Another problem with trading Ward is that in addition to his $5.5 mill contract, there is a $900k trade kicker attached to it & I can't see any reason why Ward would agree to waive it. Any way you slice it, GS will end up taking more salary on. Here's a link to NY's salaries. They have no short term contracts that would allow the trade to be made. http://www.realgm.com/src_getplayersalaries.php?team1=NY
Warriors, I say, will not pull any deal this season at least to get something back for Jackson. For one thing, why would they need Ward if they have Blaylock and Vorteego Cummings as back up guard and besides I know that Warriors does not wanted to do with any trade besides letting Jackson walk away, Because they are freaking cheap! It's just prediction, but has a lot of potential to happen!
When you think about it from a logical perspective, it makes very little sense for GS to add another guard. They currently have: Blayloack - 1 Vonteego - 1 Hughes - 1/2 Sura - 1/2 Arenas - 1/2 Richardson - 2 Adding Ward would give them 7 guards. Of course, I'm assuming that logic will play into GS's decision.
Saleem, there are four buttons just above each post. Check out the third one -- it's for editing. The last one is for answering a certain post. I didn't know about them either for the longest. Have a great day!
Unfortunately, if it's true that the NBA rule allows GS to sign Jackson and trade him after 90 days rather than a year, then the Pippen case turns my argument on its head. Given a choice between getting something or nothing for Pippen, we would certainly have signed and traded him -- even if, in the interim, we had to pay him for 90 days to do nothing but badmouth us. A whole year, however, would be a very different matter. The quote Jeff pulled from the Chronicle seems confused and not authoritative. Crispee, Mango, swopa, aelliott, et al -- we need clarification.
GS will not keep a center that is clearly not happy with them and does not want to play there by then also underpaying him. If they match and attempt to keep him it is only for 90 days to trade him somewhere, which doesn't make sense because he would be useless in the meantime, and cost them about 1 million dollars. It makes more sense for them to make a side deal with Houston to get something of value that helps their team. Charlie Ward isn't that help, Walt would make more sense for them.
Well, I am Jewish, and I took offense to his comments. I don't want Charlie Ward on my team. Period. $5 mill for a "meh" backup point guard makes absolutely no sense to me, anyway. Not I think it's even possible, but if we somehow acquired him, my "team-can-do-no-wrong/put-them-on-a-pedestal" view of the Rockets will change. And fast. Regarding Jax and the mess that is GS, I refuse to panic. Rumors circulate. Some are true. Most are not. I believe Will's point about GS desperately trying to get something for nothing. Holding Jax against his will will hurt GS in the long run. Come free agency, who will want to sign with them if they treat their players like crap? That has to factor into their decision. Granted, this whole thing has already tarnished their image, but letting Jax go will allow them to save face. So, to me, it's either GS lets Jax go, or they let him go... with a little compensation. In the end, I believe Jax will be a Rocket. I just hope CD doesn't break down and throw GS a bone to achieve that end. C'mon, CD... Stay on target... Stay on target...
The Chronicle is correct that it is no trade for a year without Marc's consent. The 90 day thing is the clause everyone knows about no-trading a free agent dealie for 90 days or Dec 15th?, whichever is later. Further, Marc cannot be a Rocket at all for one year if GS matches, including via an indirect trade scenario through an interim team. What the Chronicle is not really clarifying is that GS may not discuss any future trades until after they match....that is the "no consideration" part of the ruling. Thus, they cannot really get any feel for what Marc would consent to and what he wouldn't, nor are they allowed to get any agreements, written, verbally or through smoke signals, regarding a trade. None of this is allowed. imo, your argument is only hurt by the Pippen case. GS cannot lower salary by signing Jackson. They would have to purge more than his new salary to gain anything. They would have to find a team with a trade exception or cap room to move Dampier to. Trading Marc does not lower any salary if they gain it first by signing Marc. That achieves nothing. And even if they use him in a mixed bag 3-way, they cannot ask Marc now whether he'd accept it. Thus, for all intent and purposes, their strategy cannot handle the ROFR with the idea that they can trade him. It just doesn't make since that you'd take on more salary and a disgruntled player with a no-trade clause...who will probably just wait out the year for teams to get under the cap again to have a better selection for a salary-purging trade that GS would accept. Another thing, this whole Dampier trade and moving Marc later means they lose 2 centers and purge no salary....unless again, they find a team with cap space or a trade exception to eat both Dampier and Marc's salary. I can't calculate any salary purging scenario here involving first increasing salary by $3m by matching Marc??????
And from the reports, Dampier is looking real good right now and may be more valuable than Jackson anyway. That explains why they didn't offer Jackson anything to begin with. Would signing him push them into the luxury tax scenario?
Op, Now that the Jackson deal is a little clearer than mud, can you give us some insight into the Moochie negotiations. You mentioned in an earlier post that when the Jackson deal is settled, the Moochie/Fegan fiasco would also be settled. My question is, if they can't arrive at an agreeable price, would the Rockets just let Moochie walk or would they pursue a S&T? Have they been presented with any S&T's that would be acceptable? What's the Rockets thinking on this issue?
Realistically If Moochie doesn't resign with us, what other team will offer him more than 3 mil per year? None. Fegan is trying to beat up a dead Cato, I mean horse.
I have been out of town since Tuesday night, and just spent some time (probably far more time than it deserves) this AM reading the replies to the thread. Usually I like to keep up with any thread I start. I start very few but I like to answer any questions as they come up. But, well this delay was unavoidable. Actually, I was surprised at most of the take on it. Surprised and pissed to put it more bluntly. This all started off basically with a ROFR restricted free agent who initially demanded an amount of money (some say exorbitant) that GSW did not want to pay. A player who for all intents and purposes, is probably skilled and talented enough to be getting a $2-4M/year offer somewhere. But he didn’t. No one bites. Houston does. This is not the story nor is it particularly revealing. It is only reasonable to assume that GSW has contingent plans that included Jackson’s fate. If he gets an offer then they will have to decide “we do this” or “we do that”. This is not the story. GSW have had talks with several teams. This is not the story. But I did post from EXCELLENT SOURCES that GSW apparently decided that they could live with matching Jackson’s contract. But only if they can at least unload some flotsam at the pivot position, keeping the cheaper (some say more talented) forward/center alternative. This is important. Or you would think so. These same EXCELLENT SOURCES that have given me all of this background, confirmed that New York had the more favorable offer on the table. GSW is getting serious and talking earnestly now. NYC wants to include Charlie Ward and they want at least either Forston or Dampier included on the GSW end. GSW is interested. Rumors abound that Jackson is going to be traded to NYC. Media are getting ready to start logging the story that Jackson is headed to New York.This is the meat of the story. It has far reaching implications to our roster makeup. It may open a wider dialogue with GSW. It would likely impact on Moochie’s negotiations. This is why I posted the thread. Jackson is not the target. GSW & NY will try to get it done, and if so then Jackson will be matched and kept by GSW. The main ingredients of the offer will at least include the following: either Dampier or Forston, and Charlie Ward. That is the story. Now, I fully expected the Warrior trolls to jump all over it and call it BS. They did not disappoint me. But I was surprised and disappointed that it drew four pages of mostly seasoned posters arguing over whether they should believe my post or not. And then backing their argument against it, with mostly continuous typed masturbation over the same old biases. The most outlandish was from a senior poster who stood on the argument that it could not happen because the players involved did not match salary-wise. Fu***ng unbelievable. What players are we talking about? “ ….. GSW will take Charlie Ward but unload at last one contract. Sources say it is D. Fortson or E. Dampier to New York. ….” Those are the principals. Care to mention the others, because I sure would like to know all the names before I started making bald statements about it MUST be a false RUMOR (effectively calling me a liar) and NOT being possible due to "salary cap considerations". My ignore list has grown considerably today. In the future I will email anything I find interesting or revealing only to members who are capable of absorbing the import, or if they don't place the same gravity to my posts, at least able to discuss it with some measure thought.
Aw, pops. Don't stop contributing your insider-info to the board based on a few posters questioning you. Your insight and perspective are unquestionably appreciated here by the vast majority of members, and it would be a shame to lose that. P.S. I just sent you an email. Feel free to add me to your mailing list.
Oeilpere, there's a lot I'd like to say, but I don't have time. I just want to say that I'm sorry you feel hurt if people questioned the information you brought to the table. But I feel very few people on this board, if any, feel that you're full of it. You feel people aren't responding rationally to the information, okay, but I don't think most seasoned posters have anything but respect for you, your sources, and the information and insight that you bring to the BBS. For what it's worth, I personally value your posts very highly. I've done so because of how much insight into the Rockets they've consistently brought, and I will continue to do so.
Someone's ego has gotten <B>HUGE</B>. You need to chill out. You know that everyone here loves you and greatly appreciates your insider info...however, it is fine for people to disagree with you, or to find faults with what you're reporting. I'm pretty sure they're not calling you a liar, they're just doubting the info that was given to you. Unless of course you are Carroll Dawson, then I apologize.
