Author Topic: Stephen Jackson  (Read 6824 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Stephen Jackson
« on: December 26, 2008, 08:55:50 AM »

Offline Bankshot

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7540
  • Tommy Points: 632
There is a rumor on the Golden State board at Realgm that Stephen Jackson asked for a trade and Maggette wouldn't mind being moved to a contender and could have played for the Celtics or Spurs, but they couldn't offer him more than the MLE. ::).

Anyway, what about a trade for Stephen Jackson?  I have no idea what type of players GS wants or needs.  What about Tony, Scal and BBD/Walker (sorry, I like Giddens better) for Jackson?.  Then we can sign Mutombo or PJ Brown and still have room to sign (gulp) Marbury or another point guard that may become available, or just give more time to Pruitt.

Thoughts?
"If somebody would have told you when he was playing with the Knicks that Nate Robinson was going to change a big time game and he was going to do it mostly because of his defense, somebody would have got slapped."  Mark Jackson

Re: Stephen Jackson
« Reply #1 on: December 26, 2008, 09:42:31 AM »

Offline biggs

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 806
  • Tommy Points: 71
I have to admit, I always try to imagine an available player on our team when their name comes up and even though Jackson has had troubles in the past, he would be a huge, let me say that again, a HUGE addition to our bench.  As much as I like Walker, your original scenario sounds realistic and doable.  Maybe they take Giddens? :)
Truuuuuuuuuth!

Re: Stephen Jackson
« Reply #2 on: December 26, 2008, 10:19:20 AM »

Offline cordobes

  • NCE
  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3556
  • Tommy Points: 576
  • Basketball is like chess, only without the dice
(...)I have no idea what type of players GS wants or needs.  (...)

The "much better than those scrubs" type of players. Why would the Warriors want any of those guys? To cut them because they wouldn't have roster spots to accommodate them anyway?

Look, we simply don't have the assets to land a player like Jackson. Nobody really wants our bench players, they're just not very good. I mean Tony Allen was in the market and the demand for him wasn't exactly very high - just check the amount of free agents who got better deals than him. BBD will probably be available for free in a few months. Scal has negative value except if we're sending $3 million along with him. Walker was available for half a million dollars or something just a couple of months ago. Plus we don't have any expirings and we've already traded the 1st round draft pick.

Jackson has much more trade value than any offer we can make that doesn't include a starter.   

Re: Stephen Jackson
« Reply #3 on: December 26, 2008, 10:37:47 AM »

Offline tb727

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1552
  • Tommy Points: 129
Right now whether it's Steven Jackson, or another reliable vet (preferably perimeter player to replace Posey or big man with length) we need someone to give us something like Wallace gave Gasol to the Lakers last year.
Jay Wingspan Bilas

Re: Stephen Jackson
« Reply #4 on: December 26, 2008, 10:44:17 AM »

Offline ssspence

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6375
  • Tommy Points: 403
This might have made some sense if they hadn't given him that ridiculous contract extension. he's now on the hook for 5 years at 7mil per and growing per year. if we weren't prepared to give posey much less, why would Danny & Co give it to Cap Jack?

Mike

(My name is not Mike)

Re: Stephen Jackson
« Reply #5 on: December 26, 2008, 10:54:12 AM »

Offline Bankshot

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7540
  • Tommy Points: 632
This might have made some sense if they hadn't given him that ridiculous contract extension. he's now on the hook for 5 years at 7mil per and growing per year. if we weren't prepared to give posey much less, why would Danny & Co give it to Cap Jack?



Because they realize their mistake in not re-signing Posey?
"If somebody would have told you when he was playing with the Knicks that Nate Robinson was going to change a big time game and he was going to do it mostly because of his defense, somebody would have got slapped."  Mark Jackson

Re: Stephen Jackson
« Reply #6 on: December 26, 2008, 11:01:39 AM »

Offline ssspence

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6375
  • Tommy Points: 403
This might have made some sense if they hadn't given him that ridiculous contract extension. he's now on the hook for 5 years at 7mil per and growing per year. if we weren't prepared to give posey much less, why would Danny & Co give it to Cap Jack?



Because they realize their mistake in not re-signing Posey?

fair enough. but the guy makes $40mil over the next five years, not $25mil over four -- it's a major financial reach. very difficult for the Cs to pay a bench player that much considering what they're paying the Big 3, plus the dough they're going to have to give to Rajon, as well as some bucks for Leon.

then again, it could be a motivating factor in letting him go for GSW.
Mike

(My name is not Mike)

Re: Stephen Jackson
« Reply #7 on: December 26, 2008, 11:06:14 AM »

Offline Bankshot

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7540
  • Tommy Points: 632
This might have made some sense if they hadn't given him that ridiculous contract extension. he's now on the hook for 5 years at 7mil per and growing per year. if we weren't prepared to give posey much less, why would Danny & Co give it to Cap Jack?



Because they realize their mistake in not re-signing Posey?

fair enough. but the guy makes $40mil over the next five years, not $25mil over four -- it's a major financial reach. very difficult for the Cs to pay a bench player that much considering what they're paying the Big 3, plus the dough they're going to have to give to Rajon, as well as some bucks for Leon.

then again, it could be a motivating factor in letting him go for GSW.

You can also argue that he's worth more than Posey.  Jackson is a very good player, so I don't think the C's would have a problem trading him after this season should they want or need to for salary reasons.
"If somebody would have told you when he was playing with the Knicks that Nate Robinson was going to change a big time game and he was going to do it mostly because of his defense, somebody would have got slapped."  Mark Jackson

Re: Stephen Jackson
« Reply #8 on: December 26, 2008, 11:08:50 AM »

Offline cordobes

  • NCE
  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3556
  • Tommy Points: 576
  • Basketball is like chess, only without the dice
This might have made some sense if they hadn't given him that ridiculous contract extension. he's now on the hook for 5 years at 7mil per and growing per year. if we weren't prepared to give posey much less, why would Danny & Co give it to Cap Jack?



Because they realize their mistake in not re-signing Posey?

fair enough. but the guy makes $40mil over the next five years, not $25mil over four -- it's a major financial reach. very difficult for the Cs to pay a bench player that much considering what they're paying the Big 3, plus the dough they're going to have to give to Rajon, as well as some bucks for Leon.

then again, it could be a motivating factor in letting him go for GSW.

You can also argue that he's worth more than Posey.  Jackson is a very good player, so I don't think the C's would have a problem trading him after this season should they want or need to for salary reasons.

Yeah, but if Jackson is a very good player and tradeable, why the heck would the Warriors do the trade you proposed?

Re: Stephen Jackson
« Reply #9 on: December 26, 2008, 11:52:27 AM »

Offline RebusRankin

  • Satch Sanders
  • *********
  • Posts: 9143
  • Tommy Points: 923
I don't think its possible but if the Celtics could get Stephen Jackson that would be a great pick up. He'd be 6th man of the year.

Re: Stephen Jackson
« Reply #10 on: December 26, 2008, 12:15:28 PM »

Offline pearljammer10

  • K.C. Jones
  • *************
  • Posts: 13129
  • Tommy Points: 885
Jackson would be a great addition but if we picked him up it might mean saying goodbye to Rondo (which the Celtics would never do). Im not saying a rondo for jackson trade im saying that jacksons salary wouldnt allow the c's to resign jackson. Scal, TA, and BBD would be nice to trade for him but then we would no longe rhave a defensive stopper on the wing. Jacksons a great scorer and would be great with the second unit but I dont think he would improve our team defense much.

Re: Stephen Jackson
« Reply #11 on: December 26, 2008, 12:34:40 PM »

Offline action781

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5217
  • Tommy Points: 609
This might have made some sense if they hadn't given him that ridiculous contract extension. he's now on the hook for 5 years at 7mil per and growing per year. if we weren't prepared to give posey much less, why would Danny & Co give it to Cap Jack?



Because they realize their mistake in not re-signing Posey?

fair enough. but the guy makes $40mil over the next five years, not $25mil over four -- it's a major financial reach. very difficult for the Cs to pay a bench player that much considering what they're paying the Big 3, plus the dough they're going to have to give to Rajon, as well as some bucks for Leon.

then again, it could be a motivating factor in letting him go for GSW.

You can also argue that he's worth more than Posey.  Jackson is a very good player, so I don't think the C's would have a problem trading him after this season should they want or need to for salary reasons.

I would make the argument that Jackson is better than Posey.  What an incredible addition he'd be as a scorer to the 2nd unit and could also play well with the first unit.  We clearly don't have the assets to pull it off though if GS is reasonably intelligent. 
2020 CelticsStrong All-2000s Draft -- Utah Jazz
 
Finals Starters:  Jason Kidd - Reggie Miller - PJ Tucker - Al Horford - Shaq
Bench:  Rajon Rondo - Trae Young - Marcus Smart - Jaylen Brown -  Peja Stojakovic - Jamal Mashburn - Carlos Boozer - Tristan Thompson - Mehmet Okur

Re: Stephen Jackson
« Reply #12 on: December 26, 2008, 12:43:35 PM »

Offline guava_wrench

  • Satch Sanders
  • *********
  • Posts: 9931
  • Tommy Points: 777
Jackson is way more talented than Posey, but we don't have enough to offer. Who would they want and how can we make contracts match? This has zero chance. They can trade Jackson for legitimate talent.

Re: Stephen Jackson
« Reply #13 on: December 26, 2008, 01:13:58 PM »

Offline cordobes

  • NCE
  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3556
  • Tommy Points: 576
  • Basketball is like chess, only without the dice
Jackson would be a great addition but if we picked him up it might mean saying goodbye to Rondo (which the Celtics would never do). Im not saying a rondo for jackson trade im saying that jacksons salary wouldnt allow the c's to resign jackson. Scal, TA, and BBD would be nice to trade for him but then we would no longe rhave a defensive stopper on the wing. Jacksons a great scorer and would be great with the second unit but I dont think he would improve our team defense much.

The good part about these crazy trade ideas is having the chance to notice the incredible amount of misconceptions about some players. When Jackson puts the effort (and I agree that doesn't happen all the time), he's an outstanding wing defender, except when facing smaller guards who can run him through screens.

Re: Stephen Jackson
« Reply #14 on: December 26, 2008, 01:28:22 PM »

Offline RebusRankin

  • Satch Sanders
  • *********
  • Posts: 9143
  • Tommy Points: 923
He played pretty good defense for a good defensive team in SA in 2002/2003.