i got a feeling jax might be better than ginobli this season...
Printable View
i got a feeling jax might be better than ginobli this season...
Oh no doubt. Think manu will play pretty good, but i think jax has a better season in store. My dream-manu and jax both play great for the spurs. My nightmare-Manu gets reinjured, jax goes to the mavs/cavs and plays amazing and it comes back to haunt us. I rooting for my dream, haQuote:
Originally Posted by TDMVPDPOY
Oh come on man, everybody besides Tim and Tony sucked in that Dallas series. You can't just blame it all on Roger like that. I just think it's funny how you say he's slow, one-dimensional, and bad defender like he's the #1 option on the team or something. He's a freakin role player! I don't know why some people think you need 12 all-stars on a team for them to be good :lol. Roger is a knock down catch and shoot shooter and thats all he's gonna need to be with The Big 3 and now RJ ready to go next season. Last year he was our 3rd and even 2nd best scorer at times and this season he'll be our 5th. That just shows how much better we'll be next season and I don't know how you could complain about that to be honest.Quote:
Originally Posted by holcs50
point taken sa. Yea i admit i might be too hard on mase sometimes, but IMO it still comes down to the team we had for the playoffs last year. Your right it was completely only tony and tim. Even as a role player he should've been able to do something-and he folded hard. I'm confident in the team we have now and love what has happened in the off-season....Quote:
Originally Posted by sa_kid20
But this has come up, not our choosing but its there, and you have to put things into perspective. Holt willing to pay lux tax till TDs contract is up----yep. Spurs have expiring contracts to be traded----yep. SJax is so much better than mase and bonner------yep.
We all are stoked at what already has happened this off-season, i mean it's the first off-season spurs fans can really get excited for in a long time...but call me/some fans greedy when a situation comes up as Sjax has it just makes perfect sense....spurs are dumb if they don't try...really dumb.
Quote:
Originally Posted by holcs50
Well you're right that Holt seems willing to go into the lux tax as he's already proven and yes Jax is a better player than Roger, but i just don't think it makes sense to go after him. Why would the Spurs take even more of a lux tax hit to bring in another scorer when we already have the best scoring team we've had in a really long time? If we would have never gotten RJ I think this would be something to seriously consider but thats not the case. Don't get me wrong, I love Jax and i wish he would have never left but in this case i just don't think it's a good fit. That's just me though.
Heard nothing from the Warriors management yet. I doubt they would trade S-Jax.
The following statement was released today by Golden State Warriors General Manager Larry Riley:Quote:
Originally Posted by Chieflion
“Stephen Jackson has been a true professional since arriving here three seasons ago, and our expectations of him have not changed despite his recent comments. He’s been one of our most consistent and productive players during that time. We expect that same display of professionalism as we begin to prepare for training camp and the start of the upcoming regular season.”
“As far as his remarks on playing for a championship…that’s not the first time we’ve heard it because that’s the goal that he sets for himself and his teammates every season. That’s the type of confidence that he exudes as a player and the reason that he has endeared himself to our fans. That’s who Stephen Jackson is.”
“We have always understood his desire to contend with the NBA’s best; that’s an aspiration that is shared by our entire organization. We will continue in our quest to achieve that goal, and to be aggressive in pursuit of those results.”
http://blogs.mercurynews.com/kawakam...sonal-conduct/
It sounds like GS is not open to anything right now...but as we get into the season you can certainly file this one right beside Rip Hamilton as a potential trade target if Manu goes down or if Mason is not looking up to the task.
RJ, Mason, Manu = no need for Jax and his obese contract
Jax would just be a pain in the ass anyway, no thanks
Quote:
Warriors' Stephen Jackson not likely moving to Mavericks
By Mark Miller
Yesterday it seemed like there was some momentum toward the Golden State Warriors sending the disgruntled Stephen Jackson(notes) to the Dallas Mavericks in an attempt at a salary dump or at least in exchange for the big contract of Jason Terry(notes).
But now it's looking like there is no way Jackson will end up in Dallas this season, according to the Dallas Morning News. The Mavs are apparently over the luxury tax already and Jackson would end up costing them $70 million over four years. Even owner Mark Cuban has his limits.
But it's not just the massive dollar amount that is keeping the team from going after Jackson. Dallas apparently doesn't want Jackson to horn in on any Shawn Marion(notes)/Josh Howard playing time.
So Jackson will just have to remain disgruntled just like so many great Warriors before him.
Source: Dallas Morning News
Nice to know there are some monetary limits in Dallas.
There's no real reason for the Warriors to trade Jack now, but it would be nice just to kill the speculation.
+1Quote:
Originally Posted by chumpdumper
+1Quote:
Originally Posted by benefactor
Sounds like GS is reeling him in a little.
Well, it sounds more like no teams are interested in SJax and his ugly contract. Warriors will have hard time to find a taker for him.
I dont see what is the problem with Jax's contract. Duncan is going to take less money (about 4M) next year, with that money the spurs can resign manu. Assuming that they trade Mason and Bonner, the spurs still have Theo, finley and M.Williams coming off the books next year, with that money they can bring Tiago next year, and resign hill and Ian.
Trading for SJax is a no brainer.
If all it takes is a combo of Bonner, Mason, and Finley then you send the limo for those three and get the mariachis read for Jax on the other plane.
I love all the Spurs as a team and the organization. I would get sad if some of the role players (Mason, Fin, and Bonner in this case) get traded for SJax. But I still want to do it if it improves the team.
I think the Lakers and Mavs [the (only) two teams that always give us match up problem in the playoffs] will not be happy if it ends up that way.
we need to trade Mason and Bonner for him, it's a great opportunity. even with his long contract it will be worth this, Holt decide that he pay for a championship so it will be smart to pay a little more and to get this piece. even though we improve alot this summer there is feeling that we need another piece to improve our chances for the title because others teams that was contenders last year have improve alot and also there is the thing with Manu injury.
i also think that Jax contract it's not alot overpaid, he could give good value for his contract in the next 3-4 years. i think after next year we could keep Manu for alot less money and our salary will not increase by much even with Jax.
in our wing position we have weak players like Finley, Mason and some youngsters behind the starters Manu and RJ, add to it the problem with Manu injury and you get a need for another good wing player - need for Jax, and also Jax can be great 4 for small ball.
if we want a championship it's important to get Jax!!!
Didn't see this, apologies if I missed it.
Jack was never coming back
By Buck Harvey
Stephen Jackson says he has requested a trade. "I want to be in a situation where I can continually be in the playoffs and get another ring," he said.
Years ago, in San Antonio, he was in that situation.
Jackson instead chose to pursue money, and there's nothing wrong with that. That's his business.
The years passed. The Spurs won two more rings without Jackson, and this spring they began to look at ways to win another.
Why not trade for Jackson?
The same issue got in the way.
There were other issues. For one, there were no signs the Warriors were looking to trade Jackson. It's also unlikely the Warriors would have wanted the package of players who Milwaukee took in exchange for Richard Jefferson.
Another issue is Jack. Last week, when Gregg Popovich talked with the media, he said Jefferson was like Jackson "without the drama."
Popovich laughed and said he loved the guy. Still, Popovich knows well the moody risk-reward package.
The risk was underlined even when Jackson talked about wanting to leave Golden State. Then he said he would prefer to play for any of the Texas teams, as well as Cleveland, and that makes sense. Mike Brown was his mentor with the Spurs.
But then Jackson also listed the Knicks as an option. This move is to win a title, right?
Still, the reward part of the package was clearly there in 2003, when Jackson seemingly ended every playoff series with a clutch 3-pointer. He often raises his game for the big moment, and Jefferson doesn't have the same reputation. Jackson can also play defense, and he always got along with Tim Duncan. At 31, he averaged a career high 20.7 points a game last season.
But earlier in the summer, when the Spurs were throwing around ideas, no one on staff saw Jackson as a serious option. A primary reason was money.
The same Jackson who now wants to leave Golden State to play for a winner wanted another contract with the Warriors not long ago. Again, this is part of the Jackson personality. The Warriors obliged, signing Jackson to a three-year extension just last November.
Money isn't the problem next season. Jackson will earn about half as much as Jefferson will.
Instead, it's the length of the contract. His deal doesn't expire until 2013, and no Spur -- not Duncan, not Tony Parker -- is on the books that long.
it really seems to be hard to understand for many members:
there is no indication Spurs could trade for Sjax. absolutely not.
that's not without a reason: Spurs just don't need him.
he would not make this team better!
this team needs some role players for defined roles (like what Bruce played)
just looking at Sjax numbers (for Nelson) doesn't help. he won't get the shots and touches and role he has with the Warriors. period.
if people look at his numbers, they should look at the right numbers:
for example scoring efficiency or better (and easier to read) points per shot!
what we learn there: Sjax just isn't an efficient scorer. better: Sjax is a pretty inefficient scorer. in his best season, he scored 1.23 PPS.
(for comparison: in his "worst" season Manu scored 1.25PPS. usually Manu scored between 1.40 and 1.50PPS)
RJ always was an efficient scorer. not as great as Manu, but decent. (worst season 1.25PPS, best season 1.51PPS). I'm sure this was a big reason for the Spurs to get him.
if Sjax would join this team, he would get the role Fin got 2005 and he would also very likely provide as much as help as Finley in his first season with the Spurs. with the one little difference: Finley delivered for 2.5 million per and Sjax costs 7.7 million.
there is a good chance that also in 3 years Sjax will provide as much help as Fin did last year. with the big difference: Fin still did it for 2.5 million but Sjax then would cost 10.
so, it's not a no brainer to get Sjax if it was possible.
it's a no brainer to pass on him.
I would be shocked to learn that Spurs have called GS about Jackson.Quote:
Originally Posted by Phila_Chamberlain
The only way I could see Spurs being interested in SJax is if Manu or RJ has a very serious injury.