Printable View
39 minutes, 19 boards (5 offensive), 8 blocks, 9 pts (1-7 FT, 6 missed, could have been more) :wow
What if the spurs had executed the Biedrins/Law/Jackson for Parker/Finley trade as I proposed earlier in the season before Jack went to Charlotte, do you do this trade in hindsight now?
Parker was a beast today too.. but it seems TP only plays hard when he has something to prove (against CP3) ... tough call now.
Discuss.
Even if the Spurs want to do this deal, the Warriors would not do the deal. Pointless discussion.
Great "raising the bar" thread.
Why wouldn't they have? They wanted to get rid of Jackson in the worst way. He was defenitely available to the highest bidder IMO.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chieflion
wake me up when biedrins has a string of good games, let alone a complete season ...
Getting rid of Jackson does not mean giving up a legit good center. And Jackson, as bad as the Warriors wanted to "get rid" of him, would not give up their franchise centers. They don't grow on trees. And what are they going to do with a lineup of Monta Ellis, Tony Parker and Stephen Curry.Quote:
Originally Posted by TJastal
Bulls are one of those teams (like the Grizz and Bobcats) that gave the spurs fits. Biedrins was the biggest difference maker for the warriors (+/- of +23).
Only 1 game, but 1 damn impressive game.
Move Curry to backup role, Parker starts along with Ellis.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chieflion
Don Nelson would love Parker's up tempo no defense scoring mentality, and likewise Tony would thrive in that style. Warriors would simply outscore opponents to win games.
/thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chieflion
Wake me up when this trade was actually on the table and not just in the OPs head.Quote:
Originally Posted by anonoftheinternets
lol at Jastal making a thread for one biedrins good game to justify a trage parker.
Why not a trade parker for R. Lopez thread ? Lopez put a 19 (8 out of 10) 7 3 stat line tonite ! yeaaaahhhhh
Parker would ease the burden of scoring from Ellis and keep him from playing 50 minutes a game. Curry could easily become the backup.Quote:
Originally Posted by RuffnReadyOzStyle
/thread
Is Stephen Jackson a sun? Uh, no. Jackson of course is the centerpiece of that trade, you ding-dong.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brazil
great idea to put backup a young guy who gave a 26 10 6 + 1 stl line toniteQuote:
Originally Posted by TJastal
Put him in the "6th man role" then ala Ginobili. Their bench sucks ass he'd be perfect in the role.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brazil
so what ? you created a thread with biedrins lines not jax+biedrins, I think you wanted to show that biedrins is no scrub right ?Quote:
Originally Posted by TJastal
It was a trade I proposed earlier in the year, while Jax was bitching to the media every other day for a trade.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brazil
And I didn't need just this game to show Biedrins is no scrub, in fact he (along with Jackson) were huge reasons the warriors knock off the hugely favored mavericks in the 2006 playoffs.
Wow....ONE good game. You started a thread on a pipe dream trade idea of yours? :lolQuote:
Originally Posted by TJastal
Back earlier in the year when Jackson was talking to the media day after day to be traded I don't think it was a "pipe dream", it could have very easily been accomplished.Quote:
Originally Posted by crc21209
And as stated before, couple years back Biedrins put up nice numbers as the starting center for the warriors in the playoffs against the ultimate "spur killers" .. the mavericks and ultimately helped them pull off a HUGE upset over a powerful maverick team.
So, not only do we have to imagine GS accepting the deal, we have to imagine that Jax is still there? WTF?
Why are you SO in love with every big overpaid stiff in the NBA?
:lolQuote:
Originally Posted by exstatic
The post was made "in hindsight". What's so hard about pretending for a second its the past and ask "what if we'd done this?".
Because those "overpaid stiffs" who protect the paint and rebound the basketball are hard to come by, esp the ones who are legit 7' tall.
And btw, how are we doing against teams like the bulls / grizz / bobcats who relentlessly pummel you with a string of long, athletic players? Oh, right we lost all 3 of those while getting murdered in the paint.
I don't even think it would have taken as much as Parker to entice Nelson to part ways with his "overpaid stiff" either.
His love affair with up tempo offensive players is well known, if you happen to play some defense your are expendable. He's got Rony Turiaf besides who can step into Biedrins' spot. Parker and Ellis would have formed their highest scoring backcourt since Hardaway/Mullin.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TJastal
I'm curious to see who would the Spurs PG be, b/c GHill plays more like a 2 guard and Acie Law has been a huge bust so far in his career.
That would be the biggest concern of the trade. You hope either Law (or CJ Watson could be tossed in) can run the backup point duty and do it hopefully a step above what Jacque Vaughn was. I would have put in Watson but the ESPN trade machine wouldn't allow me to include him for some reason even though he makes similar money as Law.Quote:
Originally Posted by blkroadrunners
That said, you still have Stephen Jackson as the "point forward" running the offense and providing alot of the lost playmaking.
Essentially, you'd have
C Biedrins
PF Duncan
SF Jefferson
SG Jackson (main playmaker)
PG Hill (main ballhandler)
Backups: Bonner, Blair, Mason Jr, Law/Watson, Ginobili, etc
You still have Manu running the 2nd unit as the playmaker and either Law/Watson as the main ballhandler.
I just realized Biedrins was 1 miss free throw and 2 blocks away from a triple double. :wow
TJastal, what are you doing man?
I wanted Jackson before he was traded from the Warriors and I still mention it every now and then, but I don't go around starting threads about it now that it is not a possibility since he has been traded.
How about trying to work a trade for RJ to Goldenstate for both Maggette and Beidrins. That is one I might be interested in, but not for Parker.
We need to look at who we can get right now that will help us this season. Why are you wasting your time with players that have already been traded?
I don't see a problem with making a thread like this when there is a poll thread still current and going 5 pages+ long on what swingman the spurs should have picked up, which coincidentally has Stephen Jackson as the top vote getter.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ice009
:nope
Notice how I didn't post in that one either. I don't see the point of that one either. It's all about who we can get now.Quote:
Originally Posted by TJastal
I said Stephen Jackson is better than RJ two months ago. Everyone basically said I'm stupid. Look at the amount of people ragging on RJ now.
My ideal trade was RJ, Bonner and Roger Mason Jr. for Maggette and Jackson. I think the Warriors would have done it because RJ fits into their run and gun system and they only have him for 1 or 2 more seasons, possibly one as he might have even opted out and they could have gotten rid of two long term contracts in Maggette and Jackson who both would have fit on the Spurs.
Maggette has shown that he can be a team player after that trade and he wanted to play here last season if the money was right. I am sure he appreciated Pop and Tim going after him and I think he would bust his ass here to try and play defense and also get to the foul line. I don't know if he would bust his ass on D for anyone else, but I really do think he would do it here if he played for the Spurs.
Stephen Jackson is a pretty overrated in terms of playmaking. He has a very low assist to TO ratio, and most of Charlotte's offense is ran through either Diaw or Felton, more so than Jack. I like Jack, and he's a versatile player/defender who hits clutch shots now and then, but he's really not efficient at other areas in his game.Quote:
Originally Posted by TJastal
Well, if that's true then I guess Hill would have to learn some playmaking on the fly. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by blkroadrunners
As a caveat at least we know Jefferson would play better without Parker. :)
Nah, I don't like this deal because Tiago Splitter is basically Biedrins with a post game.
Tiago signed with the spurs!? Wooot! When does he start?Quote:
Originally Posted by Spursfan 87
Biedrins has a pretty bad contract and he has 5 years left. Splitter is coming next year so that's a bad move. The spurs this year need a center with an expiring contract (Haywood or Camby)Quote:
Originally Posted by TJastal
Tiago Splitter verbally agreed to sign with the spurs? Boy I missed that thread completely, dayyyum.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spursfan 87
Somehow I get the feeling this thread hasn't gone the way TJastal had hoped it would've.
Well, theyre high on both Monta and Stephen curry, so I doubt they would ever consider a deal for Parker.
LOL are you ending your own thread?Quote:
Originally Posted by TJastal
What is the incentive of getting rid of their starting big man (one that don nelson will actually play consistently) to complicate the backcourt situation? Theyre obviously thrilled with Curry so why make him a back up, especially at the cost of losing a big man they just signed to a long term contact.
Stephen Jackson:Quote:
Originally Posted by angelbelow
"I wanted to be out pretty bad," Jackson told The Associated Press. "Things were going bad. I was getting blamed for everything. I wasn't seeing eye to eye with the team. I got fined in preseason, which was ridiculous. It was just a lot of things that I didn't agree with that was going on."
Oh please, dude.
They traded Jack and Acie Law to the Bobcats for freakin injured Raja Bell & Vladamir Radmanovich. You really think they would have turned down a spurs' offer of Tony Parker + (insert expiring contract here)?
Because Nelson loves his small ball lineups and players with scoring mentalities? He's got Turiaf hardly getting minutes.Quote:
Originally Posted by angelbelow
Dangling Parker would been like waving candy in a 2 year old's face with him.
Do I really need to walk you through the logic over and over?
Parker / Ellis / Curry would have been a great stable of guards and playmakers. Parker would have fit like a glove, Nelson often goes with 3 guard lineups, have you guys ever watched a warrior game?
19 boards in the warrior style of play is some what impressive. However, to get 8 blocks in that style play is awesome.