Link? If that's true, that's a shame, cause I'd sure like to have a point guard of his calibur as a backup.
http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/basketball/story/116286p-104881c.html Even more than Anderson, 33, and Strickland, 37, age and luxury-tax implications are working against Jackson, 38, who played behind John Stockton in Utah last season. Jackson wanted to be reunited with Jeff Van Gundy, but the new Rockets coach decided this week to go with a younger player, Mike Wilks.
So you don't think francis needs a vet to back him up...and the guy who is the 2nd all-time assist guy? jackson would of been a prefect back-up for francis..and jackson can still play...he averaged 7 a game in the playoffs..and still got 4.6 assists a game in the season in under 16 minutes a game bad decision by JVG here
whhhooooa!! as my fellow new yorkers can attest, the daily news is a milimeter away from being the national inquirer. everything that thing says should be taken with a grain of salt.
I guess if he turned down MJ I'm guessing he wouldn't want Tim Hardaway as well. I was hoping one of these PG's would come to houston. They would be a good influence on how to play the point for SF and how to pass the ball around.
Why does the inclusion of Mike Wilks (with a non-guaranteed contract) to training camp exclude Mark Jackson from being signed? Does a 17 year vet who played under JVG previously need a training camp?
Besides the credibility of the daily news, it could be simply a financial decision. Wilks is signed to a minimum, nonguaranteed contract. To sign Mark Jackson, you'd have to pay at least $1 million and guarantee it. Also, I don't think Wilks or the other 4 camp fodder guys preclude other options. These guys were signed as camp fodder with non-guaranteed contracts. You don't let them get in the way of real signings even if they do have a chance at making the roster. Mark Jackson would be a real signing while Wilks is a camp fodder signing.
JV - I think we're in basic agreement that MJax is not out of the question but I want to elaborate. The "spin" from the Posey situation was that the Rox fear the LTax....but no one knows 1) if the LTax will kick in...and 2) if it kicks in, what will be the threshhold. IMO, if the Rox don't use the remaining 1/2 of the MLE, they won't hesitate to use the vet minimum.
Gater, no, no, no, you're totally right. I agree they probably would be willing to spend a million on Jackson if they wanted him. What I was trying to point out is that there is the finances make Wilks and Jackson different sorts of pick-ups and are, therefore, incomparable. Wilks is a zero-risk flyer. If Wilks turned it down, they could offer it to the next guy in the alphabet (they have to have someone at training camp, afterall). To sign Mark Jackson you have to specifically want Mark Jackson, because he requires at least a million bucks and a guarantee.
JV - The only problem I can foresee to alphabetical rotation for the next TCamp PG is that Wilks begins with "W". The "new" NBA economics has left Jackson, Kenny Anderson and Rod Strickland all in limbo. Heck, even Jim Jackson hasn't been signed yet and I was almost positive that's why the Kings cleared Keon Clark's contract. Just my opinion, but I can still see M Jackson is a Rox uni.
Rocketsfan03 .... How many years did you coach Mark Jackson? I'll take Jeff Van Gundy's opinion over your expert armchair analysis anyday. LOL
MJax could still be a Rock. Yes. Jimmy Jax has a questionable lockerroom effect, so I have heard. The man can play some hoops, however. KA and RS are guys with dwindling talents (even moreso in Strickland's case) with highly questionable 'personalities'. Those two have made their own beds.
Just look at his damn record...jackson is 2nd all-time in assists..what the hell has wilks done? jackson > Wilks even when Mjax is at age 50
