there is no way we will trade Manu and no way we would bring in a big contract and no way we will bring SJax back, because a year ago we would have all said there is no way Bruce gets traded and Holt goes over the cap - but it happened. Everyone being indignant about how the Spurs are this way and Holt is that way and Manu is this to the city and all that stuff - you might as well can it because there are only 4 people on the bench that we know will for certain be there at the end of the year: Tim, TP, RJ and Pop.

We all want All Star Manu to be there, but I truely believe that average Manu will not.

Couldn't disagree more.

[wildbill2u]

Are there other talented players out there who can be had for less than 10 million at age 35? I think so.

Is Jax a disruptive whiner if he doesn't get big time minutes to stroke his big time ego? I think so

Are we better off without him. I think so.

[Blackjack]

I agree with the majority of your post, mountainballer, and especially Cleveland being the most likely suitor. But I have to take exception with Jack being the type of player that relies on his athleticism; I'm not sure if some teams view him as a great athlete, but I think they'd be a little misguided if they did.

Jack should actually age pretty well. He's actually more of a below the rim player than some would suspect and he has the size and strength to still be effective on both ends of the court, as he hits the inevitable slow-down that all players do. He's got a post game, a must-honor 3-point shot, and the length to keep him competitive defensively by using more spacing than quickness.

Now don't get me wrong, he won't be worth what he'll be getting paid. (that contract is just a killer) But if, and I stress 'if', there's an owner not worried about the cash as much as a title and Jack comes in with the right mindset and attitude? They'd have a nice player for pretty much the duration of the contract; it'd definitely be a big gamble though, given the cap ramifications and the potential volatility Jack presents.


All I am saying is that I don't believe that we can say there is no way we will trade Manu and no way we would bring in a big contract and no way we will bring SJax back, because a year ago we would have all said there is no way Bruce gets traded and Holt goes over the cap - but it happened. Everyone being indignant about how the Spurs are this way and Holt is that way and Manu is this to the city and all that stuff - you might as well can it because there are only 4 people on the bench that we know will for certain be there at the end of the year: Tim, TP, RJ and Pop.

We all want All Star Manu to be there, but I truely believe that average Manu will not.

I'm sure the '01 mention, in regards to the Finals, was just a typo so I'm not going to bother with that. But I believe it's safe to say that we can say that Manu won't be getting traded this year; well, unless there's some absolutely devastating turn of events that for all intents and purposes ends the Spurs' season rather abruptly.

The Spurs believe, and rightfully so, that given a healthy Ginobili they're in the ballgame with a look at a championship. I think they're a role-playing piece or two away from being a likely suitor to the crown, but they're definitely in the ballgame with a shot given a couple of fortuitous breaks.

You know you're not going to get equal value for Ginobili and there's no one out there that you could honestly bring in that would help complete the championship puzzle better. There's just not some lesser talent out there that possesses a better, more needed, skill set at a different position; they need what Manu brings from the wing position and the only people that bring what he has, well, they'd be franchise players that the Spurs will never acquire.

And to the notion that Manu isn't the '03 or '05 player he used to be. Well, given health, and considering '08 was his best individual year, he's actually better than '03 and closer to '05 than you might think; '05 was the best Manu in most people's eyes because of the spectacular playoff run but Manu absolutely peaked individually in '08 prior to the ankle injury.

Manu's a gamble in a lot of ways given his health and importance to the team's title aspirations. But given Tim's window, it's a gamble they've got to take.

[duncan228]

SI.com Roundtable (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/basketball/nba/11/03/roundtable.artest/index.html)

2. Stephen Jackson wants out of Golden State. If you were a general manager, would you take a chance on him? What team would be the best fit for his talents and mercurial personality?

Thomsen: I doubt he'll be traded because he has four years at almost $36 million on the books (including this season). He could help contenders like the Cavaliers, Nuggets or Hornets, but they would have to give up a little talent in the exchange -- and even then the weight of Jackson's contract might be too much for them to bear. The Bobcats, Knicks and Timberwolves all have needs on the wing, but Charlotte isn't likely to spend the money, New York is saving for 2010 and Minnesota may prefer to wait and see if its cap space can be applied for a more established star.

McCallum: I've always had a soft spot for Jackson, who, like Artest, is a good guy at heart. So, yes, I would take a chance on him. The normal answer here is that he has to go to a team with a clearly defined "culture," a place where he can be kept in line, like San Antonio. But he's already been there, so that's out. He needs a strong coaching figure on at least a decent team. Here are three suggestions: Washington, New Orleans and Utah.

Mannix: It depends on what your situation is. If you are a team on the brink of a championship -- say, Cleveland -- you might be willing to take a chance on a hard-nosed swingman with a history of making big shots in the playoffs. But if you're a middling team -- say, Chicago -- there is no reason to add Jackson's questionable attitude and big contract. Still, the most logical destination remains Cleveland. The Cavs have not been shy about taking on massive egos (see O'Neal, Shaquille) if they think it will help them win a title. And Jackson is still a dangerous shooter who would get plenty of open looks in that offense.

Markazi: I would have no problem taking a chance on Jackson. At this point in his career, Jackson doesn't want to be on a rebuilding team. Despite his trade demands, I don't see him as a cancer. He won a championship with the Spurs in 2003 and helped the Warriors pull off the biggest upset in playoff history in 2007. Last season, he was one of four players (along with LeBron James, Chris Paul and Dwyane Wade) to average at least 20 points, six assists and five rebounds. This isn't some head case at the end of his career; Jackson is one of the best players in the league when he's motivated and in the right situation. I would think Cleveland would be the best fit for him.

[LOL@MavsFan]

By Chris Broussard

For now, this is a rumor because I haven't verified it with sources close to the situation, but I've been told by a few people around the league that the Stephen Jackson trade talk is heating up. I'm told that Golden State is mulling several offers, and one person told me he expects something to happen within the next few days. I don't know the particulars of any supposed offers, but I'm told Cleveland, Denver, San Antonio, New Orleans and the Los Angeles Clippers are all interested in Jackson.

Golden State wants Zydrunas Ilgauskas from Cleveland, but the Cavs aren't willing to give him up because they need him to back up Shaq. The Warriors would like Manu Ginobili from the Spurs, but I can't see the Spurs parting with Manu. I'm told the Warriors' discussions with Denver were brief because Jackson's $7.65 million salary doesn't fit under their $7.4 million trade exception.

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop

Trade Manu?
......PASS

[Agloco]

Like I've said before, I'd shit an enormous brick if Cleveland actually engineered a deal for him. James and Jackson on the court together is just plain frightening.

Spurs don't really need him though. I'd say make a play to get an upgrade over Finley/Mason only if his attitude was right, but he's not the same SJax from 2003 unfortunately. :depressed

[HarlemHeat37]

Meh, I don't think it would be a big deal..

Cleveland's frontcourt is horrible, so is their offensive coaching, and that will always keep them out of the Finals when you're going against 2 dominant teams like Boston and Orlando..

[objective]

this past weekend ESPN Classic showed the 07 game 6 against the Mavs.

Once again in a clinching moment, Jackson was clutch all over that game raining threes and playing solidly otherwise.

He's like the anti-Bonner.

Jackson is the kind of player who will get bought out the last season of his contract no matter who he plays for. If the Spurs could get him without giving up Manu or Blair then it's hard to argue against it other than money issues.

[TDMVPDPOY]

i throw in a few draft picks and european rights we hold...for jax...

his worth the gamble

[NFGIII]

I'd love to have the 2003 version of SJAx but he doesn't exist as stated by estactic. Anyway he brings a 36 million price tag which I think Holt will pass on. If we trade for him who is leaving? Manu? Bonner/Finley/??who?? How does the FO balance the trade in terms of money? I don't see this ever happening.

I sometimes think back to the '04 season when he turned down a 10mil 3 year deal thinking he was worth much more only to sign with Atlanta for a mil for 1 year (even though that turned into a huge deal with Indiana the following year). If he had signed then no Hedo and we probably repeat or at tleast make the Finals against a very good Piston team.:depressed

[mountainballer]

I agree with the majority of your post, mountainballer, and especially Cleveland being the most likely suitor. But I have to take exception with Jack being the type of player that relies on his athleticism; I'm not sure if some teams view him as a great athlete, but I think they'd be a little misguided if they did.

Jack should actually age pretty well. He's actually more of a below the rim player than some would suspect and he has the size and strength to still be effective on both ends of the court, as he hits the inevitable slow-down that all players do. He's got a post game, a must-honor 3-point shot, and the length to keep him competitive defensively by using more spacing than quickness.


you are right, he is pretty skilled and versatile and will be able to deliver on offense in some years. but IMO he will lose significantly on defense. I thought it could be a bit like it was with Finley.

[Blackjack]

you are right, he is pretty skilled and versatile and will be able to deliver on offense in some years. but IMO he will lose significantly on defense. I thought it could be a bit like it was with Finley.

Yeah, his defense will take a much bigger hit than his offense. But his size should at least give him the potential to transition to a different, but still useful defender in certain match-up's; I don't think I ever truly appreciated the size/length of Jack until he was no longer a Spur.

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

this past weekend ESPN Classic showed the 07 game 6 against the Mavs.

Once again in a clinching moment, Jackson was clutch all over that game raining threes and playing solidly otherwise.

He's like the anti-Bonner.

Jackson is the kind of player who will get bought out the last season of his contract no matter who he plays for. If the Spurs could get him without giving up Manu or Blair then it's hard to argue against it other than money issues.

Have they also shown the following series with the Jazz?

[TDMVPDPOY]

MAN if jax continues with his 20 4 4 performance, it be hard for other teams to come up with a nice package to get him....cause the warriors will want equal value out of him....

[Mel_13]

Don't forget Bobcats in Stephen Jackson sweepstakes

November 5, 2009 4:53 PM
By Marc Stein

It's been about a week since we had any certifiable chatter to pass along on the Stephen Jackson trade front. That's not because the Warriors have slowed the search for trade partners -- to the contrary -- but because the most interested parties (Cleveland and Denver) are generally high-payroll teams that can't easily absorb Jackson's long-term contract. The Cavs and the Nuggets, furthermore, just aren't teeming with tradeable (and available) assets to hook Golden State.

What we can confirm, though, is that Charlotte has to be mentioned more prominently on the list of interested suitors. We've briefly noted the Bobcats' interest in a couple of previous entries, but further checking reveals that the Bobs have seriously explored the prospect of trading for Jackson, apparently undaunted by the fact that they weren't mentioned when Jackson announced late in the summer that he wanted to be dealt to Cleveland, New York or one of the three Texas teams...

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/10397/dont-forget-bobcats-in-stephen-jackson-sweepstakes

[DPG21920]

DJ Augustin/Bell for Jax works and would give GS cap room and a talent in DJ.

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

Say the Spurs could put together a package of some kind (expirings, Mahinmi, a pick let's say), the question then is where the hell does Jackson fit for us, and after years roaming the world as a gunner could he come back in here and abide by Pop and the system? Big question, that.

I love the guy's talent, but we can't afford him to come in here and disrupt everything.

[galvatron3000]

This team would have to rely too much on small ball, I thought that was a big time no-no to most people. Looks good on paper, but I don't think it'd work and I don't for a second think the Spurs have even the smallest interest in trading for Jax.

If you look ar who is missing from the current team then you have to say they are playing small ball now.

[Mel_13]

UPDATE: I’m hearing too that Charlotte has shown interest in trading for Jackson, but there is nothing serious, not yet anyway. The Bobcats haven’t presented an offer that the Warriors really like. The Bobcats have not offered Boris Diaw, which is probably the player the Warriors would be most interested in. I know from Jackson’s camp that Charlotte is not a place Jackson wants to go. If those talks persist, don’t be surprised if Jackson tries to scare the Bobcats away from a deal before they sign on for a trade.

http://www.ibabuzz.com/warriors/2009/11/07/game-4-clippers-118-warriors-90/



• What, nobody wants to trade for Stephen Jackson? No surprise that the disgruntled Warrior has not been moved. It's not just that he is a pain to deal with, but few GMs want to take on his money, at his age and with his reputation. Besides getting $7.6 million this season, he has three years left and $27.6 million on his deal. "He's 31," said one GM. "Do you really want Stephen Jackson when he's 34?"

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/basketball/2009/11/07/2009-11-07_magic_johnson__larry_bird.html

[Chieflion]

DJ Augustin/Bell for Jax works and would give GS cap room and a talent in DJ.
I wonder why GS would do the trade. They already have Monta Ellis and Stephen Curry.

[Mel_13]

I wonder why GS would do the trade. They already have Monta Ellis and Stephen Curry.

The thing with GS is that they have made a succession of really stupid personnel decisions. Common sense that would apply to most FOs does not seem to apply there. I'm concerned that those idiots will wake up one morning and agree to include Anthony Randolph in a trade to one of the elite teams.

[mountainballer]

http://hoopshype.com/twitter_media.html
Ric Bucher: League sources: Add Miami to the teams interested in Stephen Jackson. And, according to a Jackson source, add Miami to his preferred list.

hmm. Heat would likely have to sacrifice some cap space 2010, but as it stands right now, they could take Sjax contract, re sign Wade AND still have enough cap space to go for a quality FA. (not a max FA though and they likely also wouldn't be able to re sign Haslem, if they acquire a FA).
or they get also rid of James Jones, who would be even more redundant, if they get Sjax. (I always thought J Jones would be interesting for the Spurs. still think so)

so, priority for them is re sign Wade. best chance to make this happen is a potential contender team. adding Sjax (for Q-Rich?) makes them already pretty good. if they also can get rid of Jones, they could go for Bosh or Amare, because a team with a core of Wade-Sjax-Beasley-Cook-Chalmers will look intriguing for either of them.
I can see this happen. if they even could manage to get Jones into the package for Sjax, the deal will be very attractive for them. they might be even willing to include Cook into the package, something that would make the package very attractive for the Warriors. (even if they don't need Cook, but I'm sure Nelson likes him)

[exstatic]

I don't see Miami doing it during the season. They have a plan they've stuck to almost as long as the Knicks, and I think they'll see it through. If they totally strike out next summer, then maybe they'll work something out as a consolation prize.

Trading for Jackson this year would put them out of the FA derby for any of the top (LeBron,Bosh) or second tier guys (Amare, Joe Johnson), who will only take the MAX salary. There are enough teams with money to make it a player's market.

[spursnatic]

Say the Spurs could put together a package of some kind (expirings, Mahinmi, a pick let's say), the question then is where the hell does Jackson fit for us, and after years roaming the world as a gunner could he come back in here and abide by Pop and the system? Big question, that.

I love the guy's talent, but we can't afford him to come in here and disrupt everything.
How the hell would he come in and disrupt everything?...We aren't playing well enough to disrupt anything?...But I really don't see how we would be able to get him anyways?...We are already way over the salary cap as it is, we would have to get rid of way to much to land Jackson...I would love to have Jackson back in black and silver, and I think he would work out good without any problems..No way would he come in here asking to be traded, he knows Pop and knows what Pop does and doesn't tollerate..I am all for it, if you could show me what it would take to get him?....

[mountainballer]

Trading for Jackson this year would put them out of the FA derby for any of the top (LeBron,Bosh) or second tier guys (Amare, Joe Johnson), who will only take the MAX salary. There are enough teams with money to make it a player's market.

well, I tried to demonstrate a scenario how they could stay a player in the free agency. no time to read? they need to get rid of Jones, then they will be able to still hand out the 16.2 million a max contract for Bosh (or Lebron) would cost them in the 1st year.
Jones is only guaranteed 40% of his 2010-13 salary. (about 6 million overall) Heat could even add some cash to cover a part of this. so, it shouldn't be impossible to find a taker for Jones.

(or he is part of the package. why not try Jones plus Wright plus teaser like money and pick?)

[Mel_13]

Jackson is now moving in the toxic asset category. IMO, GS will be lucky to get expiring contracts for him. It's becoming more likely that they will have to take back a bad contract to get rid of him.



Jackson's agent goes after Nelson

In an effort to get Golden State's disgruntled swingman Stephen Jackson traded as soon as possible, Jackson's agent, Mark Stevens, has gone on the offensive, attacking the credibility and character of Warriors coach Don Nelson.

In a telephone interview just moments after the Warriors lost to the Sacramento Kings Sunday night, Stevens lambasted Nelson, criticizing everything from his trustworthiness to his coaching ability. Leaving few stones unturned, Stevens gave his take on some controversies in Nelson's 31-year NBA coaching career.

"No one trusts Don Nelson," Stevens said. "When Nelson was in Milwaukee, Wayne Embry trusted him and brought him in, and he betrayed Embry. In Dallas, Mark Cuban took damn good care of him and his son [Donnie Nelson Jr.], and he betrayed Cuban. In Golden State, Chris Mullin hired him and trusted him and Nelson backstabbed him by reaching out to president Robert Rowell and blaming Mullin for everything that was going wrong with the Warriors."

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=4636820

[mountainballer]

Jackson is now moving in the toxic asset category. IMO, GS will be lucky to get expiring contracts for him. It's becoming more likely that they will have to take back a bad contract to get rid of him.


jesus, stop this! this thread will be flooded with proposals, that the Warriors will send us Sjax plus Randolph or Curry plus a pick if we send them our expiring contracts.:lol

but yes, the Jackson camp is putting a lot of pressure on the Warriors. that one for sure.
I wonder why the Jazz are not in the talks. (maybe they are?) they really have a problem at the wing and they could offer several different packages that work. they could even work out a package, that sends out more money than brings back on Sjax. they could save quite some money short term, considering the lux tax.

btw. taking back another bad contract......
I assume the Warriors priority is to avoid that. they are around cap for next year, I'm pretty sure they want to become a player in the free agency. they will need to get rid of Sjax to start with, but need to also get rid of at least another 2 contracts. Maggette will be almost impossible to move, so it will be Azubuike and Turiaf. and that's something to look at for the Spurs. they might also be one of the few teams interested in Ian.

[wildbill2u]

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_ylt=AtinaoUZ4KezFyT54htkNI28vLYF?slug=mc-jackson111009&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

Check out the attitude from Jax to his teammates and vice versa. This guy is a running sore and would not be a good addition to our team chemistry.

[bigbendbruisebrother]

The Warriors would like Manu Ginobili from the Spurs, but I can't see the Spurs parting with Manu.

:nope

[TDMVPDPOY]

MAYBE nelson should trade him to the spurs to screw the mavs, and whatever team he hates....

dont the spurs have a really good relationship with him? didnt we allow him in preseason training sessions 2 seasons ago?

[Ice009]

I really think the Spurs should see if they can get jack for expiring contracts.

Mason+Finley+Ian are 3 expendable players. I like Matt Bonner too much to trade him. Mason and Finley seem to be gaining smaller roles on the Spurs by the day, and they would fit in perfect with Nelly's system.

Does that work with out including Bonner money wise????

If that works PUT IN THE OFFER NOW.

[HarlemHeat37]

I think Bonner would be a piece that would be a key for Nelson though..

I'd love Jackson, but if we're going to make a trade, it should definitely be for a big man..

[MaNu4Tres]

The only way we trade Bonner is if it's for a big man.

Ratliff is looking like anything but reliable. Then again that could be a premature statement since the season is still very young.

[MaNu4Tres]

I wish we had shopped Mason heavily in the off-season whenever the Jefferson trade went down. Then again there's still some hope.

[HarlemHeat37]

Mason/Bonner/Finley for Jackson/Turiaf works..I don't know if I do it though, depends on other options for big men..

Turiaf is a very good shot blocker, but his individual defense is pretty average..

[Mel_13]

Don Nelson: "It's harder than hell to trade that guy."

November 11, 2009 5:07 PM
By Henry Abbott

Don Nelson was on radio station KNBR in San Francisco talking about Stephen Jackson. He couldn't have been clearer that he's no longer assuming things will work out.

“We know Jack wants out, we’re trying to accommodate him," he explains. "It’s harder than hell to trade that guy. He’s got his history; he’s got a long-term contract. We’re trying.”

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/10556/don-nelson-its-harder-than-hell-to-trade-that-guy

[senorglory]

3 years, $28 million? Too much from us for an aging SJax. We could afford him on his way up, maybe we will be able to again afford him on his way down, but we can't pay his peak market price, put too much a crimp in our style.

We need that money for future big men.

[MaNu4Tres]

Mason/Bonner/Finley for Jackson/Turiaf works..I don't know if I do it though, depends on other options for big men..

Turiaf is a very good shot blocker, but his individual defense is pretty average..

Post #55 in the thread.

I think Turiaf would be a great addition. Love his game and energy and like you said shotblocking.

His contract is reasonable as well.