Sunday, August 30th, 2009...3:41 pm
Should the Spurs Buy a Ticket to the Stephen Jackson Sweepstakes?
As many of you may already know, Stephen Jackson has stated publicly that he would like to be traded by the Golden State Warriors. He mentioned the Texas Three-Step, Cleveland, and New York as potential landing spots. This all begs the question: should the Spurs attempt to trade for Stephen Jackson?
For the purposes of full disclosure, I’ll admit that I would love for Stephen Jackson to return to the Spurs. He was one of the my favorite players during our ‘03 title run. Turmoil has followed him since his days in San Antonio, but my opinion of him has consistently echoed that of his former teammates: Tim Duncan et al. speak often of their affection for him, and so do I.
But there are plenty of players I would love to have on the Spurs. That doesn’t make their acquisition realistic. So is my yearning to see S-Jax back in the silver and black empty hope, or could this truly happen?
At this point, there are only two trade scenarios I would consider (both of which were mentioned in a comment thread on Friday): Jackson for Bonner and Mason; or Jackson for Bonner, Finley and Williams. In terms of the championship run the Spurs are about to make this upcoming season, I think either of those are an immediate upgrade.
And immediate upgrades have been the name of the game this offseason. The notion that Tim Duncan is the window has gained some traction in the front office, and subsequently, from a financial and personnel perspective, the team has gone all in.
If you’ve already bet the house, why not toss in the car and the kids’ college fund while your at it? Then again, it’s not as if the Spurs are doomed to irrelevancy in 2 or 3 years: This is a team with some solid young pieces, a rejuvenated core, and arguably the savviest front office in the league. Maybe a little consideration for the post-Tim Duncan era is in order.
As someone who plans on being a fan far past the year 2012, I’m fine with making some long-term considerations as long as we have already ensured that we will genuinely be a contender this upcoming season. And as we’ve discussed around here recently, there are reasons to be skeptical.
Just to be clear, I believe the Spurs are a contender. In fact, I believe the Spurs might even be slightly underrated. But if we had Stephen Jackson coming off the bench behind Richard Jefferson, we would be a large step towards silencing the doubters and (more importantly) shoring ourselves up against potential injury.
It’s worth noting that, if the Spurs had both Jefferson and Jackson on the team, the starting position at small forward could be up for grabs. For all this talk of Jackson being a “chucker,” his player efficiency rating of 16.20 last season was better than Jefferson’s rating of 15.45. And although I am very susceptible to the argument that Jefferson’s PER was a bit deflated due to the injury woes the Bucks faced, you could make the same argument about Jackson and the Warriors, who were without Monta Ellis for a significant portion of the season.
Again, just to be clear, I think Jefferson deserves the starting job, Jackson or no Jackson. But were this trade to go down, there is an argument to be made.
That being said, we all know PER is disproportionately reactive to a player’s offensive ability and, let’s be honest, Jackson’s abilities on the defensive end are probably a larger concern. Except, when you are talking about trading some combination of Michael Finley, Matt Bonner, or Roger Mason, do you honestly see Jackson as a step down defensively? I don’t.
But Jackson’s potential contributions this upcoming season are not what concerns my colleague Tim Varner, who is opposed to the trade. Tim’s worried about the fact that Jackson is owed $7.6 million next season; $8.5 mil the next; $9.2. mil the season after that; and to top it all off, $10 million during the 2012/13 season. Those are numbers that make even someone as shamelessly adoring of Jackson as myself take a step back.
This all leaves us with a question we have asked numerous times this summer: Would you rather compete for championships during the next 2 to 3 seasons or be better prepared to undergo a legitimate rebuilding effort in 3 or 4? Call me imprudent, but I side with the former.
The Dallas Factor
I’d like to mention that, if Jackson does not end up in a Spurs uniform next season, there is a decent chance that he could end up playing for Dallas. Of all the places aside from San Antonio Jackson expressed interest in (Dallas, Houston, Cleveland, and New York), Dallas worries me the most.
As things currently stand, Dallas is a very underrated ball club. In my opinion, with the Marion acquisition, the moved firmly into the West’s top 5, if not into its top 3. If they had Jason Terry and Stephen Jackson coming off the bench behind Dirk, Howard, Kidd, Marion and Dampier, they would be no pushover come the postseason.
I don’t love the idea of Cleveland strengthening their team any further either, but for the sake of my own mental health, I try not to worry about Eastern Conference contenders too much. We have 82 games and 3 rounds of the playoffs before we have to worry about meeting an Eastern Conference team in an elimination game. Let’s stay focused on our rivals in the West.
Which is also exactly why I am not worried about the Rockets: Even if they did trade for Jackson, he alone doesn’t push them into the ranks of the West’s elite.
By no means am I advocating trading for a player just so a division rival doesn’t get him. But I did want to say that seeing Jackson in that awful blue and green isn’t exactly the way I had hoped this story would end either.
76 Comments
August 30th, 2009 at 4:32 pm
Graydon,
I agree that Captain Jack would be a good addition and would be an upgarde to the Spurs immediate needs… however,
I opposed to this trade because of the same reason Tim has (his contract bad enough to take). And if ever by the 2012-2013 he would be the only Spur under contract.
Also, I would want to have the ‘wait and see’ attitude… observe what we have first, then make a possible move before the trade deadline in February (if needed).
Maybe by then we will have more options because we still have the expiring contracts of Finley, Bonner and Mason (although i’m hesistant to include him in a trade).
Dallas, concerns me too… but then again IF Haislip can play good defense (with the likes of Dirk, Odom and Lewis), Ian breaks in to our Big man rotation, Hairston and Hill continues to develop and Blair is what we think he is…. I like our chances. thats a lot of if’s and that is why we need to have to ‘wait and see’ first. Just my thoughts… Cheers!
August 30th, 2009 at 5:14 pm
Cpt. Jack has a special place in Spurs lore, not least because he helped bring in the Admiral’s farewell championship. But I don’t think we should pick him up. Here’s why: (1) The Spurs have already committed a ton of money to salary in the Jefferson trade, and adding Jackson’s sizeable contract sounds like a bridge too far. (2) A lot has happened with Jackson since he left the Spurs in ‘03. Too much of it had to do with strip clubs and guns for him to be the type of “character guy” that the Spurs generally seek out. (3) Because so much is up in the air right now for the Spurs regarding how well certain positions will be filled, it makes more sense to wait for February before trying to fill needs. We just don’t realistically know what our needs are now. And if we go for Jackson now, we may lose our most tradeable assets (who also happen to be quality players) on a position that doesn’t need much bolstering, while another position remains unfilled because of some unanticipated problem (below-average play by a new addition, injuries, etc.). And, if we did find ourselves overstocked at small forward (or at least insufficiently stocked elsewhere) there’s not much likelihood we’d get a trade partner to pick up Jackson’s sizeable contract at midseason during a time of financial belt-tightening.
I’m not saying that Cpt. Jack would be a worthless addition. Far from it. But, if it was my call, I wouldn’t make that trade (and all Spurs fans breathe a sigh of relief that it is not, in fact, my call).
August 30th, 2009 at 5:20 pm
I agree with the trade scenarios. I too am a fan of Jack. I also don’t want to see any quality players going to the Mavericks. (An aside) I want Terry to end up on a loser because he along with Paul are the 2 most punk players I have ever seen.
August 30th, 2009 at 5:36 pm
I just want to point out that one of the primary reasons we got Kurt Thomas was because he was the only defender in the western conference who gave Timmy problems. and that worked out great for us. If i remember right, we payed him about 8 mil a year (at least the first year). I reckon Jack would probably be a bit more productive. I havent checked the stats, but if our favorite Laker poster (aka Kaveh) on this blog is right, RJ isnt as good of a shooter as Jackson. I think Jackson has matured over the past few years as hes been in and out of trouble. The guy can ball. Big time. He can shoot well (not as good as Mason, but still good), he can defend well, and he can handle the ball probably better than Mason. I like the wait and see approach, but if we make a move, i would be happy if it was for him. He never had any character issues while he was with us, and i doubt thats a coincidence…
August 30th, 2009 at 5:38 pm
I think in this case the Spurs can have their cake and eat it too, as far as being able to be a legitimate contender through 2012 as well as having a stable, financially sound future with a competitive team after that.
To me, Jackson is a longer, more talented version of Mason, but when you factor in all of the questionable reasons for pulling the trigger (I already detailed my reasons in “globetrotting with the Spurs” comments), to me it doesn’t make sense to take the risk.
I also have more confidence in Mason than many Spurs fans seem to. The Spurs put him in a role in over his head last season and, up until he had to play backup PG as well as his underwhelming post season stint, I thought he passed with flying colors. The guy is a harder worker and will be in his rightful role this season. Without any risk, I think he can fill the theoretical Jackson role well enough for this team to win the championship this season.
Willingly taking and making clutch shots, whether it’s in the regular season or playoffs, to me is a skill not to be taken lightly. He’s shown he can do it in the former and he deserves another chance to proven he can do it in the latter.
August 30th, 2009 at 5:52 pm
The reason we are even discussing this, but somehow nobody wants to say it, is that even though we all hope that Manu won’t get injured, deep inside we fear it’s just not going to work out. It’s impossible these days to read the “Manu” without the mention “if healthy” afterward. It’s depressing, and that’s what the prospect of trading for for S-Jax revolves around: he could step up in Manu’s shoes. We all know the Spurs chances will go way down if any of the big 3 is injured, and the Spurs don’t have any “insurance” for any of them — but in Manu’s case it just seems so much more likely that it would be borderline suicide to start the season w/o somebody to replace him.
Ok, now that I’ve got that off my chest:
- many people have reported that Nelson and Cuban aren’t really the best friends in the world. On the other hand Cuban likes overpaying, but still.
- I’m a bit surprised by the contract angle. If there’s anybody that the Spurs are overpaying for, it’s Jefferson. And we don’t even know what he’s worth. Hopefully he’ll prove that he’s worth every cent of his $14+ million salary, I’d actually be happy if he would be worth every cent of a $10 million salary. Without going into a debate of how much money players should be making, I’d say S-Jax seems to be paid about what he’s worth, in relative terms. A contract in his range of $8-10 million a year looks “normal” if compared to similar players around the league.
What would worry me the most if this trade were to go through, is that suddenly our depth (outside of the 2) would suddenly be (essentially) rookies. I’m not sure how far a “system team” like the Spurs can go with a roster of superstar starters and rookie bench.
August 30th, 2009 at 6:29 pm
Will , I dont agree that we are discussing such a trade because we fear Manu will not be healthy enough. The presence of Jax in 03 certainly helped the spurs, and Stephens presence in that year had nothing to do with being Manus insurance policy.
That being said, if we do sign Jackson, I dont think we would be able to afford resigning Manu at the end of this year ( If you know more about the cap than a cap-workings ignoramus like myself, please feel free to interject ) So in a way , we would be choosing Jackson over Manu Ginobili.
August 30th, 2009 at 6:37 pm
Alamobro is correct. Unless Peter Holt is willing to go way over the tax line, Jax would eat up most of the money we would use to resign Manu.
And, in all honesty, that’s why my feelings about this are more conflicted than my post reveals. Yes, I would love to have Jax back on the team. But if that means no more Manu after this season, well…
August 30th, 2009 at 6:40 pm
Graydon, Perhaps gaining Stephen Jackson would not necessarily relegate Rich J to the bench. Stephen could play shooting guard for San Antonio the way he did in 03.
I salivate at the thought of Parker, Manu, Captain Jack, Rich J and Timmy on the floor at the same time. Im sure the smallball-happy Pop drools even more at the prospect of this.
The problem is if Mason should be included in the deal , we would lose our best shooter.
Worse yet, the this deal could possibly torpedo our ability to resign Manu. Also , how would this affect potentially signing Splitter at years end ?
August 30th, 2009 at 7:00 pm
ok first of all, MANU is our best shooter, not mason who choked late in the playoffs last year. I could agree with second or third best shooter but not first. lol also just trading mason and bonner would solidify the deal as shown in the espn trade machine. Also, williams, mahinmi, g hill, ginobili and finley all will have their contracts expiring by next season which will definitely decrease the cap space, but we will definitely resign ginobili, hill and i’m sure ginobili will be willing to take less than his current salary to stay on the spurs. Because of his age, he won’t get more than 7 million a season after next season. This trade is definitely possible. Also if Dallas takes Stephen Jackson, then you might as well put dallas as finals contenders next year, we cannot afford to take more damage from Dallas next year. (i hate Dallas and have too many friends who like their team in which we end up having 20 minute debates on whose better the spurs or the mavs) Nabbing jefferson will definitely put us over the edge of the lakers and will make us contender even if ginobili is injured all next season. I really hope this trade goes through. Oh and here’s the mason bonner trade for jackson on trade machine:
http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=lp2gay
August 30th, 2009 at 7:10 pm
For clarity, it’s not the amount owed to Jackson that bothers me. (Although, I think trading for Jackson portends bad things for Manu Ginobili’s future with the Spurs.) It’s the length of Jackson’s contract that bothers me.
Setting aside the duration of his contract, Jackson would be an awesome get. He’d improve the team–in fact, the Spurs would have the best roster in the league–in almost every way. And he’d help us the most against the Lakers. On that level, there isn’t much to think about. You pull the trigger.
August 30th, 2009 at 7:25 pm
While Manu is a far better all around guard than Mason, and is infinitely more of a “clutch” player than Mason,I wouldnt say he is a better flat-out shooter than Mason…..The question isnt IF the deal can be consumated,the question is SHOULD it be consumated.
Outside of being Manus agent or best friend, and fast forwarding to the end of next season, I dont see how anyone can be sure that manu will take a sizeable pay cut to stay with the Spurs. Then there is the question of Tiaggo Splitter who under the cap rules, will be able to be offered a bigger contract than the normal rookie offering…
That being said….I agree zainn, that signing Jackson, in addition to significantly increasing the spurs title hopes this season, would also make a great insurance policy were Manu to be reinjured.
I still dont know if I would do this deal…
August 30th, 2009 at 7:46 pm
I think the Spurs should absolutely go after Jax. Although he is a bit overpaid, he can essentially play three positions. (He actually could played 4 positions with the Warriors, but he was a SUPER undersized PF). He would not only help us with depth at the SF position, but also played quite a few minutes a PG which would also shore up the PG position behind Parker and Hill.
I too am concerned about his salary a couple years out, but by then we will have a totally different team plus we could trade Jax’s expiring contract. Finley, Bonner, and Williams would do the trick without having to give up Mason. I really think he is going to have a nice year.
Could you imagine this lineup:
C – Duncan
PF – McDyess
SF – Jackson
SG – RJ
PG – Parker
6th man – Manu
Pops’ biggest dilemma would be whether RJ or Jax plays in the final three minutes! Well, even if this doesn’t happen, the Spurs have had a hell of an offseason.
August 30th, 2009 at 8:05 pm
Even if Stephen Jackson is an upgrade at present, I’m still not going to pull the trigger that fast… We still don’t know who might be available come trade deadline by February. In my opinion, if we think we still need to improve our current roster, waiting ’till the trade deadline maybe our best route…
August 30th, 2009 at 8:30 pm
The good thing is that even is manu is injured b4 the trrade deadline we can trade manu to a crappy team for some high quaality teams for cap relief. Also manu has hit wayyyy more game winners than mason. I still think manu or even parker is a better shooter than mason
August 30th, 2009 at 9:05 pm
Like previous posts have mentioned the Spurs might be best served to wait and see what they have and then address any potential weakness and with that in mind the Spurs should not trade for S-Jax.
In my opinion the Spurs should only pull the trigger right now for a player that helps us right now and also has a contract expires in time to that keeps our rebuilding plan for the 2011 offseason intact. As the season continues their should be more than enough options for the Spurs to consider with the number of teams that are trying to clear cap space for the Lebron chase.
Now of course a change of plans could take place if during the season…..I don’t even want to say it but if a certain player happened to still have ankle issues this season than his expiring contract could be used in a trade for Jackson.
August 30th, 2009 at 9:06 pm
don’t we have bird rights to manu so we can resign him without affecting our cap correct. then weres the problem. lets get the captain win it this year and the next three while were at it. and i just looked at the warriors page and last year was jacksons third year with them so if we trade for him we get his bird rights also.
August 30th, 2009 at 9:13 pm
I live in San Francisco. I watch the Warriors. Stephen Jackson would have been a great role player before Jackson got with the Warriors. With Nellie ball and the little basketball IQ fans-wise there is in the Bay Area, Stephen Jackson fell victim to the hype. I cringed for 3 years at the number of ill-advised shots he takes and cringed worse when he made a fastbreak pull-up 3 pointer.
Jackson is not what people make him out to be. A good defender he is not. The only good D he plays is on Dirk and everyone knows a little muscle and a little swag can take Dirk out of his element. A leader in any sense he is not. I have seen him dribble the ball for 7 seconds, then slowly drive the ball and not have the whistle called for him while the other team is running for an easy fastbreak layup as “Capt’n Jack” is jumping up and down, flailing his arms and yelling at one of the officials.
I have been a longtime fan of the Spurs. They are my favorite team and Tim Duncan is my favorite player. As someone who has witnessed the horrors of the Warriors and Stephen Jackson first hand, I only wish Jackson will sign with the Cavs, Celtics or Lakers. He will cripple cap-space and be an albatross.
Sorry for my semi-rant. JACKSON IS TERRIBLE.
August 30th, 2009 at 9:23 pm
i may sound stupid , but is it possible to re-negotiate his contract if he wanted to be on a contending team?
August 30th, 2009 at 9:24 pm
Regarding Manu, I don’t think we have to worry about his injury to much… he’s resting right now and has mentioned that he’ll come back 100% when training camp starts.
Manu knows his body more than anyone so let’s be optimistic that he’ll come back strong. And of course we know that Pop will still be watching his minutes when the season starts…
So need to rush for a trade, when indeed we may have better options in the future…
August 30th, 2009 at 9:26 pm
* I mean no need to rush for a trade (with all due respect to Capt. Jack)
August 30th, 2009 at 9:30 pm
Zack,
I’m not sure fully aware of his contract details. But the only way (I think) to re-negotiate or restructure his contract is if he an opt out clause…
that way he can opt out and negotiate a new deal with the team…. But it’s highly unlikely to happen.
August 30th, 2009 at 9:32 pm
By the way Guys, If you have the time please checkout My blog your comments and suggestions would be helpful thanks!
August 30th, 2009 at 9:48 pm
For the people using the wait and see argument, that does not really fly in this scenario. From a talent standpoint, there is no one better shaking loose at the trade deadline.
It would be like the RJ scenario. The Spurs had a 2010 plan. But when RJ became available, that went out the window because the Spurs could do not better than RJ anyways. So why wait?
It would be the same with Jackson.
The contract situation is a tricky one though. The Spurs have been pretty good at moving bad contracts (Butler…) but they are running out of assets to package in order to do so.
So Jack could be traded if the Spurs wanted to rebuild when Tim is done, but would it be worth about 3 legit shots at a title now to give up Blair or Tiago or Hill to get rid of Jackson later?
August 30th, 2009 at 10:03 pm
JJ,
The fact it we still don’t know who would be available come trade deadline. I like the wait and see attitude because it give us a better idea on what needs to be addressed…
As it is right now, the current roster looks good enough even with Bonner in it. Well atleast on paper. Truth is we don’t know how things will pan out that is why i’m choosing that route…
and giving up either Blair, Hill or Tiago just to get Capt. Jack (is 31 already) will be a mistake…. we still have no idea how huge their potential might be… Blair could be a beast on the boards and has offensive skills.
Hill is developing quite fast and could prove to be a nice backup for Tony.
While Tiago has been solid in the FIBA Americas.
In addition, we already have RJ to start at the SF position, Finley can still give us atleast 10-15 mins a night and we have Hairston… so let’s be a little more patient.
August 30th, 2009 at 10:27 pm
You misunderstood:
Even if we don’t know what will come available at the trade deadline, realistically you could not hope for anything better than Jackson.
Lebron is not shaking loose or Kobe or Wade. Jackson will be the best tier of player that could possibly shake loose. Not to mention, he knows the system already and is loved by the core he won a title with. There is no better fit to hope or wait for.
I am not saying they have to get him, just trying to make that point.
Also, I did not mean give Hill, Tiago or Blair up now. I meant that if the Spurs were worried about the length of Jacks contract, they could package one of those guys down the road to get rid of it. It is tough to determine whether or not it would be worth it. Legit shot at titles now or possibly giving up talent later?
Yes, the Spurs have RJ to start. But what Jackson does is offer a ton of options. Jackson can play the 2 spot easily. He could come off of the bench. He can play PF if you want to go small ball.
So you could have:
Parker
Jackson
RJ
Duncan
Dice
or
Parker
Mason or Finley
RJ
Duncan
Dice
with
Hill
Gino
SJ
Blair or Haislip
Ian or Theo
or
In crunch time small ball
Parker
Gino
RJ
Jackson
Duncan
Just a lot of options, not to mention the significant upgrade over Finley or Mason in perimeter defense.
I think the waiting until the deadline notion is the least important aspect of this potential deal. But there are other legitimate questions that make it tough. Especially the contract.
August 30th, 2009 at 10:57 pm
No I didn’t misunderstood… all I’m saying is we might have better options or flexibility if we wait until the deadline…
Don’t get me wrong I also like Jackson (I just don’t like the way he’s salary is structured) but the way I see it. He could be an upgrade on the defensive side that Hill and Hairston combined might be able to accomplish.
I am hesistant to include Mason in a possible trade because he shoots the 3 ball very well (better than Jackson). he also proves to be clutch although he kind of ‘disappear’ during last season’s playoffs…. But with the current roster, Mason as a fifth or sixth wheel on offense I like our chances.
Also, I’m not hoping for Kobe or Lebron to get loose… Keep in mind that there a lot of teams out there that might be seeking to shred salary before the trade deadline that way we have more options.
August 30th, 2009 at 11:04 pm
Three expiring contracts: Bonner, Finley, Williams. Trade value works. We loose nothing. No reason to give up Mason.
If Holt is serious about taking on LAL and challenging for rings, then go all-in for real. Make the most of Tim’s window.
Could Jax defend (along with RJ) both Kobe then James?
PS – If Jax didn’t want to spend he last productive years with a non-contender, he should have thought about that before he signed his last contract.
August 31st, 2009 at 4:41 am
Zack,
No, it’s not possible to renegotiate his contract.
August 31st, 2009 at 4:44 am
Bigtee,
Yes, we have Manu’s bird rights. So, in that sense it doesn’t effect the cap. But the Spurs are way into tax territory, so in that sense whatever Holt pays Manu will cost him double.
August 31st, 2009 at 5:09 am
If we could pull off a deal where we keep our big 4 (RJ included) it would be some team. With so many options, Pop would need a lot of control. It would take some assurance that Jax would be 2003 Jax and not present-day Jax.
August 31st, 2009 at 5:20 am
TE-Dublin,
I’d prefer to keep an expiring contract back, and, as a player, I like Marcus Williams. Mason and Bonner is the way to go.
August 31st, 2009 at 5:28 am
Robby,
Liked your Kobe-Duncan-Shaq piece.
So far as wait and see goes, you know that I agree. In this case, however, if Jackson is available for a pair of expirings then the Spurs need to think about it. I’m disinclined to make such a move, but wouldn’t be bothered by it at all. They’d guarantee themselves no less than the WCF for the next 2 years.
August 31st, 2009 at 6:20 am
To echo JJ’s points,
Captain Jack has already played for the Spurs. He knows the system, he’s played with Tim, Manu, and Tony, and he knows Pop and the playbook.
Any guy we could bring in at the Feb. deadline would have to learn/adjust to all of these things.
Not to mention if we are making a deal in Feb. it will be because our team is not good enough to win the title.
I would like to think if the Spurs make any moves they might as well move on Jack NOW. Trying to build team chemistry is a lot easier over a full 9 month season than Feb on.
Winning now means more to me than 2012 and beyond. Tim might be gone, Manu might be gone, and every indication so far says Pop will be gone if Tim retires.
Will Parker even resign in that situation? I have no clue.
This has been a crazy summer. I’ve loved every second of it. The only thing that could make it crazier would be bringing Captain Jack back.
Let’s do it.
August 31st, 2009 at 7:11 am
So here’s my question, I would love to have Capt. Jack back, but wouldn’t that level of talent want the ball more? With five greats on the floor who would be willing to surrender their touches besides Timmy, who is the one guy we need to get the ball to more.
August 31st, 2009 at 7:57 am
I think Jackson is a hands down upgrade over Mason, who he’d ultimately be replacing anyways. It’d be kind of like going back to 2003, but again the long-term implications are huge. I think Jackson has matured somewhat in his ability to hit shots and make plays, also somewhat with his decision making, more-so than in 2003. That alone, added with viable defense (at least better than Mason or Finley) makes him an upgrade at least from an on-court perspective. In essence it’s pretty much 2003 replacing Robinson, Bowen, Claxton, and Rose with McDyess, Jefferson, Hill, and Blair/Mahinmi/Haislip. Jackson knows the system and for all his foibles he’s a solid player. He’s an automatic upgrade over anything we have currently as a starting 2 or backup 3. A wing rotation of Jackson, Jefferson, and Manu would immediately be among the best both offensively and possibly even defensively in the league. Tack on a PG of Tony Parker and one of the best big-men in Duncan and I have a team that I think is difficult to stop. At the worst case scenario, Jackson just becomes additional Manu-ankle insurance. While he’s turnover prone, you know he can make plays, and you know he can make big shots.
August 31st, 2009 at 8:16 am
Randy,
I would say yes if we were talking about Vince Carter or Corey Magette, but at this point in Jack’s career I think he cares more about winning.
There’s no doubt in my mind if Jackson could go back in time, there’s no way he doesn’t resign with the Spurs in ‘03.
Sometimes it takes guys a while to mature and realize what’s most important… winning.
August 31st, 2009 at 8:24 am
Jaceman,
I’ve just started into your match up series. Good stuff.
August 31st, 2009 at 8:57 am
Jaceman, I think in worst-case scenario, Stephen Jacksons, in addition to providing Manu insurance for one season, leads to our in inability to re-sign Manu at the end of the season.
Also, Jax will be 32 years old by the time next postseason rolls around and is commanding an average of about 9.5 million per season over the next four years. Between Stephens contract and his age,our “youth movement” would be undermined a bit to put it lightly.
Ultimately, if the Spurs should bring the captain aboard and Manu were to truly be whole again ( and somehow convinced to sign for less at the end of this season ) this trade would be an obvious boon over the short term. Id say it would be worth it even if it torpedoed our ability to sign Splitter next season….
August 31st, 2009 at 9:43 am
Let’s make it. Captain Jack can defend Dirk. Also, he can play “ala” P. Pierce. Do you remember Kobaby, he had tons of problems with Pierce/Garneet, can you imagine jACKSON/DUNCAN
August 31st, 2009 at 9:43 am
Captain Jack is probably the only ex-Spur that I would ever campaign for them to reacquire, but that contract is a little cumbersome. That and his age would be my biggest worries about him. And why wouldn’t they start him at 2? Manu ends up on the bench every season anyway. Start Jackson and Jefferson, bring Manu off the bench, and play all three with Tim & Tony as small, crunch time line up.
August 31st, 2009 at 9:45 am
LETS DO IT. kOBABY HAD TONS OF PROBLEM WITH PIERCE/GARNETT, SO HE WILL WITH JACKSON/DUNCAN. pLUS mANU AND rj CAN guard him over some strectches to drive him crazy and tire him. Also, Captain jack plays good D on Do(i)rk. Another option is to add Bowen or trade for bell so the fakers will pee their pants
August 31st, 2009 at 9:47 am
Much like Sauce above, I am also a Spurs/Duncan fan from the SF Bay Area and get to see a lot of Warrior games. And I have to agree with Sauce on pretty much EVERYTHING he said. Everything. He knows what he’s talking about.
I would also add that Jackson is no longer the slasher he was just 2-3 years ago and that although he made highlight-reel 3’s in the 4th Qtr 2-3 seasons ago (and some last season–notably against Lebron), they never showed the ridiculous amount of bad 3 point attempts he took through out the rest of the game. His stats are also VERY inflated because he played for the Warriors (similar to the inflated numbers of David Lee and anyone else on the Knicks or Suns or Sacramento). It would be very interesting to know what the avg pts/gm the players he were gaurding had per game last year against him. The stats for the players on these running teams playing no defense should be adjusted for inflation, no joke.
I think Mason is a better fit at the 2 position because he is a MUCH better spot up 3 point shooter and because we have Tony and RJ for our slashing needs.
Its true that Jackson would be a good back-up SF and is flexible enough to be an insurance policy for Manu and can play PG sparingly. And one thing that Jackson certainly is, is durable. He has played A TON of minutes at GS (which is why he may take as many bad shots as he does).
But if we make a move I believe our best move would to be consolidate and shore up our frontline and get a legit (7 foot) center. This is the NBA, not college, and Blair 6′7 frame is only going to get him as far as Chuck Hayes. And apparently there won’t be any players like this available until closer to the trade deadline. As for acclimating this savior of a center into out system, most likely he will be a defensive specialist so how much acclimation does he really need? Besides, (and I may be wrong on this) isn’t it much easier to incorporate a big man into our system than a wing player?
True Jackson would give us more options, but he essentially gives us the same things that Finley gives us. And Bonner’s ability to be a stretch big should not be underestimated (until we can find a good defensive big that is).
Bottom line? Don’t trade for Jackson!!!
August 31st, 2009 at 9:52 am
The worries over Jackson’s age are a bit overblown. He’s only 31 and it’s not like he’s the kind of player who relies on athleticism. He’s more of a grounded player and he’s developed into a nice point-forward of sorts (averaged 6.5 dimes last year) Does he take bad shots? Yes, but then, taking bad shots is an intricate and necessary vice of Nellie Ball. In the Spurs system, with Duncan and Parker and ultimately Pop running the show, Jackson won’t be taking too many bad shots, especially with Manu and Jefferson crowding his minutes already.
The same goes for his off-the-court problems. Looking at his time as the leader of the Dubs, he hasn’t gotten into any trouble (serious anyways).
As for the concerns of not re-signing Manu after the season, I wouldn’t worry about that too much. If the Spurs take this team with Jackson to the finals and/or win it all, it’s going to be tough for Holt to not bring Manu back no matter what the costs. A championship is a championship and it brings championship money with it. The wise thing (and the Spurs management is the epitome of that word) would be to offer Ginobili a 2 year contract.
On the flipside, if Manu gets hurt, which is more likely than not at this point, then the Spurs can retain their flexibility at the trade deadline by dealing him for whoever might come available.
As a Lakers fan, I know it’s tough to lose an exciting player to win right now (Ariza for Artest), but winning championships, as all of you Spurs fans know, is what the NBA season is all about. As much as I don’t want to see this trade go down, getting Jackson puts the Spurs without question on top, a place where many pundits already have them. Scary.
For what it’s worth, I would do this trade.
August 31st, 2009 at 10:06 am
Beat Counselor,
While Mason is a better spot up shooter, as is Finley, neither one of them is close to the player that Jackson is. While you say that Jackson’s numbers were inflated on a running team, the same argument can be made for why his defense looked so atrocious. Name one player on the Warriors who didn’t appear to get lit up on defense? I mean, he played quite a few minutes at Power forward and point guard for god’s sake. Speaking of god, defensive philosophy to the Warriors is like god to an atheist.
Jackson is the kind of player who can give the bigger shooting guards and bigger SFs fits, especially with Timmy and McDyess, and perhaps Ratliff behind him guarding the basket. He’s physical and scrappy, and showed that back when he was with the Pacers and Spurs. He’s also the kind of player that can carry a team offensively on any given night (though, he proved he can’t do it night in and night out). Having Jackson assures that Manu can be used even more sparingly, thus saving him for the playoffs.
Also, using Manu for 20-25 minutes a night not only saves his legs, but it also devalues him for the offseason when he’s looking to re-sign.
Maybe Wacko Jacko will be crap in three years and the Spurs will be pissed off that they’re paying him $11 million. But if he helps bring a couple of finals appearances or a championship or two, nobody’s gonna be that bitter.
Besides, in three years, Timmy could be retired and Parker will need a tough veteran around to help him carry, what will probably be a much younger team.
As for waiting for that defensive minded center that will magically appear at mid-season, you can always use Manu’s expiring to try and get that player, though, I have no idea who even remotely fits that description. The best I could come up with is Marcus Camby, and even if the Clips are way out of the race, they’re just as likely to hold onto Camby’s expiring $10 million contract.
ERick Dampier? I’d rather have Wacko Jacko…
August 31st, 2009 at 10:11 am
Great post Jordan and great to hear a Laker fan with a thoughtful perspective.
I agree that the system Jack has been playing in (Nelly Ball) has hurt the perception of what he can do.
Nelly doesn’t exactly preach defense. He does encourage jacking up shots whenever possible, and more or less playing with reckless abandonment.
I think those who are hesistant by Jack’s shot selection, high turnover rate, or lack of defense should look at the system (or lack thereof) that he has been playing in.
Jackson’s strengths: big frame, post-up game, hits big shots, can run the point, unpredictability (some call it crazy), outweigh the negative perceptions in my eyes.
August 31st, 2009 at 10:17 am
Aaron,
His age could seem to be a big problem, but if you look at his career he is just hitting his prime. Some guys just age really well..for example Kobe. I am really on the fence with the whole trade possibility, but if I had to make a choice now, I would say Bring home Jack! Tim Duncan is my favorite player of all time, and I want him to retire with more championships than Kobe and Shaq. Yet another reason why we can’t let Jack go. He must not end up @ Dallas or Cleveland. No ring for the King!
August 31st, 2009 at 10:38 am
While I love Jax(for mostly sentimental reasons), I think it’s too early to say whether the Spurs should go for him. I want to see(among other things) what we get out of Haislip – if he can play the 3, as has been suggested on numerous Spurs sites, there might not be a need for Jax. Too many questions right now, just like Tim said.
August 31st, 2009 at 11:46 am
Look, you can analyze this 6 ways from Sunday and every statement can be met with skepticism and lead to more questions. The only facts that remain are:
1) Jackson is a significant talent upgrade offensively and defensively over Mason and Finley. Even though it is a legit question whether or not the gain in Jackson will be recognized entirely if he just fills the Mason role because of limited touches and such, he no doubt is a better player.
2) Spurs are in win now mode and do not have a lot of time to wait and see on players. If they get surefire bet player like Jackson, it goes a long way to solidifying the gamble they are taking.
3) His contract is of serious concern. The length could have serious repercussions not only with regards to Manu Ginobili resigning, but with possibly hindering the rebuilding process after Tim.
August 31st, 2009 at 11:57 am
Jordan-
I must admit you make some excellent points. Nellie’s system is essentially 7 seconds or less so, yes taking bad shots is inherent. Also you’re right, Jackson can take over a game unlike Mason or Finley. You’re also right that SJax has been an upstanding guy since he went to the Ws. And again, you’re right it would be nice to platoon Manu, RJ and Jax and save Manu for the playoffs. And again you’re right there really aren’t many defensive minded 7 footers out there to be had.
But I do feel Capt Jack is past his peak by 2 years.
What I wouldn’t do for Pryzbilla or Dalembert, Gortat or even Roy Hibbert. I would even be willing to consider, Bogut, Kaman, Foster and even the more offensive minded Brad Miller. All of which seems unlikely at this point…but who knows by the trade deadline.
August 31st, 2009 at 12:14 pm
I think there’s no question that Captain Jack would be a significant upgrade. However, I’m not sure that it’s really an upgrade we’d want to make. Right now, if we trade Bonner, that puts a lot of pressure on DeJuan Blair, Ian Mahinmi and Theo Ratliff to produce as the only three big men left behind Bonner. Obviously, that’s a risky proposition because we have to both worry about all of their ability to produce (Blair and Mahinmi because of inexperience, Ratliff because he has too much) as well as their injury issues. If Duncan or McDyess gets injurred at any point in the season, suddenly we’d find ourselves even more thin up front.
Furthermore, if we sit tight, there’s always a good chance that someone is going to underachieve and start a fire sale around the trade deadline. We might be able to get someone much better than Jackson for hopefully less of a long-term commitment. Just because a trade might indeed be an upgrade doesn’t mean we shouldn’t hold out to see if we can get a better deal later on.
August 31st, 2009 at 12:26 pm
The thought of Jackson coming to the silver and black, excities me. But my worries are the money Jackson is owed and I believe it will stunt the growth of the Spurs young players. Finley is almost done, Jefferson will be a main cog for awhile. So lets see how Hairston, Hill, and Blair turn out.
Plus, if Splitter comes next summer. Its like getting a free agent who can make a impact right then. Jackson is good no doubt, but he is getting older. I like what the Spurs have right now. Jackson will go somewhere else, hopefully not Dallas, or Cleveland. I’m hoping for NY or Houston.
August 31st, 2009 at 12:50 pm
I don’t think Houston wants him. They let Artest walk for the same reason they won’t want Jackson.
Dallas is well over the luxury tax for the foreseeable future, so they would owe Jax double his salary for quite a while.
Possibly the Cavs, but they don’t have many expiring contracts they would be willing to move (Big Z, Shaq). Possibly Delonte West (guaranteed only 500K next season) and Jamario Moon for Jax?
I don’t know why the Knicks would take Jackson and that contract if they are trying to shed salary.
So out of the teams that Jackson named, the Spurs seem the most likely, but even then there are some arguments on why the Spurs would not be interested.
It could be a tough situation for GS and just because a player wants something, does not mean they get it.
August 31st, 2009 at 12:56 pm
Gents and ladies,
Great discussion so far. For my part, I’ve been further persuaded by the leave Jackson alone crowd.
And, fwiw, if he’s not moved now, the Spurs can go get him at deadline.
August 31st, 2009 at 1:28 pm
@Beat Counselor,
The 76ers would probably be jumping for joy if the Spurs wanted to take Dalembert off their hands. But, I don’t think he’s going to be what you’re looking for and that price tag is just as ugly. As for Jackson being past his prime, you may be right, but he is only 31. Nash won his second MVP when he was 31. Not that I’m comparing them. But shooting, defense and passing age very well, and Jackson’s game is rooted in all three of those things.
@JJ
True, true, and true…though, Manu’s situation should be looked at as a separate issue. I mean, if people want to stick on that point, then they’d have to think of it like the team is trading Finley, Bonner, and Mason for Ginobili next year. That, in and of itself, is a shakier proposition than trading for Jackson imo.
@John,
I think you have a valid point about injuries to the bigs. Even the young rookie has pressing injury concerns, but, in all honesty, if Duncan gets hurt, that pretty much puts the season down the toilet anyway. There isn’t a single player who can fill in, even adequately for Timmy missing significant time. If McDyess goes down (and he’s been a rock the past few seasons) Duncan has won with Nesterovic, Mohammed and Oberto, so finding a smart big (not saying Nazr was smart…) won’t be too hard by mid season. Hell, Oberto might be available! On the flipside of that, finding a player like Jackson when other teams will be going all in or pulling all their chips off the table at mid-season, will be much harder. Getting him now allows for the team to gel from the get-go and it helps ease Ginobili back.
@Sean C
Thanks. See, ALL lakers fans aren’t asswhipes.
@Timothy Varner,
Was wondering what points have swayed you in favor of moving away from Jackson.
August 31st, 2009 at 1:32 pm
Perhaps this doesn’t hold true for Jackson, since he’s played for Popovich before, but I’m hard pressed to think of any team that made a major shift in its rotation mid-season via some pre-trade deadline move that has won in that season. Furthermore, short of Marcus Camby, there really aren’t any “legit” defensive-minded seven-footers out there, none that fit well next to Duncan at the least. The only two other fits are both playing for the Celtics (Garnett and Wallace).
I agree to some extent that trading Bonner might not be a great idea, since he at least is a known factor. John, please check your roster, last I checked, trading Bonner would leave a good 4 other bigs besides McDyess and Duncan, those being Mahinmi, Haislip, Blair, and Ratliff. Of course, we don’t expect Ratliff to be a huge factor, but Bonner really becomes just insurance in the roster, insurance in case Mahinmi, Haislip, and Blair don’t pan out, those three are currently the biggest x-factors in the Spurs roster at the moment.
I was unable to watch a whole lot of games but I’m rather amused by the sudden love of Roger Mason, at least as a basketball player. I’m sure he’s a great guy, he shoots the three fairly well, but he’s an undersized 2 with fairly poor defense and is relatively inefficient in his scoring. Are there people I would rather have than Stephen Jackson? Sure. I’ll take any one of Caron Butler, Kobe Bryant, Brandon Roy, or even Michael Redd, are those realistic? Not at all. The only reason to not take Jackson here and now are simply the future implications regarding salary and all that, and perhaps that warrants a cautious look. However, roster-wise, Jackson is hands down an upgrade over Finley and Mason, that’s not the question, I think the question is, can we find a cheaper and younger version in Hairston and/or Williams?
2-way wing players are hard to find, and Jackson is among those. He doesn’t make the best decisions, but he’s a crafty player and he can be effective. He’d end up being something of a fall-back, albeit an expensive one, but he might be worthwhile. This roster spot has been one that I think the Spurs should have been upgrading for a while, but we just haven’t. Ultimately, while I’m not a huge fan of waiting and seeing until the trade deadline (as the Spurs usually don’t do) because of the lack of time to mesh, it might be a necessary evil in order to better assess our needs. What do we need more? More viable wing options or an improvement on the front line? Ultimately it boils down to who fails to deliver: Williams and Hairston? or Haislip, Blair, and Mahinmi?
However, that being said, with Mason, Finley, and Bonner being known quantities, I still don’t think we should settle for them. I think they’re highly tradeable, and ought to be traded if an improvement can be made. Stephen Jackson: upgrade, as for the contract and money issues, I’ll let Buford decide if Jackson is worth that price.
BTW Tim, thanks for reading it. Hopefully I’ll be able to get some more posts up soon.
August 31st, 2009 at 2:03 pm
Boy oh boy, I cannot wait for the season to start. Partly, to see the new-look Spurs in action. But just as much, to quell all the entertaining but ultimately, to my mind, wasted energy being spent on discussions of how we can secure Stephen Jackson.
When one looks at 1) the length of his contract, 2) his age, 3) what it would do to our financial flexibility as the season progresses and 4) how it would make re-signing Manu impossible, it becomes pretty apparent very fast that he will NOT be wearing silver and black this season.
By all means, don’t let me get in the way of having a good time exploring endless trade scenarios. But at the end of the day, I think that this is the team that will be suiting up for us on opening night. Let’s discuss our options again come February.
But for now, I think my view is best expressed by the words of Gene Hackman as Coach Norman Dale in “Hoosiers” when facing a skeptical gym full of fans who wanted the team to add a beloved player*:
“I would hope you would support who we are. Not, who we are not… This is your team. ”
*Of course, they did ultimately add Jimmy Chitwood to the squad, but not at $35 million over 4 years.
August 31st, 2009 at 2:04 pm
Since I already explained the reasons for which I would strongly consider the possibility to make a trade with G.S. for Captain Jack in my comments in the other thread, I won’t bother you again on the point.
But a couple of things I read left me astonished:
1) It seems just like a couple of days before the trade deadline some kind of 7′1” hyper athletic mix between MJ and Bill Russel will suddendly become available and hell bent to sign with the Spurs. Sorry, but I just don’t think this will be the case. At the trade deadline, the teams willing to make a loopsided trade will include Sacramento, Memphis, New York (Curry and Jeffries…), Minnesota, Indiana, NJ. No hall of famers available here. Maybe Charlotte, Phila, Atlanta, Utah and New Orleans will be willing to trade too, if they stink greatly. The best we are getting is Boozer, in the remote possibility that he sticks with Utah that long (and that we put together 12 millions in expiring contracts, meaning a 4 for 1 trade or saying goodbye to Manu, which would rank this move as one of the dumbest ever), Posey (even worse contract than Jax, when you consider production) or Redd (coming back from a torn ACL and with that nice 2010/2011 18 millions player option).
Please consider that young studs with reasonable contracts (Kevin Martin, Josh Smith, Al Jefferson, Millsap), studs with expiring contracts (Joe Johnson) & superstars (Cris Paul, Deron Williams) weren’t, aren’t and won’t be even remotely available.
Maybe I am missing someone, but I can’t see a player much better than Jax becoming available at the trade deadline and, in any case, he will come with a bad/so and so contract (that is the reason the other team is willing to trade for expiring contracts).
So, I would be grateful to anyone who can point out to me that 7 footer defensive savior who will be there for us to pick up (thanks in advance to everyone who will avoid to mention a certain newly acquired Bobcats’ player in this discussion).
2) Talking about Captain Jack independently from the evaluation of the possible trade, I can’t believe people from the Bay Area are really bashing Stephen.
This guy played 40 minutes of Nellie Ball per game last year (good for 2nd in the league in
mpg), taking a ton of shot, but still shooting substantially around his career FG% (0.414, just to give an example Mason shot 0.425, Finley 0.437, the new high vaunted *starting* SF of the Lakers 0.401, Joe Johnson 0.437, Richard Jefferson 0.439), leading the team in meaningless statistics such as ppg, apg, being 2nd in FTpg and 5th in rebounds, while posting the higher PER of his career.
And someone is criticizing him because he has been a bad defender and he took bad shots? In that system? Playing for such an embarassing team in such an embarassing and disfunctional organization? In a season full of minor-but-still-bothering injuries? Playing PG in November? Being the emotional leader of the team?
Personally, I do think he wasn’t the terrible player you portray… …or at least he had 14 worse players (and a worse coach) on his team!
Best,
N
August 31st, 2009 at 2:08 pm
Great read on Cpt. Jack:
http://www.sportingnews.com/blog/The_Baseline/entry/view/32283/stephen_jackson_just_wants_to_fit_in
August 31st, 2009 at 2:39 pm
Let’s go for it. He’s a smart player, not afraid of late game heroics, and he’s got balls. We have many very good players, but how many have the out and out swagger Capt. Jack has? Swagger is such an underrated intangible. Who else will be able to talk mess to Kobe/LeBron/’Melo/et al? He adds an edgy dimension without being dangerous.
I’m not worried about his character. When he was with us before, surrounded by quality men, he was a quality guy. He hung out with some questionable guys at Golden State, got in trouble, but has been pretty clean for the past little while. I say he shapes right back up once surrounded by quality guys again.
As far as money goes (and I’m not writing checks here), it makes sense. There will be someone out there after the superstar shift of next summer that is looking to add good ball players to their new superstar. If LeBron ends up in New York, don’t you think he’d enjoy Capt. Jack on his team? I don’t think the last 2 years of his contract will be difficult to move, esp if his numbers and off court issues improve like most players in the Spur system.
Let’s do it.
August 31st, 2009 at 2:43 pm
Great topic indeed.
Every pro-trade I read almost convinces me. Come on that’s doable, let’s do it. Until I stop reading and try to simplify all that. And everything goes down.
Aging player, huge contract, too long contract, would duplicate skills the Spurs already have, would threatens Manu’s future in SA, would rip salary cap further, would kill a mid-season trade possibility.
I’m not mentionning the one-ball-for-ten-hot-hands part, because I’m quite sure every Spur has the will to share the ball just as Jackson would have it if he comes. Parkers took more shots last year because he had/wastold to. I don’t see him whining about less tickets if he has a title in sight.
Well, I don’t know if simplifying thing is a good way to see clearer, but I’d be glad to claim ‘I was wrong’ if the Spurs end up winning two more rings with Jax on board.
August 31st, 2009 at 5:03 pm
Tim,
Thank for checking on My blog
I like the wait and see approach as I think the best move would be before the Trade deadline…
If we will take Capt Jack, i’d give up Bonner, Finley (although he has rights of first refusal) and a future second pick if thats possible…Cheers!
August 31st, 2009 at 5:35 pm
Finley no longer has right of first refusal Robby IIRC.
August 31st, 2009 at 6:35 pm
Not sure if anybody on here is a US Open fan, but David Robinson was recognized before the start of tonight’s US Open tournament along with Andre Agassi, Doug Flutie, and Mia Hamm. They were all recognized for their charitable foundations, Robinson for his Carver Acadamy that was started in San Antonio. I know there have been some posts about Robinson being inducted into the Hall of Fame, but as someone whose favorite player growing up was the Admiral, it was just a special moment to see him recognized on another big stage, and not just for his accomplishments on the court. He’s such a great person and it was a proud moment for this Spurs fan.
August 31st, 2009 at 7:08 pm
How did Finley loose his right to first refusal? just curious… Thanks!
August 31st, 2009 at 8:32 pm
Group 2: One-year Bird cases like Hollins and George.
A team must receive permission from the player to trade him if he has signed a one-year contract (excluding options) and if the player (a) can become an Early Bird free agent at season’s end (player completes a two-year contract or finishes two consecutive years with the same team), (b) can become a Full Bird free agent at season’s end (player completes a three-year contract or finishes three consecutive seasons with the same team) or (c) has accepted a qualifying offer for the fifth season of a Rookie Scale contract.
Players on the following list lose their Bird rights and become a non-Bird free agent at season’s end if, like Hollins, they give consent to be traded in these circumstances.
Atlanta: Mario West
Boston: Eddie House* and Sam Cassell
Chicago: Ben Gordon
Dallas: Devean George*
Denver: Anthony Carter
Detroit: Walter Herrmann
Miami: Chris Quinn*
New Orleans: Ryan Bowen
Oklahoma City: Robert Swift
Orlando: Adonal Foyle
San Antonio: Michael Finley*
* House, George, Quinn and Finley would no longer be on this list if they exercised their player option for 2009-10 … and players are permitted to pick up options during the season. Who could ever forget Milt Palacio doing so at the trade deadline in 2002 so he could be included in a deal which sent Tony Delk and Rodney Rogers to Boston for Palacio, Randy Brown, 2002’s No. 22 overall pick (which Phoenix used on Casey Jacobsen) and a future All-Star guard named Joe Johnson?
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/dailydime?page=dime-090124-25
August 31st, 2009 at 9:10 pm
I highly doubt that the Spurs would even think about signing Jackson. I highly respect Jackson’s play. In my opinion, Jack > Jefferson, even though most of you Spurs fans will disagree. While Jack is also a volume shooter, as is Jefferson, Jack also has a lot of other qualities which Jefferson lacks. Like athleticism + size, thus making him a hybrid player. A hybrid player who can play multiple positions and is excellent on defense. I wouldn’t look at Stephen’s numbers on D as he played on GSW. With the pace they play and the defense they have, Mutumbo in his prime would have bad defensive numbers if he was on GSW last year.
If you get both Jackson and still have Jefferson the Spurs will look good on paper, but in reality there would be chemistry issues. As i said before, both jackson and jefferson are volume shooters. Where will all the shots come from? Personally, as a lakers fan, i’d much rather have Jefferson/Jackson taking up shots than Parker/Manu/Duncan, especially since the big 3 shoot a great FG% and they also create major foul trouble for opposing teams. Not to mention that the big 3 are also great playmakers and facilitators.
Just look at the Usage % of Jackson and Jefferson! Both have USG% of 25%! This is ridiculously high for these players. USG% means the % of possessions which are designed for these players while they are in the game. Just to give you a comparison, i’m sure since most of you dislike Kobe, you think that he is a ball hog, etc. Kobe’s USG% is 32%. That means that while Kobe is in the game, he gets 32% of the laker’s possessions. Jefferson and Jackson both get 25%. Pau Gasol by comparison has a USG% of 20.4%. Of course even assists count in your USG% rate, so it’s not just shots/turnovers/etc.
These two are volume shooters. I bet if the Spurs could go back with hindsight and decide on a new course of action, it would be to NOT sign Jefferson and to sign Jackson. However, since Jefferson is signed, I see no way that the Spurs would also sign Jackson. They are too similar. Both very inefficient volume shooters. You can’t have BOTH of these guys on 1 team, since 1 is bad enough (just kidding).
What you guys need is a guy like Trevor Ariza. I’ve said it before and i’ll say it again. Ariza is like a young Bruce Bowen. That’s why you guys need. A guy who will hit the 3pt shot with high accuracy, but also has a very good sense of defense. A clutch shooter that is quick/athletic, understands his role and doesn’t shy from the big moments. Tough to find, but Jackson/Jefferson are not it.
There is only 1 ball on the court. I wonder what is going to give next season. Here are the USG% for the following player’s from last year.
Parker: 31.7% (as high as Kobe’s)
Duncan: 28.5%
Manu: 27.2%
Jefferson: 25%
Jackson: 25%
August 31st, 2009 at 10:16 pm
I find it quite odd that everyone here thinks so badly of Ron Artest yet so highly of Jackson. The only bad thing Ron Artest has done is this…oh yeah, and the only bad think Jackson has done is this…see exact same video. By the way, who is worse, Jackson or Artest? Jackson is absolutely WAILING on a fan who didn’t even do anything. He is in the middle of EVERY fight.
http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docid=1875149266123369069&hl=en&fs=true
August 31st, 2009 at 10:49 pm
This is a Wikipedia entry, so take it for what it’s worth, but the ‘Reputation’ section in this link provides a fairly even-handed discussion of Jackson’s character issues. If anything, I came away with a much more positive impression of him than I had before reading the post.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Jackson
August 31st, 2009 at 11:18 pm
I have a feeling alot of people assumed that Parker would unconditionally continue to lead this team after Duncan gets old, and Duncan would stay until he retires?
Captain Jack’s contract runs into 2013! Holy Crap! Think about that. It hinders the resigning of not just Manu, but Parker, Duncan and pretty much everybody else. Parker would still be in his prime at the end of his contract, that means he deserves a few mil more than this current one. More bad possibilities for the team than good ones.
I sure want the team to win a championship, but thinking of the Heat in the past couple years give me chills.
September 1st, 2009 at 5:35 am
I wouldn’t be worried about the character issues with Jax but as Tim stated in his post, the length of the contract, which could handcuff our ability to make good decisions in the future.
In an ideal world, if we could pick him up for the next two years, I wouldn’t hesitate one bit. Phil Jackson is credited, and rightly so, for properly managing so many big egos on one team. The Spurs FO is credited for bringing in professionals – so when they have a Dennis Rodman, or a Glenn Robinson or SJax, they might not have the track record of a Tim Dunan, but they will be held in check and subscribe to Spurs’ philosophy.
September 1st, 2009 at 6:48 am
I don’t know if this is possible but if a players contract can be altered then I say bring jackson over. I think the only thing you can do to a contract is extended. But if it is possible.
Finley right now is only a trade piece and Bonner is some what of a no show and Mason is the best of this 3 trade assets.
The best option for a trade would be to trade finley and bonner for jackson.
But long term he isn’t the answer. He’s good now but later.
We have to worry about defense. The legendary spurs defense was absent last year. Trying for battie is better trade for now and later. Short contract and great value.
That would be a better trade than for Jackson. If he hadn’t left after 2003. I still say the spurs couldve won 6 straight championships but hey people have their own intrest which for jackson hasn’t panned out very well.
Defense should be a concerned right now than offense.
But let Pop decide. How many times has he been wrong.
September 2nd, 2009 at 3:28 am
He stopped shaving for too long?
September 2nd, 2009 at 5:58 am
Lol thanks for that link Kaveh, listening to Jim Gray and especially Bill Walton’s commentary on what’s happening cracks me up.
Also you’re right, Ron started it by going into the stands, but Jackson and Jermaine O’neal looked like they were kids in a candy shop while they jumped into the fray and started punching people.
September 2nd, 2009 at 10:28 pm
@Kaveh:
Jackson is more athletic and bigger than Jefferson? I’m sorry, but which Jackson and which Jefferson are we talking about here? Darnell and Dontell? Jefferson is listed at 6-7 225 lbs, boasts a much more athletic game attacking the basket. Jackson is listed at 6-5 218 lbs. I’ve also seen Jackson play, he’s anything but athletic, but he plays smart. Jackson is a crafty player, but he’s anything but an athletic one.
September 2nd, 2009 at 10:32 pm
@Bert
Do I want Shane Battier? Sure, and I want Kobe Bryant too. My point is it’s not reasonable, and you know the Rockets aren’t trading Battier.
Leave a Reply