To the 71% “no” — why not?
Wait, what’s the question?, should the Warriors fire him or should they bring him back? The headline asks is if they should bring them back, the poll question is should they fire him? I mistakenly said Yes they should bring him back, but now that counts as a Yes, they should fire him. Pay attention to the questioning or else you get completely skewed numbers. The internet is full of enough idiots, don’t make it any harder for them.
Time to look @ the roster; xould they orchestrate the “blockbuster” deal that would bring kevin Love to the east (or, eventually, west) bay?
Surely it would cost Harrison Barnes; just trading David lee’s salary straight up would probably not interest the ‘Wolves. But some sort of future lottery protected 1st round selection, particularly in 2016 when the W’s next are bereft of a #1 draft pick could be the way to go.
As far as FA additions I would seriously entertain the possibility of signing Shaun Livingston of the Nets; Brooklyn doesn’t retain his “Bird:” contract rights so he can go wherever he chooses. To me that would be a significant upgrade over Blake as he was a non factor in the playoffs & Livingston can play the point & ‘D” up on marquee guards & many 3’s. A Small lineup with Curry, Thompson, Livingston & ‘Dre would also add Three above average defenders who can switch effortlessly & produce many more fast break opportunities for the W;’s. . .with Ezeli returning & hopefully a rejuvinated & hungry Germaine O’Neil, along with Bogut the W’s would have versatility &, with Love an upper echelon 4 who is an elite rebounder & adds to the W’s perimeter game. . .
hate to give up on Barnes but the upside; more consistent 4 play, better rebounding & much improved perimeter defense would surely pugrade thw W’s going forward, regardless if Jackson, Lionel Hollins or whomever becomes the next HC. ..& readdressing the 3 down the road, as ‘dre ages can be put off for the next two seasons, allowing the W’s to turn their long term contract attention to Love & Thompson. . .
C’mon you messed up the poll – you don’t headline the poll “Should the Warriors bring back Mark Jackson as their coach?” (No), and then phrase the question as the opposite, “Should the Warriors fire coach Mark Jackson?” (Yes). #pollfail
Because they don’t want to make Steph cry : )
My #1 concern with Jackson is that the growth of his ego seems to be more important to him than the growth of his offensive repertoire.
Even so, he has his strengths and should get his extension until someone better is essentially locked in. What’s to lose except the paltry few mill it would cost to make him walk if you decide to cut him loose down the road?
What a horrible set up. The article’s headline asks “Should the Warriors bring back Mark Jackson as their coach?”
I rush to say “YES!”
Only to see that the poll question actually reads: “Should the Warriors fire coach Mark Jackson?”
Um…. NO! But I already said YES! 🙁
Look, the team is making progress, the players are improving and so is coach Jackson. We need a stronger bench and Bogut and Ezieli need to stay healthy. We’re right there, it doesn’t happen over night. Let’s not blow this thing up like we did after We Believe.
Really!! I actually voted wrong….
I voted wrong … please deduct my vote from YES…..
I am 100% behind Mark Jackson….The great coach
Poll with a strange agenda
Assuming the Ws wouldn’t trade Curry (which they wouldn’t or shouldn’t), Love would cost at least Barnes and Thompson. They’d also probably have to find another taker for Lee so they could flip an expiring contract to Minnesota, who probably doesn’t want to take on the rest of Lee’s deal.
Then there’s the question of how much of an upgrade Love really is over Lee. He’s a better offensive player, but not world’s better. He’s better at defense, more than the difference at offense, but Love’s not a great defender either. Love is a better rebounder, but again, not a huge difference. I’m not saying Love isn’t an upgrade — he definitely is, and he’s younger so that’s good — but I doubt it would be worth Thompson and Barnes, which is surely the price.
That said, I think they should trade Barnes for whatever they can get for him. He’s pretty well proven that he’s only really good when he plays the 4, but he’s way undersized for the position. That makes him a role player at best.
One good thing about that trade, though, is the Wolves would have to ship JJ Barea, or Mbah a Moute or Brewer to the Ws to help salaries match (or Budinger, but that’ll never happen). Any of those guys would help the Ws.
Looks like they fixed it now….
What would be the better choice:
1) Be a playoff team year after year, but never win a championship
2) Be cellar dwellers for another 10-20 years?
Because they probably can’t demand much from other teams they might be enticed to take on Lee.
I think Love is a far superior offensive player with much more versatility than Lee & fits the W’s system much better than Lee. Remember, Love can fill it up fro three point range, thus Barnes won’t be missed & this certainly brings a new dynamic to the W’s offense. If there is an NBA team that can best utilize Love’s skill set it’s the W’s. . .think of the matchup problems this would create for LA of the Blazers, Griffin of the clips, etc. . .What happened to Lee’s alleged new found shooting range? Never materialized during the season.
Lee is a hustler & quick slasher. That’s all he has; Love, while a wash defensively for Lee does have more bulk & can absorb more pounding than Lee. Also, due to his increased shooting range he provides slashing opportunities to Thompson,Curry, Crawford &, if they sign him as a FA Livingston, thus slash & kick situations. . .
Most NBA teams would be willing to wait out Love’s last season & entertain the possibility of obtaining him as a true FA. With a deal for Lee & Barnes the Wolves would have an expiring contract in two years in Lee, thus another opportunity to “cut & run” while amassing first round draft selections, which is the way to future growth. . .
Have to consider Curry untouchable. If the W’s sign Shaun Livingston, which is not as daunting as one supposes this would allow curry to play like Deron Williams did for Brooklyn with Livingston on the court; two elite ballhandlers limits toe potential for W’s turnovers, their achillies heel, & affords for better ball movement, which is when the W’s are @ their offensive best. . .
I loved Mark Jackson on the Knicks in the 80’s and 90’s. I love him as a motivational speaker. If the Warriors want to take it to the next level they need to look elsewhere. If I am Lee or Curry, it should not be about a friendship. It is about results. Period. Jackson had no coaching experience and it shows. Bring on Jeff or Stan Van Gundy.
I just don’t see them moving Love for only Barnes and what’s left of Lee and his contract. If they are going to lose Love, why delay the rebuilding by saddling themselves with Lee? Lee and that team goes nowhere. I’m 100% sure it would at least take Thompson, but I really think Thompson and Barnes. Maybe you’re right that they’d take Lee and the Ws wouldn’t have to find a third team, but no way do they do it for Lee and Barnes. No way.
Also, this deal (even your version) probably isn’t worth it for the Ws unless they can resign Love. But he’s almost certainly going to test free agency.
That would be my contention; the W’s immediately sign Love to a long term deal. . . the W’s could provide a fit not available via
My other assertion is the Wolves would be left with nothing if they don’t deal Love now; even @ next year’s trade deadline many teams might prove reticent to make a deal for a “rental” version of Love. . .other NBA teams. . .nobody can offer the perimeter structure & three 5’s (Bogut, Ezeli & O’Neil, providing he comes back. . .) that would support Love. . .
I do admit it’s a radical move but that might be what is required. . .
Being left with nothing should be the Wolves goal if they lose Love. If they want to contend without Love (and maybe even with him), they need to start over from scratch. That’s how you build a winner in the NBA. A lower division team adding a David Lee doesn’t produce a winning team.
Now, don’t start scolding. If you read my accompanying post you would realize I am merely offering an “out of left field” possibility based on one thought process the Wolves might entertain.
If they lose Love outright they don’t get anything in return, like the lake show did losing Dwight Howard. Don’t think they want to go down that road. . .
No scolding intended. And, yes, that’s exactly the road I think Minnesota wants to go down. These are their choice in the order I think they’d prefer:
1. re-sign Love. (preferred option)
2. Trade Love for draft picks and expiring contracts (legitimate second choice)
3. Let love go (begrudgingly, but better than bad contracts)
4. Trading him for draft picks and non-expiring contracts of non-difference makers (I don’t think they’d do this over #3, obviously)
5. Trading him for non-expiring contracts of non-difference makers (obviously completely off the table)
Screw Jeff Van Gundy. After his complete homerism for the Clippers, you’d still want him? Forget that guy.
I’ve ranted about this franchise for the last time. Now I truely DO HATE THEM. I started out unsure about Jackson, now I love him. He’ll have great success as the Knicks new coach. Mark me on that one (LOL.) So Lacob’s unsatified huh. Then he and Meyers can suit up. You have to have the horses to win a race. Jackson did his best. Thompson vanished, Iquodala does’t score much, and Bogus just plain sucks. The Duds can go F–k themselves. I’m through. And I used to love Rick, Silk , Johan, the hopper, C Webb and run TMC, et al. Though S__T now . Goombye.