I can't wait for next season

Discuss anything related to Golden State Warriors basketball here

Moderators: Mr. Crackerz, JREED, Guybrush, hobbes

User avatar
All Star
Posts: 3621
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 1:05 am
Location: Oakland California
Poster Credit: 35
PostPosted: Sun Apr 28, 2013 11:52 am
1. Where we stand, we will already be over the luxury tax even if we do not sign Jarrett Jack. The luxury cap figure this year is 70.3M and we are just under that. Next year, if Biedrins, Jefferson, Rush, and Landry picks up their options, that will put us at 74M.

2. I'm going to talk about Landry in more depth since he's the most likely to opt out of his contract. If he decides to do so, that again would put us right under the luxury cap at 70M, and we'll have the full MLE and the bi-annual exception to re-sign Jarrett Jack, and a bi-annual exception to find Landry's replacement. If we give Jack the full MLE, we'd get pushed back up to ~75.5M and we'd spend another 1.5M (bi-annual exception) on a back-up 4 which would push us up to 77M salary cap figure. This will be about 6M over the luxury cap and that means we'd pay a luxury rate of $1.75 for every dollar we are over the luxury cap. So, 6M x $1.75 = 10.5M and that's how much it will cost us bring Jack back + Landry's replacement.

Now let's talk about 2014-15 if what I said above did occur and no trades happened. Jefferson, Biedrins, Rush, Bazemore, and Bogut comes off of the books putting us at a salary figure of 32.6. I've already accounted for Jack, Curry's new contract, and a Bi-annual PF that we've signed the year before. That will give us 25.4M under the (soft)salary cap, and 38.4M under the luxury tax to re-sign Bogut, re-sign/find a replacement for Rush/Landry, and fill out the roster. I think that's is plenty of breathing room. We don't have to worry about Thompson because he will be in his last year of his rookie contract, just like Curry is this year, and his new contract doesn't have to be taken into consideration until 2015-16.

3. If Landry decides to pick up his option for the 2013-2014 season, that would put at 74M cap figure with the full MLE to re-sign jack, and a bi-annual exception to sign whoever we want, but if we hand Landry, we probably wont use it. Under this situation, giving Jack the full MLE would put us at 79.5M for the the 13-14 season. In 14-15 same thing happens; Biedrins, Bogut, Jefferson, Landry, Rush, and Bazemore comes off the books, and we'll be 27M under the soft cap, and 40M under the luxury.

Going over the luxury cap next year to keep Jack will have very little implications to our future financial flexibility to retain Thompson, Barnes, Ezeli, and Green because of the relief we get from Jefferson and Beans. Keeping Jack means so much more than numbers if you consider what he does for this team. I'm not going to talk about his stats, because we know what he does on the floor for us, but his intangibles that makes it very important to keep.

He is the epitome of your typical "glue" guy. When Rush went down, you saw everyone rally around him, but Jack did it especially giving him post game shout outs. It gave us a sense of unity and togetherness. It showed us that everyone in the locker room was fighting for each other. Jack is also a fiery competitor. He brings it before, during, and after games. He competes with you in practice, he goes above and beyond during games, and there was even a time where he shot so bad in a game, he stayed in the arena afterwards to put up some shots to get his stroke right for the next game. Things like that will set a perfect example for the team of how much work you have to put in if you want to win. He also gives us mental toughness. After a 20-7 night in game 3 vs. the nuggets, which would be a spectacular night for anyone, he let the media know in the post game interview that he wasn't satisfied with his effort. He instead highlighted his 7 turnovers and said he could've done better. All of these things are the makings of a true leader and the price of leadership is invaluable. Those serviceable 10-5 guys that 32 mentions does not replace the character and leadership that Jack provides, and I'd love to have him back even if it means going over the luxury tax.
From "we believe", to "we belong", to "we gon beatcho ass!"

Image
Image
Image

Image
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13512
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: Golden State
Poster Credit: 51
PostPosted: Sun Apr 28, 2013 2:21 pm
Can he catch lightening in a bottle again? You think he'll put up another career year like this?

We can talk intangibles all we want, but Jack had more than 20 games with 10 assists off the bench this year. He hit 5% better for 3 this year than his norm (he shot a Ray Allen percentage; he's typically in the Al Harrington range). He played a ton of minutes and his efficiency didn't drop. He benefitted from playing in a predominantly 3-guard lineup where he drew the worst defensive assignment while the D focused on Klay and Steph... By next year, it's reasonable to think that teams will have a better adjustment for our three-guard look.

I'm not saying he didn't have a great season or he wasn't a glue guy. I'm asking, realistically, can he do it again?

And, bottom line: how much are we willing to pay for Jack?

IMO, $6.5 million and under should be the threshold. Anything over $7 million and its a bad deal.
Image
GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS DIE HARD
Image
Image
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13512
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: Golden State
Poster Credit: 51
PostPosted: Sun Apr 28, 2013 2:25 pm
And with that in mind... I believe a team will offer him $8 million a year to start.

Doesn't Miami need a floor general who can play off the ball, initiate offense, and spot open 3's?
Image
GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS DIE HARD
Image
Image
User avatar
All Star
Posts: 3621
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 1:05 am
Location: Oakland California
Poster Credit: 35
PostPosted: Sun Apr 28, 2013 2:32 pm
32 wrote:Can he catch lightening in a bottle again? You think he'll put up another career year like this?

We can talk intangibles all we want, but Jack had more than 20 games with 10 assists off the bench this year. He hit 5% better for 3 this year than his norm (he shot a Ray Allen percentage; he's typically in the Al Harrington range). He played a ton of minutes and his efficiency didn't drop. He benefitted from playing in a predominantly 3-guard lineup where he drew the worst defensive assignment while the D focused on Klay and Steph... By next year, it's reasonable to think that teams will have a better adjustment for our three-guard look.

I'm not saying he didn't have a great season or he wasn't a glue guy. I'm asking, realistically, can he do it again?

And, bottom line: how much are we willing to pay for Jack?

IMO, $6.5 million and under should be the threshold. Anything over $7 million and its a bad deal.


We can't offer him more than the MLE, so if he does come back, it'll be in the range of 5.5M. That's a no-brainer to me.
From "we believe", to "we belong", to "we gon beatcho ass!"

Image
Image
Image

Image
User avatar
All Star
Posts: 3621
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 1:05 am
Location: Oakland California
Poster Credit: 35
PostPosted: Sun Apr 28, 2013 2:36 pm
32 wrote:And with that in mind... I believe a team will offer him $8 million a year to start.

Doesn't Miami need a floor general who can play off the ball, initiate offense, and spot open 3's?


Miami has been in the luxury tax the last 2 years. Repeat offenders lose their Bi-annual exception, and they don't get a full MLE. Their MLE will be something like ~3 million dollars.
From "we believe", to "we belong", to "we gon beatcho ass!"

Image
Image
Image

Image

All Star
Posts: 1352
Joined: Mon May 07, 2012 1:57 am
Poster Credit: 22
PostPosted: Sun Apr 28, 2013 2:38 pm
I will take Jose Calderon if we can't keep Jack for a reasonable price.
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13512
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: Golden State
Poster Credit: 51
PostPosted: Sun Apr 28, 2013 2:51 pm
8th ave wrote:
32 wrote:And with that in mind... I believe a team will offer him $8 million a year to start.

Doesn't Miami need a floor general who can play off the ball, initiate offense, and spot open 3's?


Miami has been in the luxury tax the last 2 years. Repeat offenders lose their Bi-annual exception, and they don't get a full MLE. Their MLE will be something like ~3 million dollars.

Aite, so maybe not Miami. But I'm sure out of the 28 other teams, somebody has more than
$5.5 million for Jack. If not, as you said, the MLE for JJ is a no-brainer. But is he willing to surrender an extra $2 million a year? I know he made some warm, fuzzy comments, but the man's got a family to feed.[/sprewell]
Image
GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS DIE HARD
Image
Image
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13512
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: Golden State
Poster Credit: 51
PostPosted: Sun Apr 28, 2013 2:53 pm
Blackfoot wrote:I will take Jose Calderon if we can't keep Jack for a reasonable price.

I'd prefer Calderon. Straight up.
Image
GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS DIE HARD
Image
Image

All Star
Posts: 1352
Joined: Mon May 07, 2012 1:57 am
Poster Credit: 22
PostPosted: Sun Apr 28, 2013 2:54 pm
Jose is much better offensively I believe, but Jack is a much better defender.

Jose at five million > Jack at eight million
User avatar
All Star
Posts: 3621
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 1:05 am
Location: Oakland California
Poster Credit: 35
PostPosted: Sun Apr 28, 2013 4:47 pm
Guys... We can't give Jack 8 million. Even if we wanted to.
From "we believe", to "we belong", to "we gon beatcho ass!"

Image
Image
Image

Image
User avatar
All Star
Posts: 3621
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 1:05 am
Location: Oakland California
Poster Credit: 35
PostPosted: Sun Apr 28, 2013 5:13 pm
I must be trippin cuz i think Jack is a HUGE part of why we are where we're at.
From "we believe", to "we belong", to "we gon beatcho ass!"

Image
Image
Image

Image
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13512
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: Golden State
Poster Credit: 51
PostPosted: Sun Apr 28, 2013 6:30 pm
Were not saying he's not.

We're just saying, backup point is the easiest thing on this planet to fill. Do the Warriors get substantially worse with Nate Robinson instead of Jack? Or Jose Calderon? Or Earl Watson, Jeff Teague, Shaun Livingston, or CJ Watson? 6'3" guys who can ball are literally a dime a dozen.

Jack was great this year... But his production can be replicated by several other (potentially cheaper) options.
Image
GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS DIE HARD
Image
Image

All Star
Posts: 1352
Joined: Mon May 07, 2012 1:57 am
Poster Credit: 22
PostPosted: Sun Apr 28, 2013 6:32 pm
Jose Calderon is the best to replace him. Nate is a bit worse offensively, much worse defensively, everyone else is a significant drop off from Jack.
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13512
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: Golden State
Poster Credit: 51
PostPosted: Sun Apr 28, 2013 6:38 pm
Not a huge drop-off. Jack's 13-and-6 career season will likely fall back to 11-and-5 next year. We can get that from most of the guys listed.
Image
GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS DIE HARD
Image
Image

All Star
Posts: 1352
Joined: Mon May 07, 2012 1:57 am
Poster Credit: 22
PostPosted: Sun Apr 28, 2013 7:07 pm
Just in terms of offense and defense. Jack does really good on point guard defense. Switches well and rotates good. Stays in front of most guards. You aren't going to get that defense from anybody on that list. Jose offsets that by just being super ****ing good on offense.

I want Jose Calderon as our back up if we can't retain on Jack.
PreviousNext

Return to Warriors Basketball

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest