I'll make this quick.

I no longer have Comcast, or any TV broadcast. I got sick of paying through the nose when I really only watch one channel. So now I have a PS3, Netflix, and a computer connected to my television. I am also usually unavailable to watch 7.30pm games, and if I am I really don't want to watch the commercials. So I used to DVR every game and spend about 90 minutes watching it later that night. Basically, I need a way to "DVR" the live online feeds, or I need to know if NBA.com has such a feature, which I'd be willing to pay for.

Oh mighty GSOM, come to my aid.

Cleveland is not going to part with Z without getting a big in return, and rightly so. Every other legit championship caliber team is loaded with big-time big men, and there is really no chance they could win it all without at least two (even then I think they will have a lot of trouble dealing with the Lakers, Magic, and Celtics frontlines). We all want to get rid of Cap'n Crack, but we know the only way to do it is to give away Turiaf as well. Most diarists on this site have balked at the suggestion, but what follows is the case for making this deal happen.

Argument One: Trading Jack will only be harder over the course of the next 2-3 seasons (until he becomes an expiring or near-expiring contract). The convergence of talent at the top of the league this season is unprecendented. With every top-tier team reloading, the time is now to cash in on the insecurity of a team that has come tantalizingly close to a championship in recent years, and recognizes that their window may be closing. Getting an expiring contract for Jackson is only going to get more difficult after this season. The prospect of trading a disguntled Jack for contracts that are the same length or longer than his current one is just too depressing to contemplate.

Argument Two: Turiaf is a role player, and perhaps a solid backup, but nothing more. I love the guy, really I do. His game is exciting and he brings a lot of energy, but what does he really do for us that we couldn't replace? He is not a good post defender nor is he a particularly good rebounder. He blocks a lot of shots, but we have Randolph, Biedrins, and (next year) Brandon Wright (who I maintain is going to be a very good player and will ultimately make us glad we got him). He does not have good hands, and with a team featuring Curry and Ellis, two guards who like to slash and dish, as well as an offense that features (or ought to feature) lots of high pick and rolls, this is a serious liability. Mikki Moore can easily replace Turiaf in the rotation for this year, and he may actually be an upgrade in several key areas.

Argument Three: Getting rid of Jackson needs to be the number one priority for this team, and contrary to popular opinion I actually think this trade would make us better, not worse, immediately. Azubuike and Morrow need playing time, and only Jackson's departure will allow that to happen in a way that doesn't hurt us (playing Buike at the 3 and Jack at the 4, for example)

Addendum to Argument Three: Acquiring Big Z is not going to make us any better. If he comes here, he won't be playing for us. The guy is just about done with his career, and there is no way he wants to play out the string with us. Hickson, on the other hand, is a guy who might actually be able to help us (at the very least he gives another option at PF). He is barely playing in Cleveland, and I really doubt they would be unwilling to part with him.

So there you have it. Comments please.

Steven Jackson has been on his best behavior for the last 10 days. Undoubtedly, he has come to realization that the only way his situation improves (whether with the Warriors or another team) is to play the best basketball of his career. From my perspective, this is the best thing that could have happened to us given how bleak the picture looked only a week or so ago. Respected commentators on this site put forth a few trade proposals (for example: http://www.goldenstateofmind.com/2009/10/11/1079967/trading-jack-the-ultimate-price) that at the time, given his mental dysfunction, seemed reasonable but now seem prematurely myopic. I mean, really, doesn't keeping a Jackson who knows he is not the primary ball handler nor the #1 offensive option (neither of which he would be were his wishes granted and he magically appeared on the Cav's roster), make more sense than Eddie Curry? (A LOT more sense?) More sense than Peja? To me the answer is now pretty obvious, but let's see what the Hive Mind has to say...

It's been a long time; I shouldn't have left you, without a dope beat to step to...

Why are statistics quoted in "per game" format? Obviously this is a meaningless metric because it doesn't account for how many minutes per game a player actually plays, or who he plays against, or much of anything other than raw production. Some of you nerdier types use the "per 36" format, which is better but still inherently limited because it doesn't tell you what kind of system the player plays in. For example, a guy playing for Don Nelson or Mike D'Antoni is obviously going to have higher numbers (good and bad) than the same guy were he playing for Greg Popovich or Mike Brown (see Jackson, Stephen as a useful test bunny for this scenario).

So my question: why hasn't a metric been developed (or if it has been, why is it never quoted) that shows what a player is likely to do PER POSESSION? This could easily be reflected as a probabilty, and it would allow you to combine statistics (e.g: what is the probabilty of Player A taking AND making a shot each time down the floor?). It also seems that if you wanted to get super geeky on the scene you could overlay this metric with others like "minutes against starters," etc. This would give a far more complete picture than "per anything" can, because it would eliminate more variables.

This seems really simple, even to a layman like me. If better statistics were more readily available, fewer people would doubt their intrinsic value. Thoughts?

So the Warriors appear to be heading into next season with the idea that Monta will run the point, Jack will man the two guard and help with distributing, Rudolph will hold down the 4, and Goose will play the 5. The biggest question mark, for me, is not whether the Monta/Jack backcourt will work out (I personally think it can and will succeed), but rather who is going to play the 3? Kazabuike is a solid player who has made great strides since coming into the league and is worth every penny he is getting from the Dubs. But is he really good enough to be a starter? He shows signs of offensive brilliance, and his ability to shoot the three or drive to the rack against closeouts is awesome. He also brings some needed toughness and physicality when it comes to rebounding. However, he can go quiet for entire games, and this lack of consistency is discouraging. Even more importantly, in two of our greatest areas of need, ball movement and defense, he remains deficient. His passing skills started to improve at the end of the season, and he is clearly making a point of taking the next step in this area. I am less concerned about this than I am about his defensive lapses. While he has shown an ability to defend superior offensive players (I recall him D-ing up Kobe particularly "well"), his lack of lateral quickness makes him a target on switches. Given that he is not particularly long, faster players seem to have no trouble getting past him on the perimeter. With all that said, I think he is ultimately a better fit for our team than Corey Maggette at the 3. While I am not one of the Maggs-haters, I freely admit that his style of play is really not conducive to what we are trying to develop with Monta/Randolph/Goose as our core (namely, a quick-hitting, up-tempo style where the ball moves from one side of the floor to the other).

So, if Buike isn't a starter, and Maggette doesn't fit, that means we need a starting small forward. Someone who brings a defensive mentality, can rebound, and shares the ball. He also needs to be able to shoot the trey, as no one else in our projected starting lineup (save Jack when he gets into Cap'n Unconcious mode) can do this with any regularity. Many names have been bandied about, and most of them are pie-in-the-sky fantasies like Lamar Odom or half-baked ideas like Ron Artest (Sidenote: I have been on the Artest bandwagon for a while now, but seeing him play every night in the playoffs has made me realize that bringing him to the Bay is a bad idea. He is simply too pig-headed offensively. We already have one Jack). Another popular name has been Gerald Wallace. While he doesn't shoot the three, he does other things that would help us. The only problem there is that he plays for a coach (Larry Brown) who values defense above all-else, and so in order to trade for him we would need to offer some good defenders in return, something we do not have the luxury of. So then who?

How about a veteran with Championship experience who can defend both bigger and quicker players, shoots the 3 at nearly 40%, passes well (both in terms of total assists and assist-to-turnover ratio, and grabs 6 boards a night? Who could I be talking about? Why, TAYSHAUN PRINCE, of course.

He is a California native, and apparently the Pistons are interested in moving him. While this makes little sense to me, they also traded one of the top-5 point guards in the league after he led them to 6 consecutive Conference Finals, so I would not put anything past them. The Pistons brass apparently think they need more offense. While I would recommend that they look to acquire a scoring big-man like Amare or Bosh for this purpose, rather than trading away another piece of their core, Prince's name is already coming up in trade rumors. So, how can we get him? Well, I think the most obvious trade, given the Pistons stated desire for more offense, is Corey Maggette. The yearly salaries are virtually identical (Prince actually makes a little more), they are the same age, and Maggette would be an upgrade in terms of scoring. So the Pistons would probably at least consider the deal. From the Warriors perspective, this would be a blockbuster deal. In fact, I would even throw Brandon Wright into the offer to sweeten the pot.

So what do you think, Dub-Nation? Maggette for Prince? Maggette and Wright for Prince? Maggette and Beli? Maggette and a #1 pick? No Tayshaun at all? Remember to VOTE!!!