http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/rumors/post/Warriors-Jackson-could-have-new-deal-by-start-o;_ylt=Aqdbhb9v4KypawXuMrUEI5u8vLYF?urn=nba,116567
I'm all for signing Jax to an extension and in fact, if the rumors are true, I am glad that Rowell vetoed the Baron contract. But, it seems that Rowell is being high and mighty about everything, which it seems will run Mully and Nellie out of town. I feel there were better ways to deal with hierarchical decisions than in public.
Something like 3/$24M or maybe 4/$32M would make me happy. The only things I really don't like about SJax is he shoots less than 42% for his career (not going to change) and his turnovers are a bit high. But I do think he's probably a bargain at less than $9M per year by today's standards, especially with the Warriors desperate need for leadership. We saw what happened last year when he was out of the lineup, it was ugly. With Al Harrington coming off the books next year, plus Foyle's buyout, there will be an opportunity for some big free agent signings, I want to see the Warriors leave themselves some space for that possibility. I don't think they're going to get a top-line, elite superstar to come here, but there's a lot in that A-/B+ area that might.
Horrible idea. Caproom in 08 is 58.7 mils, and caproom in 10 should be roughly 62 mils (it could be bigger, but with current economic, I am not even sure with 62 mils figure). And, this is our situation in 2010, barring from trade. Monta 11 mils Biedrins 9 mils Maggette 9.6 mils Turiaf 4 mils Azubuike 3.4 mils Wright 3.4 mils Randolph 2 mils Bellinelli: 2.4 mils Roughly 45 mils. Of course, we will add contracts and stuff, but if we manage things well, we can be a player for 2010 FA market with more than 15 mils caproom. With core players like Monta, Biedrins and others, one superstar will make this club a contender instantly, and I think that's what big name FAs would like to see as well. By giving Jackson an extension, Rowell will destroy a chance to acquire a superstar via FAs. And, he will solidify our roster for years to come. If our team is a contender, there is no problem solidifying the roster. But right now, it would be a miracle to make PO with this roster. If that's the case, we should maintain as much of financial flexibility as possible. And, what's the point of giving Jackson an extension? Especially when he still has two years remaining? Not as dumb as giving an extension to Dunleavy after his 3rd year, but it's not far from it...
It just seems like, after Mullin's working SO hard to clean up his mistakes and trim the cap and tighten salaries, suddenly Rowell wants to just spend $$ on mediocre deals. I mean, many GMs would dream of being whre GS is -- a ton of young prospects, no albatross contracts, and plenty of cap space coming up. Yet, Jax's deal isn't up for 2 more years. Why give in and restructure now? He signed the deal -- make him play it out... After all that hard work, and luck of the draw, to get into this dream scenario they are in right now with the roster, we cannot afford another Foyle/Fisher/Dunleavy type signing to take us out of PO contention. We have spent all this time preparing for the big-splash star signing. They better not blow it. Next thing we know, Rowell will be re-signing Harrington to 5 years / $50 mils to be the franchise PF...
Agreed on your comments about Rowell. It's not just that Rowell is pulling a power play here when one isn't necessary, but he's going to a rebuilding plan when there isn't one in place. We now know that Mullin was going to bring back Baron and see if they could go deep in the playoffs for the next couple of years with Baron leading the way. Also, Rowell is not a judge of basketball talent and he seems to be judging people based on what he perceives where their loyalties lie. What's wrong with that is it is hard to be loyal to the upper management of the Warriors when they aren't loyal to their best players like Baron. Oi vei.
I can't believe what I'm hearing from you guys. First of all, Jackson is WAY better than Dunleavy, Foyle, Murphy, or any of those stiffs, and he's significantly more valuable than Harrington too. I don't think it's right to even compare him to them. Secondly, have you forgotten how bad the Warriors are when Jackson is not in the lineup? With Baron gone and Monta out, who is going to be the leader? Who is going to take the last shot? Even if he doesn't take the last shot, people have to defend him because he is dangerous. He has a rare presence on the court that you will not find with many other players, and not many on the current Warriors roster. Thirdly, yes you could just let him play out his contract, and logically that makes sense, but it's just not the reality of today's NBA. Look what happened recently with Baron and with Brand, teams waited until the last minute and they decided to walk because of the lack of "respect". And many others have done the same. That's just the way it is. And finally, he actually WANTS TO BE HERE. Remember how much we liked that about JRich? If they overpay, I'll be disappointed, but they absolutely should explore a reasonable extension with him. He may not be perfect, he may not be a superstar, but $8M per year for SJax is a bargain. Cap should be close to $65M in 2010 (it's been increasing an average of more than $3M per year the last few years) and I think either Wright or Belinelli is destined to be shipped out at some point in the next year.
No question Jackson is a valuable player, and I like him in here. However, I just don't have a confidence that Monta, Jackson, Maggette, Turiaf and Biedrins will lead us to anywhere. And, if we give Jackson 9 mils per year extension, they will take roughly 43 mils per year. Then, if you add other contracts, we will not have enough caproom to attract superstar in 2010, even if we assume we ship Belinelli, Wright, and 65 mils caproom. And, I also highly doubt that cparoom will be 65 mils in 2010. Caproom largely depends on TV contracts and such, and till now, sports business was booming due to stable economy. Now that we are in economic depression, many companies are already pulling their ads from TVs, and TV deals won't increase like previous years, if not decrease. In normal years, I would agree that caproom may increase to 65 mils. But, at this point, I won't be surprised if caproom actually decreases. If you agree that Monta, Jackson, Maggette, Turiaf, and Biedrins will not make this team to a contender or even PO, then it's time to look for a different solution. And, without resigning Jackson, we can shop number of FAs with significant caproom. If I have to choose, I would rather have Jackson than Maggette. But, at this point, it's impossible to remove Maggette's contract, and we have to make next best decision. And, as much as I like Jackson, I would rather have one of top FAs in 2010 than Jackson. And, I just don't agree with making players feeling good by giving them unnecessary contracts. That's what we did with Richardson, Dunleavy, Murphy, and Foyle, and we know what happened to Warriors. Players can say 'respect' and such, but at the end, they follow money. I mean, look at Davis. Mullin threw hardball to Davis, and Davis certainly wasn't happy about it. But, he was Rowell's veto away from returning to Warriors. The reason why Davis left Warriors is not because of lack of respect, but because he was able to get the extension he wants from Clippers. And, Brand too. He received 'respect' from Clippers, and it's assumed that he made a promise to return to Clippers if he receive an extension and get Davis at the same time. That's why Clippers 'waived' him (losing bird right) to create caproom big enough to resign both Davis and Brand. If the promise is not made, there is no way Brand would opt out of his contract after devastating injury caused him to miss 74 games. And, Clippers would not waive Brand and lose their bird right if they planned to resign, which they certainly wanted. But when Clippers could only offer him 13 mils per year after resigning Davis, and 76ers offered him 17 mils pea year, he went 76ers instead. And, Brand is a solid citizen to boot! Boozer also left Cavs due to money, and there are tons of cases that players follow money regardless how much/less respect they got. In another hand, it's very hard to find a case where players took significantly less money due to lack of respect. If money is not too different, they will consider extra elements, such as respect or hometown, and that's why we couldn't get Brand with 18 mils per year offer. But, if that's not the case, they always follow money. Of course, if they don't get what they want, they will not be happy, and sometimes, it does damage the team. But, even if Jackson is happy, I don't think this team is going anywhere. And, if Jackson is unhappy and become disgruntled, he also damage his reputation and greatly harm his chance to get a big contract in 2010 due to his past history. I think Jackson is smart realizing all that, and even if he does not receive an extension, he will probably play hard for next two years to receive last big contract...
I think a core of Monta, Jax, Maggette, Randolph, Biedrins would make this team a contender IF everyone stays healthy and IF Randolph becomes a superstar, which right now I'm betting that he does being the optimist that I am. Turiaf is a back-up C and you shouldn't really be throwing his name around when it comes to talking about a core. We also have to see what happens with Wright...he may turn out to be better than Randolph. Who knows. At this point, one of our greatest voids is the PF position, NOT the PG position. I have faith that Monta will do fine playing PG. I can rack up like 20 assists with him in NBA 2k9 Also, the top FA's in the 2010 list is Kobe, LeBron, and Yao. Maybe you can throw in Wade and Pierce. Do you honestly think any of those players will sign with the Warriors? Maybe Yao, but I think he's too injury prone. Give me a healthy Biedrins over an injury plagued giant. Kobe will end up on an Eastern Conf. team, LeBron will play in NY. The point is, we need to see how our young guys can do first before committing to an unknown FA in 2010 that is certainly no guarantee we will land one. I think giving our young investments a chance to mature is the best thing to plan for and surrounding them with positive veterans that don't cost an arm and a leg is a good idea.
I am also high on Randolph and Wright is also starting to impress me more. However, they really do not factor in 2010 market, because they will still be under rookie contracts. And, if they do become superstars, we have a chance to have them and another superstar. Isn't that better fantasy to have than Just Randolph alone? Do I think superstars like James or Kobe will come? The chance is probably remote. However, I think we have a fair chance to have players like Wade, Bosh, Yao or Stoudmire, because there are so many superstars and not enough teams with caproom to have them. And, even if we don't get first tier superstar, 2nd tier stars in 2010 is nothing to sneeze at, and I would rather have them than Jackson at this point. I mean, who knows what would happen? Who expected that Brand will end up in 76ers and Davis will end up in Clippers? And, who knew that Arenas would blow up in his 2nd year? Teams like 76ers, Clippers, and Washington were able to grab those stars because they had available caproom, and we weren't able to retain Arenas because we didn't have a caproom. You just don't know what will happen in 2010 FA market. By having a caproom, we may end up getting a star we never dreamed of. Then, do we lose Jackson for sure because we did not extend his contract now? That's also not the case. We would still have his bird right, and we can very much get him back if we does not lure big name FAs. He still has two years remaining, and he is not going anywhere. As a matter of fact, what's better performance enhancement than contract year? Really, what's the downside by not resigning Jackson? There is no question that our future is unknown. That's exactly why we should open every options we can possibly have. If we extend Jackson now, we close a door on 2010 FA market even before knowing what our young players can do. You can feel positive about what we have, but what if both Randolph and Wright happen to be busts, and Monta-Jackson-Maggette-Turiaf-Biedrins can't carry this team to PO, then what? If that's the case, we are in serious trouble for next five years, because we don't have financial flexibility to make a change. I mean, we walked this road before. I am far more positive about this group than last group. However, it never hurts to make a back up plan, instead of eliminating different choices. If you have plenty of unknowns ahead, it's best to keep every possible options open, not committing on just one way, internal development for this case. If upside is getting a superstar and downside is Jackson being angry, why not take that bet?
Yeah. If Monta-Jackson-Maggette-Turiaf-Biedrins core does not lead our team to PO, both Randolph and Wright become busts, and we give Jackson an extension, we are right back to Fisher-Richardson-Dunleavy-Murphy-Foyle era. And, chance of that happening is also not exactly minimal either. It's bit scary to think, but what Rowell is doing right now resembles what Mullin ver. 1 did few years ago; giving early extension to satisfy players, giving up caproom in the name of internal development, and lock up number of big contracts and eliminate financial flexibility, when he doesn't know what those players can do. If we repeat the history again, I just don't know I can remain as a Warriors fan...
I still think we could have enough to sign a big name in 2010, even with a Jackson extension (again, if it's reasonable...under $8M/yr.). It would be tight, yes. But there's always the possibility of trading a player or two (including Jackson) to free up some cap space, and as Kwan points out, there are so many big name players in 2010 that they simply can't all sign max contracts, or all in top markets either. There's not enough cap space in the NBA. So I do think because of that glut there will be opportunities to sign a big name with even $15M or less, helped if necessary by backloaded contracts, and again, trades could augment that.
We also have to consider that a lot of those teams will probably resign their stars (or at least try) before 2010.
The reason why I think we will not have enough caproom if we resign Jackson is this. - Let's assume that caproom actually increase to 65 mils. I don't think it would be possible in today's economy, but let's look for the best possible scenario. - Let's assume that we keep Monta, Maggette, Turiaf, Azubuikie and Biedrins. They will take roughly 37 millions - Let's assume that Jackson's extension is 8 mils per year. - Let's assume that we waived everybody including Wright, Randolph, Bellinelli, Hendrix except those six mentioned above. Since, we need minimum of 12 players, we filled remaining 5 roster slots with rookie FAs like Morrow or Kurtz type of players. They will only cost $440,000, and veteran minimum is $711,000. - Let's assume that we traded our first round pick in 2009 and 2010, so that they will not count against caproom. It's against NBA rule to trade two first picks in a row, but... 65-37-8-0.44*5=17.8 Even with this unrealistic and absolute best situation, all we get is 17.8 millions. Then, if we add Wright and Randolph's rookie contracts, that will take another 4 mils, already not enough to offer big name FAs what they are looking for. Then, you add two first rounders (roughly 3-4 mils depending on where they are drafted), some veteran minimum contracts, 13th, 14th 15th players and consider whether caproom will be 65 mils or lesser. If you consider all those factors, our caproom would be around MLE. If we are lucky enough, we may have 7-8 mils, and if we are not, we will not even have a caproom bigger than MLE. Then trade to dump existing contracts? Unless we dump one of Monta, Maggette or Biedrins, we will not have a caproom big enough to attract stars. We definitely will not trade Biedrins, because he is a center, and 9 mils for his production is a bargain. Then, if Monta comes back 100%, it would be very hard for us to trade him (we don't want to trade him), and if he comes back with less than 100%, it will be very hard for us to trade him (nobody wants him). Of course, if Rowell void Monta's contract, it would be the end of our discussion though. Obvious choice is Maggette, but will any team wants to take his contract for an expiring contract? We did dump Richardson's contract, so there is a hope. The problem is that 2010 cap space is unlike any other years. 2010 FA market is probably the best FA market ever in NBA history, meaning number of teams will look to grab contracts that ends in 2010. Obviously, that means price will go up, and we already saw Jefferson, who is better player than Richardson, for Yi, and Nets also have to pay 20 mils, in the name of Simmon's two years contract. I do not know how much we have to pay to dump one of our big contracts. But the price to pay won't be cheap, and it will be nothing like Richardson's trade. If we resign Jackson, we cannot get a major caproom in our current situation. And, in order to create significant caproom for 2010, we pretty much have to dump contracts equal to Jackson's extension amount while paying hefty price to do so. That's like saying I will quit my day job and will work at gas station and 7/11 for 80 hours per week to make the same amount of money. Jackson is not going anywhere till 2010, and even after 2010, it's not a certain thing we will abandon Jackson. Let him play for next two years, and choose what's the best for Warriors...
I agree with Kwan. Jax may be a borderline all-star type of player but he's not franchise player. We simply need franchise players. More specifically, we need a big man franchise player and a star swingman. I would keep a player like Sjax until the end of time, unless a Joe Johnson or a Brandon Roy comes along. But priority should be getting a terrific backcourt and getting a center or a power forward that can dominate against most matchups offensively and defensively. That's the key to victory. Inside/outside play with good ball movement and plenty of defense.
Well then we should be glad Rowell is going to oust Mullin and eventually Nelson because the inside/outside play is non-existent with Nellie.
Yeah, it was pretty terrible to see your star center getting less playing time because he wanted more offense/perimeter scoring. We had very few halfcourt inside finishers as it was. Maybe this explains why our guards never seemed to pass much. They just shot and shot and shot... Or it could have been that Biedrins was made to be underweight for more quickness, but it wore him down a lot sooner. The guy should have been seeing a lot more playing time IMO if fouls or free throw situation weren't the issue. The higher % shooters and better defense/rebounding the better.
