Reply With Quote
Nice to see Mark Stein ending these wild speculations.
I would be really surprised if Spurs are interested in Jackson.
I'm just going to add that if the Spurs can pay RJ 15 million then they sure as 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.
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.
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
I really do think the Spurs need to at least talk to the Warriors about him if they haven't at all.
The length of the contract is the killer.
Pull the trigger.
By the end of the contract the team is so bad it won't even matter.
Win now damnt.
Pull the trigger.
By the end of the contract the team is so bad it won't even matter.
Win now damnt.
I'd actually agree with T-Park on this one.
I say do it.
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.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."
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.
S JAX is not the answer now. Maybe he was but no longer fit this SPURS team
It sure is easy to spend other people's money, isn't it?
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...
Peter Holt
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 mother er 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.
Last edited by phyzik; 10-31-2009 at 01:35 AM.
+1
lol theyre trying to see if they can pull some bull , 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
ginobili, lol j/k theres no way
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
If you look at what Jackson did to GS, you have your answer.
Is Goldenstate San Antonio?
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/feature...aldridge.mmpg/
What does he mean by heat? I wonder who the Heat was from. Spurs side I guess?
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.
Broussard looks like a fool.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
