# Blazers acquire Bayless/Diogu for Rush/Jack



## croco (Feb 14, 2005)

> The Blazers will send the rights to Rush and Jarrett Jack to the Pacers for the rights to Bayless and Ike Diogu. I think this is a great pick for the Pacers. Rush should be a great fit in the backcourt with T.J. Ford because he defends, shoots the ball and has great size in the backcourt. Rush is one of the most NBA-ready players in the draft.


Chad Ford is reporting it.


----------



## chocolove (Apr 4, 2006)

Pacers are looking pretty good now. Ford,Rush,Granger,Hibbert, thats a solid group.


----------



## croco (Feb 14, 2005)

The talent level of the Blazers is ridiculous.


----------



## chocolove (Apr 4, 2006)

Josh McRoberts also added to the trade, so it gets sweeter for the Pacers? I dont know I havent seen McRoberts play in the NBA.


----------



## Middy (Jul 16, 2002)

Am I the only one who thinks the blazers got away with robbery? Bayless gives the blazers a dynamic scorer who can also handle the point. Bayless, Roy, and Oden could be a great core for the next 5-10 years.


----------



## Jayps15 (Jul 21, 2007)

Middy said:


> Am I the only one who thinks the blazers got away with robbery? Bayless gives the blazers a dynamic scorer who can also handle the point. Bayless, Roy, and Oden could be a great core for the next 5-10 years.


Don't forget Aldridge!


----------



## croco (Feb 14, 2005)

Middy said:


> Am I the only one who thinks the blazers got away with robbery? Bayless gives the blazers a dynamic scorer who can also handle the point. Bayless, Roy, and Oden could be a great core for the next 5-10 years.


You can strike the could. They will be almost impossible to defend for any team and play very good D themselves. The biggest question is how long they will be able to keep all of those guys in Portland.


----------



## Wade County (Jun 22, 2003)

Blazers made out like bandits. Bayless is a top 5 talent that slipped.

Hes a great fit next to Roy where he doesnt need to be a pure PG.


----------



## Hephaestus (Jun 16, 2007)

croco said:


> You can strike the could. They will be almost impossible to defend for any team and play very good D themselves. The biggest question is how long they will be able to keep all of those guys in Portland.


Here's how...


> "Paul Allen
> Paul G. Allen (born January 21, 1953) is an entrepreneur who first established himself by co-founding Microsoft Corporation with Bill Gates. His investment company Vulcan Ventures also holds large stakes in Charter Communications and Dreamworks SKG.
> 
> Fortune
> ...


 :allhail:


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

croco said:


> The biggest question is how long they will be able to keep all of those guys in Portland.


Not too much of a question, IMO. The Blazers will have Bird rights on all the players, so can go over the cap to sign them. And Allen has never been stingy about paying talent.


----------



## croco (Feb 14, 2005)

Yes, but that's not my point. If you sign all of those guys at almost the same time you have no more flexibility to add role players and at some point their egos will grow no matter how great a character they have. Real money will not become a problem with Allen, managing the salary cap could. It's pretty much a luxury problem 29 other teams would love to have.


----------



## afobisme (Apr 29, 2006)

i think bird was thinking "oh, hey, cool.. let's trade bayless for rush because we already have another rush on our team.. how cool would that be to have 2 rushes?"


----------



## X Dah Creator (Jun 19, 2008)

bayless, roy, outlaw, alridge, oden............


----------



## PacersguyUSA (Sep 1, 2002)

I was excited for the upcoming season for about....30 minutes. Way to grab an absolute STEAL and then give it away. Plus, to have McRoberts back in town is embarrassing. Everyone I know form Carmel hates him. That's gotta be bad when your own peers from high school hate you instead of root for you. Bird is a joke general manager.


----------



## afobisme (Apr 29, 2006)

what was bird thinking? seriously.. what a horrible GM.


----------



## Hephaestus (Jun 16, 2007)

PacersguyUSA said:


> I was excited for the upcoming season for about....30 minutes. Way to grab an absolute STEAL and then give it away. Plus, to have McRoberts back in town is embarrassing. Everyone I know form Carmel hates him. That's gotta be bad when your own peers from high school hate you instead of root for you. Bird is a joke general manager.


The Pacers never "grabbed" an absolute steal. Bayless was never Bird's to keep. The trade with the Blazers for Bayless was arranged before the draft ever started. 

The Blazers paid the Pacers well to help the Blazers arrange that trade. Jack, McBob, and the Blazers eat 7 Mil worth of Ike Diogu salary.


----------



## andalusian (Jun 29, 2006)

Bayless, Roy, Rudy Fernandez, Aldridge, Oden, Outlaw and we still got Webster/Frye/Blake/Pryzbilla. Yup, it is going to be nice to see this Portland team growing up together...


----------



## Nightmute (Apr 12, 2007)

Portland is quickly becoming my second favorite NBA team. They're gonna be one of the best teams in the NBA to just watch.


----------



## The Future7 (Feb 24, 2005)

Nightmute said:


> Portland is quickly becoming my second favorite NBA team. They're gonna be one of the best teams in the NBA to just watch.


I dont wanna seem like im jumping on the bandwagon, but the Blazers actually have like 4 of my fav players


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Every time I have a favorite player, they end up in Portland. I am not divulging who I like in the future.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

dp


----------



## NewAgeBaller (Jan 8, 2007)

afobisme said:


> i think bird was thinking "oh, hey, cool.. let's trade bayless for rush because we already have another rush on our team.. how cool would that be to have 2 rushes?"


:rofl::rofl::rofl:

Seriously, Bird is an idiot.


----------



## Ballscientist (Nov 11, 2002)

afobisme said:


> i think bird was thinking "oh, hey, cool.. let's trade bayless for rush because we already have another rush on our team.. how cool would that be to have 2 rushes?"


2 rushes will turned out to be 2 bushes soon. it is great comparison!!


----------



## Geaux Tigers (Apr 26, 2004)

This makes me LOVE the Trailblazers. Seriously...call me a bandwagoner, I don't care. This team is going to exciting to watch. There are a lot of teams that will be kicking themselves in the *** for passing/trading Bayless...


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

What a team Portland is assembling...and they still have multiple picks for the futures and Euros overseas.


----------



## NewAgeBaller (Jan 8, 2007)

Ballscientist said:


> 2 rushes will turned out to be 2 bushes soon. it is great comparison!!


Yuo tell him Balls!


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

HKF said:


> Every time I have a favorite player, they end up in Portland. I am not divulging who I like in the future.


why are you upset? with bayless joining roy, oden, and aldridge in portland, they are going to start winning championships this season.


----------



## Smithian (Apr 3, 2006)

HKF said:


> Every time I have a favorite player, they end up in Portland. I am not divulging who I like in the future.


Say Antoine Walker.


----------



## knickstorm (Jun 22, 2003)

how many players are the blazer allowed to have on the roster? they pick up like 5-6 guys every draft night.....looks like they're trying to build a team to take on AND1


----------



## NewAgeBaller (Jan 8, 2007)

I swear Portland has like 20 players now..


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

HKF said:


> Every time I have a favorite player, they end up in Portland. I am not divulging who I like in the future.


Only reason I stopped by tonight was to see what you had to say about this. I know how much you dislike Portland.


----------



## rock747 (Aug 3, 2004)

The Pacers get a big solid SG that can play defense, and a solid back up PG. I'm not too upset over this. I was excited when we had Bayless though. The Jury is still out on these players...


----------



## LameR (Jan 4, 2004)

NewAgeBaller said:


> I swear Portland has like 20 players now..


They've actually got 13, with the rights to 3 others I believe.

C: Oden, Pryzbilla, Raef
PF: Aldridge, Frye, Diogu
SF: Webster, Outlaw
SG: Roy, Rudy
PG: Blake, Bayless, Rodriguez

Rights: Batum, Koponen, Freeland


----------



## rock747 (Aug 3, 2004)

Does anyone else wonder why Charlotte would pick Augustine over Bayless? Wierd how he would drop.


----------



## different_13 (Aug 30, 2005)

Does Indiana really want a backcourt consisting of Bayless and Ford?

Were they ever going to sit one of Dunleavy, Ford or Bayless?

Sure, they should've gotten better value, but Ford and Jack is a solid PG rotation; Granger and Rush are going to be a great wing duo (with Dunleavy there too, I suppose - oh, and Williams). 
The PF spot is looking pretty weak, but I suppose that's what the 2009 draft is for.


----------



## rock747 (Aug 3, 2004)

I agree they should have atleast recieved another pick from portland. They settled for too little in my opinion, but still not a terrible trade.


----------



## JFizzleRaider (Nov 1, 2004)

rock747 said:


> I agree they should have atleast recieved another pick from portland. They settled for too little in my opinion, but still not a terrible trade.


Absolute terrible trade for Indiana. You'll see Jack is turnover prone. Rush is ok, but come on, its Bayless.


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

different_13 said:


> Does Indiana really want a backcourt consisting of Bayless and Ford?
> 
> Were they ever going to sit one of Dunleavy, Ford or Bayless?


I was thinking that we could use Bayless in the old Monta Ellis/Louis Williams role. You know, slide Granger to Power Forward and Dunleavy to Small Forward at times to bring him in at SG, or whenever Dunleavy or Granger go out. He could've also been the backup PG as well, which would easily get him 20-ish mpg.



> The PF spot is looking pretty weak, but I suppose that's what the 2009 draft is for.


Yeh, with Blake Griffin or BJ Mullens as one of the worst five teams. I don't know if I can take another ****ty season.


----------



## rock747 (Aug 3, 2004)

> Absolute terrible trade for Indiana. You'll see Jack is turnover prone. Rush is ok, but come on, its Bayless.


But Bayless is all they gave up...Diogu is worthless. Was it a risk giving up Bayless? Yes. But Bayless isn't Gauranteed to be a super star. They got a SG that can playe defense and has a potential and a back up PG thats young.


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

HKF said:


> Every time I have a favorite player, they end up in Portland. I am not divulging who I like in the future.


:laugh: This is so true. When ever I look in your sig before draft time, atleast one player always ends up on the Blazers. 

So HKF I have a question for you, what kind of impact do you see Bayless having this season? And what do you think his ceiling is? I ask just because I know you've been following this guy for a long time.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Blazer Freak said:


> :laugh: This is so true. When ever I look in your sig before draft time, atleast one player always ends up on the Blazers.
> 
> So HKF I have a question for you, what kind of impact do you see Bayless having this season? And what do you think his ceiling is? I ask just because I know you've been following this guy for a long time.


His ceiling is an all-NBA guard. What team who knows? On Portland I don't know because he is coming in there to be a high profile role player. Some people didn't like him in college, but I saw a guy who just wants to win. Need him to score 20 ppg, he will. Need him to be a decoy, not forcing bad shots, he will do that too.

This guy's work ethic is through the roof and he's a better PG than people are giving him credit for. The problem is Arizona is a mess of a place. The guy has perennial all-star potential. I doubt he reaches it in Portland, but if he's all-star "caliber" during the duration of his prime years, you can't be mad.

The guy is only 19 years old.


----------



## drexlersdad (Jun 3, 2006)

croco said:


> Yes, but that's not my point. *If you sign all of those guys at almost the same time you have no more flexibility to add role players* and at some point their egos will grow no matter how great a character they have. Real money will not become a problem with Allen, managing the salary cap could. It's pretty much a luxury problem 29 other teams would love to have.


i couldnt dissagree more, we will have the MLE/Bi-Annual/and veteran minimum exceptions to round out our roster however we see fit, once we go over the salary cap.

the exciting thing to me is all the assetts we can afford to lose.

Raef's expiring 12 million
Travis Outlaw
Martell Webster
Joel Pryzbilla
Ike Diogu
Channing Frye
Steve Blake
Sergio Rodriguez
Various euros
Nicolas Batum
4 09 2nds
future 1sts

oh yeah and around 20 million in cap room next offseason if we so choose.

all of these can be used to bring in better players, while still leaving...

Jerryd Bayless
Brandon Roy
Rudy Fernandez
LaMarcus Aldridge
Greg Oden

who i see as our long term nucleus.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

rock747 said:


> But Bayless is all they gave up...Diogu is worthless.


Diogu is better than Jack. Diogu has been injured a fair amount and will likely never justify his draft position, but his production when he's played has been very good. He's an excellent rebounder and has a fairly refined offensive game, despite his size.

Jack is a solid backup, but does nothing particularly well. I originally had hopes that he could be an Eric Snow player, but that doesn't seem likely. His defense is not consistently excellent like Snow's was, and Snow was a steady distributor, while Jack turns the ball over too much.

Portland won even the Jack/Diogu swap, in my opinion. Bayless over Rush is a no-brainer. Bayless has star talent, Rush's ceiling seems more like a good, steady player.


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

Minstrel said:


> Diogu is better than Jack. Diogu has been injured a fair amount and will likely never justify his draft position, but his production when he's played has been very good. He's an excellent rebounder and has a fairly refined offensive game, despite his size.


He didn't show any of that in Indiana. Diogu hasn't been injured so much as he hasn't been good enough to play. He's not even a decent rebounder. He's big, but he doesn't box out and doesn't jump for rebounds. Sometimes they fall to him, but he doesn't make that much of an effort. His post game is hardly refined. It's barely better than David Harrison's. The only thing he has going for him is his free throw shooting, improving jumper, and occasionally a weak side block.


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

Pacers Fan said:


> He didn't show any of that in Indiana. Diogu hasn't been injured so much as he hasn't been good enough to play. He's not even a decent rebounder. He's big, but he doesn't box out and doesn't jump for rebounds. Sometimes they fall to him, but he doesn't make that much of an effort. His post game is hardly refined. It's barely better than David Harrison's. The only thing he has going for him is his free throw shooting, improving jumper, and occasionally a weak side block.


Just be happy that you have TJ Ford at the point and not JJ starting because Jarrett still cannot run a fast break to save his life. I'm not kidding 90% of the time he will turn it over even if it's a 3 on 1.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Pacers Fan said:


> He didn't show any of that in Indiana. Diogu hasn't been injured so much as he hasn't been good enough to play. He's not even a decent rebounder.


I certainly haven't watched as many Pacers games as I imagine you have, but his Rebound Rate (per-minute rebounding adjusted for opportunities and pace) is very good. And his scoring percentage is extremely good.

I did see a lot of him when he was a Warrior (I live in the Bay Area) and the numbers don't contradict what I saw. I think he's an extremely underrated player. He's certainly not a star, but I think he could be an average starter if given the chance. He won't be given the chance in Portland, as they are extremely flush with big men, but I think he's a useful young player and Pritchard was wise to get him essentially as a throw-in.


----------



## Perfection (May 10, 2004)

croco said:


> Yes, but that's not my point. If you sign all of those guys at almost the same time you have no more flexibility to add role players and at some point their egos will grow no matter how great a character they have. Real money will not become a problem with Allen, managing the salary cap could. It's pretty much a luxury problem 29 other teams would love to have.


Blazers can/will go over the salary cap if necessary to keep the dynasty intact. For adding role players, there is always the MLE and LLE to add a piece here and there.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Perfection said:


> For adding role players, there is always the MLE and LLE to add a piece here and there.


And the draft. I hear tell that Pritchard's not bad at finding talent there.


----------



## rock747 (Aug 3, 2004)

Minstrel said:


> I certainly haven't watched as many Pacers games as I imagine you have, but his Rebound Rate (per-minute rebounding adjusted for opportunities and pace) is very good. And his scoring percentage is extremely good.
> 
> I did see a lot of him when he was a Warrior (I live in the Bay Area) and the numbers don't contradict what I saw. I think he's an extremely underrated player. He's certainly not a star, but I think he could be an average starter if given the chance. He won't be given the chance in Portland, as they are extremely flush with big men, but I think he's a useful young player and Pritchard was wise to get him essentially as a throw-in.


He is a good rebounder due to his agressiveness in very limited playing time. To be honest, he just doesn't seem to be real intelligent when it comes to basketball and knowing what do when on the floor. Him being undersized is also a real detriment to him(6'8"). I think he could be a role-player given the right environment. Maybe.


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

Minstrel said:


> I certainly haven't watched as many Pacers games as I imagine you have, but his Rebound Rate (per-minute rebounding adjusted for opportunities and pace) is very good.


Really? Last year he only averaged 9.8 per 35 minutes, which is a number that would probably decrease to around 8 1/2 if he were given actual starter's minutes. Adjusted for opportunities and pace should only make it worse, since Indiana was one of the top teams in the league in possessions per game.

He has the Zydrunas Ilgauskas effect on his rebounding as well. He misses so much around the basket and grabs his own boards. I don't think he ever tries that hard for rebounds unless he realizes that he should make up the mistake of blowing a 3-footer.



> And his scoring percentage is extremely good.


47.8% for a big man who primarily plays inside and only takes open jumpers is good? Maybe you're thinking of a different stat.



> I did see a lot of him when he was a Warrior (I live in the Bay Area) and the numbers don't contradict what I saw.


Well, looking at the numbers, it's easy to see that he declined in production when he came to Indy. Maybe he'll improve in Portland, but he won't be playing anyway.



> Pritchard was wise to get him essentially as a throw-in.


Meh, he was going to be a throw-in at some point, anyway. He fell out of favor with Obie very quickly, and I think Bird essentially gave up on him last year.


----------



## rock747 (Aug 3, 2004)

> Pritchard was wise to get him essentially as a throw-in.





> Meh, he was going to be a throw-in at some point, anyway. He fell out of favor with Obie very quickly, and I think Bird essentially gave up on him last year.


Yeah, I doubt there was really a huge trade market for Diogu. He was there to make the salaries match up so we could accept Jack and McRoberts.


----------



## jman23 (Aug 13, 2007)

bayless
roy
outlaw
aldridge
oden


FUTURE!!! DYNASTY FOR YEARS!!! TO COME!!!

:yay::yay::yay::yay: GO BLAZERS!!!
:yay::yay::yay::yay: GO BLAZERS!!!
:yay::yay::yay::yay: GO BLAZERS!!!
:yay::yay::yay::yay: GO BLAZERS!!!
:yay::yay::yay::yay: GO BLAZERS!!!


----------



## gi0rdun (May 31, 2007)

And also Rudy Fernandez, Frye, Webster and maybe Batum later.

WTF!!!


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Pacers Fan said:


> 47.8% for a big man who primarily plays inside and only takes open jumpers is good? Maybe you're thinking of a different stat.


I'm using TS%, which is (basically) points per attempt to score. It takes into account that three-pointers count for more (not applicable here) and drawing and making free throws (very applicable to Diogu).



> Well, looking at the numbers, it's easy to see that he declined in production when he came to Indy. Maybe he'll improve in Portland, but he won't be playing anyway.


He declined in raw stats, but not in efficiency. His minutes per game dropped, so his total production dropped.



> Meh, he was going to be a throw-in at some point, anyway. He fell out of favor with Obie very quickly, and I think Bird essentially gave up on him last year.


Well, yes, I agree he was bound to be departing Indiana in a rather undistinguished manner, either as a throw-in or as a free agent. I don't think Diogu is a possible star, but I think he's underrated.

At worst, I think he's a useful back-up power forward and at best I think he's a decent starter.

I would say the same thing for Jarret Jack, but I think his chances of attaining that "ceiling" are lower.


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

Minstrel said:


> I'm using TS%, which is (basically) points per attempt to score. It takes into account that three-pointers count for more (not applicable here) and drawing and making free throws (very applicable to Diogu).


Ah. So that stat basically explains that Diogu draws fouls, hits free throws, and doesn't convert a good number of his other shots?



> He declined in raw stats, but not in efficiency. His minutes per game dropped, so his total production dropped.


Adjusted for mpg, his points, blocks, steals, and fouls all dropped, while his rebounds, assists, and turnovers increased. Nothing I'd consider significant, except maybe for his blocks, rebounds, and assists, and he's still not a good rebounder or passer.

All this while his field goal percentage dropped from 52.5% to 46.3%. Hardly as efficient, even if he did manage to shoot better than usual on his 47 free throws this year.

He hasn't really improved at all since his rookie season. I tend to give up on players after three years of no improvement when they're even given many chances. The worst part about Ike is that he's not even smarter. He still can't figure out help defense, and he's a major black hole on offense.



> I would say the same thing for Jarret Jack, but I think his chances of attaining that "ceiling" are lower.


I think just the opposite, so I guess it's good for both fanbases to have a better amount of hope.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Pacers Fan said:


> Ah. So that stat basically explains that Diogu draws fouls, hits free throws, and doesn't convert a good number of his other shots?


It says that when he tries to score, his rate of actually getting points, either by hitting the basket or by drawing and hitting free throws, is good.



> Hardly as efficient, even if he did manage to shoot better than usual on his 47 free throws this year


His PER has improved since his rookie year. Not a ton, but since he started off with a decent rate, his current rate is good.

PER is a player rating that uses all the major statistical categories, but adjusts for factors like pace and opportunities. And it's adjusted for minutes played.



> PER is a rating developed by ESPN.com columnist John Hollinger. In John's words, "The PER sums up all a player's positive accomplishments, subtracts the negative accomplishments, and returns a per-minute rating of a player's performance."





> I think just the opposite, so I guess it's good for both fanbases to have a better amount of hope.


I suppose. I'm not pinning any great hope on Diogu, but I think he's an underrated and under-the-radar pick up that might pay off. If it doesn't, nothing lost. Bayless was the real point of the deal.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

Minstrel said:


> I suppose. I'm not pinning any great hope on Diogu, but I think he's an underrated and under-the-radar pick up that might pay off. If it doesn't, nothing lost. Bayless was the real point of the deal.


I agree completely with this. I think he has the potential to develop into a really nice player in this league, but really. If he doesn't. If he completely sucks it up and doesn't play a minute, that deal was still a success he was only a marginal part of that deal.


----------



## rock747 (Aug 3, 2004)

> at best I think he's a decent starter


No way. Not decent. 




> It says that when he tries to score, his rate of actually getting points, either by hitting the basket or by drawing and hitting free throws, is good.


Well of course. All he plays is garbage minutes.


----------



## JFizzleRaider (Nov 1, 2004)

rock747 trust me, you will see Jarrett Jack and be pissed that he is on your team when he turns the ball over in the 4th quarter. Rush should be decent, but Bayless as a prospect is a much better one. 

Diogu > McRoberts which is all that matters because Diogu will just slide into McRoberts spot as being the #3 PF unless Portland trades Frye.


----------



## rock747 (Aug 3, 2004)

JFizzleRaider said:


> rock747 trust me, you will see Jarrett Jack and be pissed that he is on your team when he turns the ball over in the 4th quarter.


Oh okay. I'll wait and see. Hopefully, he won't be handling the ball in the fourth then eh? Thanks for the insight. From the portland games I have seen, he seems like a decent player. Exspecially as a back up. 



> Rush should be decent, but Bayless as a prospect is a much better one.


Everyone knows that. We all saw how they have been rated. 



> Diogu > McRoberts which is all that matters because Diogu will just slide into McRoberts spot as being the #3 PF unless Portland trades Frye.


I would agree, but why is that all that matters?


----------



## JFizzleRaider (Nov 1, 2004)

Portland fans were willing to give Jack away for a bag of peanuts. McRoberts was nothing more than Oden's buddy as he pretty much sucks. Diogu supposedly knows Bayless too, so it should make his transition easier. All in all this was a great trade for Portland. IF your Indiana you just don't trade Bayless for basically crap (outside of Rush)


----------



## rock747 (Aug 3, 2004)

> Portland fans were willing to give Jack away for a bag of peanuts.


Interesing. I have heard that he wasn't that bad from portland fans. Just inconsistent.


----------



## JFizzleRaider (Nov 1, 2004)

rock747 said:


> Interesing. I have heard that he wasn't that bad from portland fans. Just inconsistent.


He was consistent.....as a Turnover machine who made horrible decisions.

Every time he had the ball on a fast break I would say "omg please pass it to someone else" which would always lead to "Damnit Jack you ****ing suck"


----------



## NewAgeBaller (Jan 8, 2007)

rock747 said:


> Interesing. I have heard that he wasn't that bad from portland fans. Just inconsistent.


He wasn't that bad for his role, just inconsistent and a poor decision maker.

His poor decision making is where most of the hate for him comes from - he does stupid stuff like step out of bounds on the fast break, try to put it behind his back in traffic, just stuff like that.

I think there was a period where he had a few games where he'd string together a chain of these mistakes, which is when Portland fans really started getting mad at him. Just don't give him the ball unless you need to and he should be alright for his role as a backup.


----------



## Jayps15 (Jul 21, 2007)

Jack makes a lot of mistakes, like leading the league in turnovers per minute for bench players. He's not a good finisher in the lane because he lacks any athleticism, and he's a below average outside shooter. Courtvision wise he's not a PG or a CG, he's simply an undersized SG without the ability to create for others. His one saving grace on offense is his ability to draw fouls and hit FTs, it should keep him in the league as a backup.

Defensively the lack of athleticism is what kills him, he can't stop people unless they're as slow as him, he can't get into the passing lanes effectively, and can't challenge shots. He'll body up anyone and give effort, but he's severely limited in what he's actually capable of doing on the court.

Honestly I think Blazer fans are being PC with Jack's departure, not wanting to come off badly for being excited he's gone. But if you search around on the POR board there's really only a small handful of posters who even considered bringing Jack back to the team next year, and no one saw him winning the starting job back from the likes of Steve Blake(who while an adequate role player, is by no means an even average starter).


----------



## croco (Feb 14, 2005)

Perfection said:


> Blazers can/will go over the salary cap if necessary to keep the dynasty intact. For adding role players, there is always the MLE and LLE to add a piece here and there.


They will be way over the salary cap at one point, any winning team in the NBA is.


----------



## andalusian (Jun 29, 2006)

Jack is a decent backup. The Portland boards are full of people with unrealistic expectations of Sergio that were whining that Jack was getting his minutes (of course, Sergio is close to hopeless, as we will see next year when he still gets no minutes). That's why there is such criticism of Jack. Don't get me wrong - Jack has his issues, he is not good leading a fast break and he does make some stupid mistakes - but he is a very good finisher with elite TS% (better than any other guard on Portland's roster, including Roy), he is very good in half-court sets and will win you 2 - 3 games a year when everything works well.


----------



## NewAgeBaller (Jan 8, 2007)

andalusian said:


> Jack is a decent backup. The Portland boards are full of people with unrealistic expectations of Sergio that were whining that Jack was getting his minutes (of course, Sergio is close to hopeless, as we will see next year when he still gets no minutes). That's why there is such criticism of Jack. Don't get me wrong - Jack has his issues, he is not good leading a fast break and he does make some stupid mistakes - but he is a very good finisher with elite TS% (better than any other guard on Portland's roster, including Roy), he is very good in half-court sets and will win you 2 - 3 games a year when everything works well.


I'm curious cause you guys would know more about the Blazers than I do,

How do you say he's a "very good" finisher, and Jayps15 says hes not even a good finisher?


----------



## Redeemed (Feb 2, 2008)

By the way if anybody wants to join my Brandon Rush fan club just let me know, i'm looking for members.


----------



## Foulzilla (Jan 11, 2005)

NewAgeBaller said:


> I'm curious cause you guys would know more about the Blazers than I do,
> 
> How do you say he's a "very good" finisher, and Jayps15 says hes not even a good finisher?


I won't try to speak for anyone else, but I can give my opinion.

He's pretty good at finishing in traffic, even when hit fairly hard. However, he's also pretty good at blowing easy layups (particularly when fast breaking with someone right behind him who could easily dunk it).

So it mostly just depends on whether you look to his positives or negatives.


----------



## andalusian (Jun 29, 2006)

NewAgeBaller said:


> I'm curious cause you guys would know more about the Blazers than I do,
> 
> How do you say he's a "very good" finisher, and Jayps15 says hes not even a good finisher?


Just look at his TS% - more than respectable and the best among all the guards on the Blazers roster. Since he is not a 3 pt shooter - you have to ask yourself where he gets these points? He either puts them in the hole or gets fouled and converts them at a very high rate.

Jack is listed as a SG on ESPN's player stats, his TS% is 21st out of 67 qualifying SGs in the league. If you take his stats and move them to the PG players - he is 16th out of 72.

When Jack attacks the rim - he converts at a very respectable rate, either by scoring or the FT line. That is all that really matters. Just to give you an idea - his TS% is better than Wade's, Roy's and Vince Carter's. Of course, he does not have the ability to take some of the crazy shots these guys need to take, does not face the defenders they have to contend with and he is not counted on to be the primary scoring option - but if there is something Jack does well - it is attacking the rim and converting it to points.


----------



## afobisme (Apr 29, 2006)

btw, what is a "fan club" anyways? is it just your name in someone's signature, or is there something more? i don't even get what the point of it is.


----------



## Redeemed (Feb 2, 2008)

afobisme said:


> btw, what is a "fan club" anyways? is it just your name in someone's signature, or is there something more? i don't even get what the point of it is.


basically but it makes a unique sig


----------



## Jayps15 (Jul 21, 2007)

andalusian said:


> Just look at his TS% - more than respectable and the best among all the guards on the Blazers roster. Since he is not a 3 pt shooter - you have to ask yourself where he gets these points? He either puts them in the hole or gets fouled and converts them at a very high rate.
> 
> Jack is listed as a SG on ESPN's player stats, his TS% is 21st out of 67 qualifying SGs in the league. If you take his stats and move them to the PG players - he is 16th out of 72.
> 
> When Jack attacks the rim - he converts at a very respectable rate, either by scoring or the FT line. That is all that really matters. Just to give you an idea - his TS% is better than Wade's, Roy's and Vince Carter's. Of course, he does not have the ability to take some of the crazy shots these guys need to take, does not face the defenders they have to contend with and he is not counted on to be the primary scoring option - but if there is something Jack does well - it is attacking the rim and converting it to points.


That's just not my definition of finishing, and that's where our difference of opinion stems from. Finishing to me has nothing to do with hitting free throws, and is all about finishing the drive you make with a basket (layup/floater/dunk etc.). Jack's lack of athleticism means he can't finish with a dunk, even on the fast break let alone in traffic, he hasn't shown the ability to hit floaters and when going in for a layup he often times gets blocked or has to throw up a shot that has no chance in order to draw FTs.

That's supported by the fact that he shot only 50.7% at or near the rim last season, which out of the Blazers top 10 (Roy/Aldridge/Webs/Outlaw/Blake/Jack/Pryz/Frye/Sergio/Jones) was only better than Jones(bum knee, 3pt specialist) and Sergio(can't shoot from anywhere, let alone make a layup). His TS% is great because of the frequency with which he's able to draw FTs and how accurate he is at the line, but it would be better if he finished his drives with a basket and 1FTA compared to his usual 2FTA.


----------



## Spud147 (Jul 15, 2005)

NewAgeBaller said:


> I'm curious cause you guys would know more about the Blazers than I do,
> 
> How do you say he's a "very good" finisher, and Jayps15 says hes not even a good finisher?


I'm usually pretty much a lurker but I've had this discussion on the Blazer board... Sometimes it seems like we're discussing two different players on the Blazer board when it comes to JJ. The only thing we can agree on are the strange and untimely turn overs. But, PG is the hardest position to learn in the NBA and I think that will get better.

Some people say he's a horrible defender. I think the exact opposite. True, he's not as fast as some of the small PGs in the league but he's bigger and stronger than most PGs which can be an advantage as well. He's a gym rat and highly intelligent (great sense of humor). He's very coachable and will work to do whatever the coach and team needs him to do. He is a great locker room guy (I know, it's intangible but I think he's a big part of the reason the young Blazers are so tight knit). He's been benched pretty publicly and just took the attitude that if that's what it takes to win he'll be the best 2nd unit PG he can be. 

We have some really good guys left but I'm a little concerned that JJ had more to do with the improvement of the team than they realize. He is going to come into Indiana with a great attitude and ready to work. Has he had his press conference yet? You'll kind of see what I mean when you see him there. He doesn't look like he's going to be All Star caliber but neither did Chauncey Billups until he went to Detroit. I really wonder if they gave up on him too soon but, with the great drafts/trades lately I think some Blazer fans expected way too much from him. The Blazers already tried (as did the Mavs) amassing as much talent as they could without considering chemistry (during the Bob Whitsit era) and it was a complete failure for both teams. You don't need an All star at every position!


----------



## rock747 (Aug 3, 2004)

> Has he had his press conference yet?


No. Have to wait till July 9th or whatever to do that. I am looking foward to it though.


----------



## LameR (Jan 4, 2004)

Jack is great at getting to the line, and shoots well from there. He's good at penetrating, and sometimes decent at spot-up shooting. He was even fairly clutch in different ways (even defense at one point) at the end of a few of our games during the win streak.

His problems are that he dominates the ball, especially when others should have it (Roy, etc.). He makes some poor decisions, but our team didn't have very good movement last year, so the ones from half-court can't be placed solely on him. On fast-breaks, he's either going to draw the foul, or do something absolutely stupid.

It was a love-hate relationship with Jack. He's a passionate player, and he has potential to step up if he can play a bit smarter.


----------

