I just want to know how a guy who made less than 400K last season, spent half the season on the IR, and has no team interested in him is worth 4.5 million? If he received a 2 year 5 mil contract from the Rockets and the Warriors decided to match it, does that mean he has to play for the Warriors? Even if it does, at least we helped the guy get some money, since he has NO bargaining room with the Warriors right now. The press pretty much screwed him over saying no team is interested in him. I keep hearing all this talk about how we don't have any cap room, does this mean we are using are 4.5 mil exemption somehow to sign our own free agents? I really think we should use our exemption somehow to get another serviceable center. (I still stand to my two-year max theory for any center that is currently available.)
I am trying to understand how these raptor trolls can possibly come to this board and talk smack after we smoked their a$$es so badly both here AND in their igloo last season. Another mystery I am struggling to figure out is how a team fan can possibly dare talk smack, when Chris Childs of all jokes starts PG for his pathetic team.
http://www0.mercurycenter.com/premium/sports/docs/warriors08.htm In this article, they say essentially that Jackson is stuck at GS because other teams are unwilling/unable to sign him. Here's a quote from CD: According to Houston General Manager Carroll Dawson, the team wants to use its available money to re-sign its own players. ``We've been talking with them, but I told them there was no way we could get that done, unfortunately,'' Dawson said Tuesday. ``We don't have the means or the roster place to put Mark.
Rockets don't have an exemption since we are under the salary cap. The only help we get are some Bird rights to Air Bull. I'm not exactly sure what "Bird Rights" are. Can somebody explain? -krosfyah
The article Juan posted includes this quote from the Golden State front office: Even just looking at the words on a computer screen, I could see Fitzsimmons smirking when he got to that last part.
Dr. N: Sorry, in what I've seen of Golden State, Jackson didn't demonstrate more than mid-range. He certainly isn't a 3 pt threat, which would make him far more useful. The 3pter really is almost ridiculous in its value. IMO, that's why I'd much rather have Sabonis for a year and then chase Raef "Shoots like Guard" Lafrentz.
Swopa-I saw it through the words, too! My question is, how can one of your own reporters spell the guy's name wrong so many times? I wouldn't sign with Golden State for that reason alone. Sign and trade is out for Jackson. They can only S/T him for the league minimum, which there's no chance he'd take. haven-I draw a similar impression. It looks like we'll take our chances with Cato/Collier along with another guy on a modest 1 year deal (McCoy, OP, Sabonis, Piglet etc.), and take it from there. The Rockets need to figure out, now that Dream is gone, if they have something in Cato or not. This is his real trial. I'm going to wait till we get some word on Shandon's official deal, and Mooch as well, and then I'm going to do some salary projections for next year, to see our possibilities for fitting Kandi, Raef, Clark, or the next "hot" big man. IF Cato becomes a legit center, we could be looking at serious cap with no serious needs, which can be a dangerous combo to help make minor tweaks.
I keep saying that Marc Jackson is much better than Cato, hustles, rebounds, runs the floor, doesn't get injured (that's large), plays with intensity (John Chaney was his college coach), and wants to play for the Rockets. Want more do we want, oh I know, Hakeem 94/95 numbers We have overpaid for Matt Maloney, Brent Price, Cato, MoTaylor, and now Shandon "no shooting" Anderson. I don't think Marc is that worse of an option compared to Cato and Collier. He should accept the same money Mo accepted for one year and then prove his game. I from Missouri the "Show Me State! I think LOTTERY, spells out our situation quite nicely if we go through the season with Cato and/or Collier.
Man: You're really overvaluing the value of the center position itself. Don't be so "limiting" tot he Rockets. Unless Cato plays better than he has so far, I'd be surprised if the Rockets use a "true center" for mroe than 20 minutes in most games. There are very few true centers left who are capable of coming in and changing a game. You can count them on the fingers of one hand, in fact. When we play LA, Philly, Miami, SA, and maybe Toronto, it will hurt Houston not to ever field a 5. Put Griffin, Taylor, Anderson, Mobley, and Francis on the court... or subtract Anderson and add Moochie or Walt. Whatever. I think Houston should play their best guys, and not worry about a position that's becoming increasingly irrelevant against the majority of the NBA.
Wait, refresh my mind here. Who won the last 2 NBA championships? No, wait, I'll remember it. Damn. I lost it. Something with this big center guy. Kazaam? Shake? Shaw? Wait... SHAQ. That's it. Now it's coming back to me. Irrelevant? If the center position is so passe, why is every title contender stocking up on quality big men, while pondering the answer to the "Shaq Conundrum"? You have to contain Shaq in order to win the NBA championship nowadays. We need a quality center. CD know this. RT knows this. I know this. You know this. Have faith in the organization. This glaring hole will not go unnoticed during the rest of the offseason.
Vescey Sux: I don't think you understood the content of my post. I would love to have an all-star caliber center. It would be splendid. Indeed, teams with terrific centers tend to prosper. But my point is that very few of these teams exist, due to a severe shortage in overall quality. Is it better to play a 7' slug who can't shoot, doesn't even play great defense, and generally just fills a position? Or is it better to play a better player who just happens to be a couple inches shorter? Against most teams, it's not going to burn you, anyway. And the offensive benefit is enormous. You want to contain Shaq... but that's not possible. Deke's the best defensive center in the NBA... Shaq tore him to pieces. Drobb's the 2nd best (if Alonzo doesn't return to form), and Shaq made him look like a 2-bit IR reserve. You think getting Marc Jackson is going to matter in the least against such a beast? Nope. Paraphrasing Shandon Anverson, "if you can't fight fire with fire, try using water." Get big men who can bust the zone. Get guys that can force shaq to play defense. Use guys like Raef Lafrentz or even Jason Collier to counter attack. Marc Jackson's going to be worthless against Shaq. Shaq'll stop him from scoring, and he'll be a speed bump in return. He'll get outscored 40-6. But what about a Sabonis that can shoot over the monster? Well, it might be something like 40-15. And that's a better matchup. Let's play the best players available, and not overvalue a 270 lb slug because he can *giggle* stop Shaq.
FYI, in the course of endless "who's the least crappy center on our roster" debates among Warriors fans, I looked at the play-by-play of each GS-Lakers game this year (available at CBS Sportsline.com) and broke them down to see how well Shaq did against each center. The final field-goal stats were as follows: Shaq versus Jackson: 7 for 11 (63.6%) Shaq versus Foyle: 18 for 26 (69.2%) Shaq versus Dampier: 8 for 19 (42.1%) In the game the Warriors won on December 6, Jackson played a long stretch of the first half (after Dampier got 2 fouls) and did well against Shaq, holding him to 2-for-5 shooting. Dampier played nearly the entire second half & OT (Jackson had a brief stint in the 3rd quarter, during which the Lakers went on a 9-0 run, and Damp was rushed back in). As a little math will tell you, Shaq went 5-for-6 against Jackson in limited stretches the rest of the season. Apparently Shaq just needed that 1st quarter of one game to adjust.
