The article that you read by Matt Steinmetz was written after he read the warriorsworld.net forum most likely. We have been speculating about the possible deals that Hou and GSW are up to even before Jackson signed. The thing that bothers Chris Cohan, Warriors owner, is not the luxury tax but a payroll to about 45 million. It looks like he would be losing money if he went over that amount. The reason why we want Williams for Sura or Mills is so that we won't go over about 45 million next year because we feel that we will sign Hughes to a deal that starts around 6 million per year. But your board must understand that doesn't mean that if you don't give over Williams we still won't match. If a deal can't be made then expect us to re-sign Jackson and trade him to a team like Indiana. Steinmetz is wrong because Jackson won't be BYC if he signs for the exception. He would only be BYC if he excercised his early bird rights. So one possible deal that could come if you don't give Williams is a deal where Golden State sends a re-signed Jackson, in 90 days, to Indiana for Travis Best. At the end of the season we would then make a decision between Best and Hughes. If Hughes gets a huge offer then we would probably re-sign Best and make him the future pg. Either way we need a 5 million dollar contract off the books. The question is whether you only eat a two year deal from Mills or a three year deal from Sura. BTW Mills and Mobley are good friends. It seems that everyone is Mobley's friend though.
Why can't y'all let Jackson go where he wants to? Will you want to work at a place you didn't want to when another place that you love is calling you??????? I didn't think so!!! Let Jackson be a Rocket!!!!!!
Who said MJ is willing to play for Indiana? He could very easily decide to sit out the season just to screw GSW back and then sign witht the team of his choice next season.
This is simply case where the Warriors want to get something for Jackson. I can't blame them, they need to worry about themselves more than a soon to be former player.
According to the CBA, if he sits out the season, he's a restricted free agent all over again next year.
I don't think Marc is going to be too happy to wait 90 days in GS to go to the Lakers much less Indiana. Do you think Indiana will want a 90 day po'd Marc for Travis Best? Call their bluff CD. If we do lose him, go after Mason. Mills and Sura are not worth it.
Thanks for the info. What's everyone so pissed about? Just because it's not great news doesn't mean you have to throw a temper tantrum. Is Best really available from Indiana? Or is this just wishful thinking on your guys' part? The one issue I had with the article is it just sounded like speculation. Still, I could see this happening. Any chance GS might throw in a 1st or 2nd rounder in a Williams for Sura deal to sweeten the pot? You know while many of us would be glad to let Williams go, he's got a lot of pull with the team (players) and the Rockets may not be so lief to let him go.
Jackson for Best is just an example. It's speculation just like Steinmetz's article. Marc said he would play for the warriors and do his best but he wouldn't be happy. He would only play about 30 games of regular season basketball before he would be traded. He's willing to play for almost anywhere where he's respected and where he would be paid. So if you don't think at minimum we couldn't get Othella Harrington and a future first rounder from NY then you need to think again. I can't believe you guys are b****ing about taking on Mills. If it wasn't for the cap we would love to keep him. It's not like you had plans to sign another FA after this year. And we would never throw in a first rounder because at this point we are still thinking we will be top 5 in the draft unless we make a turn around in the next couple years. If we were offering a future #1 I bet teams would be giving away stars to us thinking they could draft Jason Williams or a player like Kendrick Perkins in 2003.
I'm pretty sure Golden State can't sign and trade Marc Jackson because they would be signing him for the exemption. And they can't sign him straight up and trade him for Best because once they sign him they can't trade him for 2 months, meaning they can't trade him until December because they don't hold his bird or early bird rights, so the threat of signing him and trading him to Indiana doesn't exist if the sign-and-trade thing is correct. And holding him for 2 months kills his trade value and saddles the Warriors with another contract.
I seroiusly doubt that Mills would be traded to us so we could keep Jackson,because he has been named co-captain along with Jamison.
I believe RocksMillenium is correct. I remember reading here many times that a team like Golden State cannot sign Jackson with their exception (which is all they have left to sign him with) and then trade him later. That was the main hurdle between us working out a deal with GSW in order to get MJ. We had to be assured that they wouldn't match. If GW matches our offer, they are stuck paying this guy for the full 6 year contract until he is eligible to be traded again...which I think might be in December.
Golden State would have to be crazy to match our offer to Jackson. They are simply bluffing in effort to try to dump Sura's contract on us. Taking Sura's contract of $5 million + for 3 years would be horrible. 01/02 - $4,913,334 02/03 - $5,540,001 03/04 - $6,166,667 Walt is $5 million, but the team likes him, he is an excellent 3 point shooter, and his contract expires after this season.
I thought he couldn't be traded for 1 year without his consent if GS retains him as a restricted FA. Coon #79. Mango
