# Did anyone listen to Quick's interview today? B-Roy PG, Sergio, Jack pouts



## darkhelmit54 (Jan 23, 2005)

I heard that he basically confirmed that it's the plan and has been going into effect that Roy is the PG of the future (and current), and that Jarret isn't all that happy about it or his role on the team, and Sergio's earned a lot of respect lately. Can anyone confirm?

Anyone could see that Roy's been playing PG (when the ball's in your hands over 1/2 the time, kind of like Scottie was the PG for a stretch when here, or other players. If bring the ball up the court distinguishes you as the PG who really cares who it is right? 

As for Jarret I say good riddance, I'd love to see him traded for something of value sometime soon, but I don't really see it happening and that's too bad. He's a mediocre (if that) backup SG, or a decent half-court slow it down guard but he's the worst player in the NBA under 6'8 on the break, and he doesn't know how to fit into a team concept. I'm gonna pull my hair out if Sergio doesn't end up getting more time soon, he's the perfect energy guy off the bench to play PG and surprise/scare the other team with tempo while Roy rests and slides over to SG or SF for a little while every game to relax a little. I feel like Roy should establish the game plan at the beginning at PG, and definetely control the end, while Sergio injects some life into the team in a first half spurt and a second half spurt. 

If we could dump Jack with Darius' contract I would absolutely love it! I will go nuts if Rudy doesn't get time because of Jack next year. Any way NY bites on Jack - Darius - Raef for Rose - Marbury - Jones? If Darius can play a little by the end of January I'd love a deadline deal like that. Jones could play backup SG much better than Jarret, D up better run the break better, shoot about the same, Sergio would get more time, AND neither Starbury or Rose would ever see time, but we'd save ourselves some money and clear some cap space, and roster spots. We don't have one expiring deal right now! We could buy out Rose and Starbury.


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

I think Jack wants to be a part of this team and its success. And that's cool. A week or two back, when he and McMillan chatted, he wanted to drive more, instead of spotting up. Makes sense. That's what he does.

He definitely didn't seem like he was pouting with this post-game quote: "'First winning month, first time over .500, first eight-game winning streak,' said Jarrett Jack, who like Allen, used his hands to mark off the milestones. 'This feels so good. It's refreshing for us because we are getting rewarded for killing ourselves in the offseason and killing ourselves in practice.'"

But here's the thing with Jarrett ... he would be a GREAT combo guard on this team. He's not great in the transition game yet, but he's shown willingness to improve and work hard. That's to be commended, I think.

And if he's willing to accept a back-up role, great! We can't have a roster 12-deep of starters, you know? If he accepts it, cool. If not, then that's on him.

I definitely don't understand the outright hatred some fans have for him. He's not the worst point guard we've ever seen play, he's passionate, he's a gym rat, and when he's running the point, he really is a floor general. Is he great? No. Is he the worst thing ever, though? No.

I AM on board with making Roy the point guard of the future, though. I just love the way he plays. And Sergio has certainly shown some improvement during this winning streak. It's very encouraging!

Oh yeah ... we're not dumping Darius' contract. It won't happen. It's ludicrous to think we'll trade that, least of all THIS season. So what if he comes back and plays 15 minutes per game? Even if he reverts the old Darius (very unlikely), he was still overpaid to begin with. MAYBE we ship it as an expiring deal, but I don't think so.


----------



## darkhelmit54 (Jan 23, 2005)

wastro said:


> Oh yeah ... we're not dumping Darius' contract. It won't happen. It's ludicrous to think we'll trade that, least of all THIS season. So what if he comes back and plays 15 minutes per game? Even if he reverts the old Darius (very unlikely), he was still overpaid to begin with. MAYBE we ship it as an expiring deal, but I don't think so.


His deal isn't that enormous, or that long, it's just very inconvenient to us. New York would save money with that deal, add it all up and take into account the luxury cap, and get Jack as a young player with promise, and Darius (if he could play a little), we would clear room for our big year, give Sergio a bigger role (which he DESERVES!) and get a good perimeter defense player who we happened to screw over recently.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

Blake and Sergio have played extremely well. Sergio has shown mass improvement on the defensive end as well, Jack is the weakest link of our rotation at this time. His ball handeling skills aren't even very good, he doesn't make good decisions with the ball, that's for sure. We can't be taking any more players than we are sending out. We must figure a way to package Jack and others for a lesser number of players. Rudy Fernandez should be taking all of Jack's time as should Sergio next season.


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

Well, we're on the hook for him after two more years. He didn't play NBA ball at all this year and probably won't return until the All-Star break this year. He has two bum knees. In terms of value, that's enormous.

And New York is so far over the salary cap, and Dolan is so out of touch with reality, I don't think that would be a huge consideration. That's just my speculation, though.

It would make some sense for us, but I just don't think there is any way you trade that Darius contract. Guys who are good make $9 million per year, not guys who, well, you know.


----------



## LameR (Jan 4, 2004)

wastro said:


> And if he's willing to accept a back-up role, great! We can't have a roster 12-deep of starters, you know? If he accepts it, cool. If not, then that's on him.


My thoughts exactly. I like him as a person, but sometimes he makes me cringe on the court. If he could suck it up and accept reduced minutes down the line, I'd be happy to have him on the team.


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

And there are a lot of players who make me cringe on the court. Jarrett, sometimes, does that. But then you hear how he wins the parking spot, because he was at the gym this summer. He has sit-downs with McMillan pretty often. He obviously wants to improve, and to see that work ethic is fantastic.

And who's to say he's not accepting reduced minutes? As recently as last week, Jack's issue wasn't with minutes, but rather how he was used in the game. And I think that's a valid complaint to have.


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

A stat worth pondering: during our win streak, Blake has a total of 35 assists. Jack has 31 in fewer minutes. 

If people think Jack is not a good playmaker, what does that say about Blake?


----------



## moldorf (Jun 29, 2007)

there are a lot of jack-haters in blazerland, and darkhelmit is one of them. No big deal, really, as Nate and KP don't seem to agree.

Part of it, I think, stems from people that want Sergio to get more playing time and think Jack is messing that up. It's a little ridiculous, but it's the internet.

The thing is, Jack may be traded in any event...maybe this summer. If Rudy Fernandez is as good as KP and the scouts believe, he will end up taking all of Jack's minutes, if not next season, by the season after.

Also, Jack is in his 3rd season of a rookie scale contract. The only way to have Jack NOT interfere with the infamous cap space plan, would be by extending his contract this summer(can't see it happening), or by trading him. If he's still on the roster entering the 2009 off-season, his cap-hold would be 6 million dollars. Portland would have to renounce him and lose him without getting any return. It makes it likely, IMO, that he may be dealt, perhaps on draft day.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

Oldmangrouch said:


> A stat worth pondering: during our win streak, Blake has a total of 35 assists. Jack has 31 in fewer minutes.
> 
> If people think Jack is not a good playmaker, what does that say about Blake?


I think they are different types of players. Blake passes the ball immediately, while Jack is much more likely to slash to the paint with it. While he often goes for his own shot and/or draws contact, by slashing he collapses the D and is often able to feed it to a wide open teammate. I think they are both decent and have settled nicely into complimentary roles. SB facilitates overall ball movement, while JJack plays off of that.

anyhoo, JQ stirring the pot with rumorama yet again... if ever there was a boy who cried wolf!

STOMP


----------



## rx2web (Jul 27, 2004)

darkhelmit54 said:


> If we could dump Jack with Darius' contract I would absolutely love it! I will go nuts if Rudy doesn't get time because of Jack next year. Any way NY bites on Jack - Darius - Raef for Rose - Marbury - Jones?


I say lets have nothing to do with that troubled franchise. We traded Zach to them and made out with a steal. Lets count ourselves lucky and leave it at that. Let their team and players implode and take each other down. I'm satisfied with our team just the way it is for now. talk to me at the end of next season when we've seen how we play with ODEN. THEN lets talk trades.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

Oldmangrouch said:


> A stat worth pondering: during our win streak, Blake has a total of 35 assists. Jack has 31 in fewer minutes.
> 
> If people think Jack is not a good playmaker, what does that say about Blake?



And how many turnovers in that same period of time?


----------



## Foulzilla (Jan 11, 2005)

Oldmangrouch said:


> A stat worth pondering: during our win streak, Blake has a total of 35 assists. Jack has 31 in fewer minutes.
> 
> If people think Jack is not a good playmaker, what does that say about Blake?


This is a fair point, although I think irrelevant in our comparing those two points. It's not, who is a better distributor that we should worry about. It's who fits better with Brandon Roy. The obvious answer to me is Blake (and I wasn't so sure about that before the season started). He's much better off the ball then Jack, and we want the ball in Roy's hands as much as possible. He's also better at running the break. I do think Jack is a very good penetrator and finisher in traffic, and I like the role for him. However, that means the ball must be in his hands. 

Basically, I think we should trade Jack while his value is high. Not because I dislike him as a player, but because I think we could get the most value out of him now, and his value will only decrease as he doesn't fit so well with Roy. I think Atlanta makes the most sense as a destination, as they have a glut of swingmen to trade and need a point (and Jack just happens to be a local boy).

However, I do have one concern about trading him. From what I've read he's apparently one of the leaders in the locker room. If this is the case, perhaps we should keep him regardless. He is a capable sparkplug off the bench. If he's contributing behind the scenes significantly, that's all he needs to be.


----------



## southnc (Dec 15, 2005)

Oldmangrouch said:


> A stat worth pondering: during our win streak, Blake has a total of 35 assists. Jack has 31 in fewer minutes.
> 
> If people think Jack is not a good playmaker, what does that say about Blake?


 I don't think your paying much attention, then. As others have noticed, Blake is not really the "PG" anymore - Roy is the actual PG about 80% of the time when he is on court, which explains why his Assists have gone way up and Blake's have gone down to even none for the NO game. Blake has transitioned into an off-guard role (ala Paxton), where he has hit some key baskets and has made some great steals. He also takes care of the ball and can run the fast break, which are my main gripes against Jack.

Since nearly all of Blake's minutes are with Roy on the court, he may not get many more assist opportunities going forward. Jack, on the other hand, is generally on the court when Roy is not, and has been give the opportunity (per his griping to Nate) to play the PG role. In this situation, his shot has been terrible and he has numerous key TOs. Personally, I prefer Jack in his previous role as the backup SG, where he shot much better.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

southnc said:


> Jack, on the other hand, is generally on the court when Roy is not, and has been give the opportunity (per his griping to Nate) to play the PG role. In this situation, his shot has been terrible and he has numerous key TOs. Personally, I prefer Jack in his previous role as the backup SG, where he shot much better.


good point. in the 9 games of December, Jack is 38% FG and 30% 3FG. all way down from November. we seem to be winning in spite of him.

I don't hate Jack, but Nate gave him a huge responsibility last year by making him starting PG and 34 mpg. it's hard to imagine a young, competitive player (who hasn't landed his big contract yet) being comfortable with going from that much prominence to being a backup shooting guard. 

had Nate evenly split time with Sergio last year, I think Jack would be much more mentally prepared to play as a reserve. as it is, he's been handed the keys and then (rightly) had the keys yanked away. I don't think there's much Portland can do to make him happy in his role long-term. we're going to have to trade him at some point. 

an interesting side note--I see a very similar situation beginning to develop this year at Center. Przybilla has been playing like a starting-quality NBA center most of the season, and has been a huge factor in our winning streak. how is he going to handle being demoted to the bench, and (assuming Oden stays healthy) only playing 12-15 minutes a night? 

obviously, it's not exactly the same. Przybilla already has his contract, and he also can plainly see that Oden is far superior to him. and for all we know Przybilla will get injured anyway. but sometime in the coming two or so years I can imagine him wanting more playing time.


----------



## ThatBlazerGuy (May 1, 2003)

> an interesting side note--I see a very similar situation beginning to develop this year at Center. Przybilla has been playing like a starting-quality NBA center most of the season, and has been a huge factor in our winning streak. how is he going to handle being demoted to the bench, and (assuming Oden stays healthy) only playing 12-15 minutes a night?


I dont think Oden is going to be a 35-38mpg guy for at least his first two seasons. He will have some serious fould problems, IMO. Also, I dont think it would be a terrible idea to overall limit his minutes to 32-34mpg for most of his career. With such a great backup, we can afford to 'save' him for the big games in the playoffs. 

Next year I see 28mpg for Oden and 20mpg for Joel.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

ThatBlazerGuy said:


> Next year I see 28mpg for Oden and 20mpg for Joel.


Shaq averaged 38 mpg his first season, despite often getting in foul trouble. 
Dwight Howard averaged 33 mpg.
Amare Stoudemire averaged 32 mpg. 
Tim Duncan averaged 39 mpg.
Ewing averaged 35 mpg. 

I really don't see Oden getting fewer minutes than Howard or Amare, unless the knee isn't fully recovered. Maybe for a month, but not an entire season. And given that he seems to have more skills entering the league than those two, I can easily see him averaging more. 

History shows that coaches have a really hard time putting a physically dominating franchise big men on the bench. They just do so much to impact the game. 

Is Nate really going to sit Oden so he can watch our offense go 4 on 5 with Przybilla any more than he has to?


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

If Oden has foul trouble, my guess is it'll be until he gets acclimated to the game/team, and the league tells the refs to stop calling certain calls against him.


Not that the league does that sorta thing.


----------



## GOD (Jun 22, 2003)

Jack - One thing that has been forgotten is how much he has improved his D this year. But I do agree that he does not fit with the Blazers long term. The question is, when does he get traded. And, what are we looking to get from a trade. The problem is that the Blazers are pretty stacked, and any player that we got for Jack would also sit on the bench most likely, and might not be such a good lockerroom guy. I think the best thing to do is keep him till the summer and then look at trades. 

In the summer, we will have a better Idea of what and who to target. I love Przybilla, but he may be on the trading block as well if the Blazers feel that Oden will take 35 mpg. We have three SF's and one of them may also be available. Perhaps something like Jack, Joel and Webster could get us another all star level player. I don't know. I hate the idea of trading Jack just to get rid of Miles, but that may end up the best option.

The Blazers have at least 2 more players to work into the rotation next year and likely three. Oden, Rudy and either the first rounder, Kop or Freeland. Oden still holds a spot on the roster, but we will need two more spots to open up. So the best option may be to trade several of our players for one in return. But who, what position, what type of player, I just don't know, this roster is real hard to figure out.


----------



## alext42083 (Nov 7, 2003)

mook said:


> an interesting side note--I see a very similar situation beginning to develop this year at Center. Przybilla has been playing like a starting-quality NBA center most of the season, and has been a huge factor in our winning streak. how is he going to handle being demoted to the bench, and (assuming Oden stays healthy) only playing 12-15 minutes a night?
> 
> obviously, it's not exactly the same. Przybilla already has his contract, and he also can plainly see that Oden is far superior to him. and for all we know Przybilla will get injured anyway. but sometime in the coming two or so years I can imagine him wanting more playing time.


I see that as one of the bigger storylines next season.
Joel has proven he can be a really good starting center, and has even become sort of an offensive threat.
I wonder if he'll be as effective or even willing to accept that bench role, and play 15-20 mins a night behind Greg.

But that would sure as hell be some defensive tandem by the hoop with Greg and Joel at the same time. Teams won't want to come to the rim.


----------



## 2k (Dec 30, 2005)

If Jack is the weak link then the Blazers have one very strong chain. He hit what was likely a game clinching three pointer last game. The weak link of a rotation usually plays a lot worse when they don’t like their role.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Joel is to Jarrett fine

Blake however is not to Oden.


Joel is playing well so far. He however is simply not as good as Oden....(is supposed to be)


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

The Jack vs Blake debate over the streak

Jack
189 minutes
31 assists
23 turnovers

Blake
228 minutes
35 assists
12 turnovers

WHen you adjust Jacks minutes based on prouduction per minute to match Blakes minutes thsi si how they fare

Jack 
28.5mpg, 4.7apg, 3.5topg, ast/to 1.3

Blake
28.5mpg 4.3apg, 1.5topg ast/to 2.9


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

Schilly said:


> Jack
> 28.5mpg, 4.7apg, 3.5topg, ast/to 1.3
> 
> Blake
> 28.5mpg 4.3apg, 1.5topg ast/to 2.9


yikes. Jack's assist to turnover ratio maybe be ok for a center, but a guard? ugh. 

by the way, has anybody else noticed Jack tends to freeze out Rodriguez? maybe I'm just being paranoid, but it seems like Jack tries to run the offense too much with Sergio in the game, and he only passes to him when there aren't other options. I've seen Jack inbound the ball, look at Sergio, and just wave him to go play shooting guard. just watching the body language there it reminds me of two guys in the YMCA both trying to play PG. 

maybe I'm just seeing things. I haven't seen anyone else comment on it.


----------



## ProZach (Oct 13, 2005)

Foulzilla said:


> However, I do have one concern about trading him. From what I've read he's apparently one of the leaders in the locker room. If this is the case, perhaps we should keep him regardless. He is a capable sparkplug off the bench. If he's contributing behind the scenes significantly, that's all he needs to be.


I've arrived at the same conclusion from what I've read - he is a leader. The things I like about him the most are his attitude and toughness. That's why he and Joel are important.


----------



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

2k said:


> If Jack is the weak link then the Blazers have one very strong chain. He hit what was likely a game clinching three pointer last game. The weak link of a rotation usually plays a lot worse when they don’t like their role.


Yep. That three was huge. He also made that great pass to Webster for the dunk so he's not totally horrible on the fast break. Let's not hate on Jack.


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

:whoknows: This thread is just odd.

I was one of the first folks to suggest that Jack was not a "true" PG, and should not be starting. Now, I seem to be one of the few who don't want to shoot him in the head and leave him to rot in a ditch!

What makes it even weirder, is that many people constantly preach patience for Webster and Outlaw - but are unwilling to give Jack even half a season to settle into his new role! 

What did Jack do to turn so many fans against him??


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Oldmangrouch said:


> :whoknows: This thread is just odd.
> 
> I was one of the first folks to suggest that Jack was not a "true" PG, and should not be starting. Now, I seem to be one of the few who don't want to shoot him in the head and leave him to rot in a ditch!
> 
> ...



I wonder if it's Nate, and not Jack that some people are mad at.

Nate always seems to give Jack a little extra opportunity. Sergio makes a mistake and he's yanked, but Jack makes 2 mistakes and he stays with him. I'm not here to debate if that's right or not, but if Jack were treated the same way the other players were then maybe people would think of him the same way.


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

mook said:


> by the way, has anybody else noticed Jack tends to freeze out Rodriguez?


Yes. I've also seen him pass up easy shots after Sergio made a great pass to get him the ball. I first noticed it early this season, right after Jack was benched for Blake. Maybe I'm paranoid too.

As far as 'turning on Jack,' I've had to laugh the entire time he's been here when people kept comparing him to Terry Porter. :lol: I've been saying he is not more than a competent backup combo guard for a long time. Once he realizes it, and he's put in a position to focus on the things he does well, he'll be alright. But, since he doesn't want to be here anyway, I look forward to the team trading him to move up in the draft.


----------



## Resume (Jul 17, 2007)

I would like to see a deal with Jack involved. He is the only player I have a problem with right now... and I usually am very hard on players. He would need to be packaged with someone though and it is hard for me to decide who needs to go with him.


----------



## alext42083 (Nov 7, 2003)

NathanLane said:


> ... he's not totally horrible on the fast break. Let's not hate on Jack.


I would disagree... Jarrett Jack is one of the worst open court players in the league. There's been so many instances where he gets stripped, he misses a layup or just turns the ball over on a bad pass and makes a bad decision.

But I do think he generally cares about the game and winning, and wants to get better. He's a nice guard to have off the bench, plays pretty good defense and has a good knack of penetration and finding guys on the outside.
I do notice though that he falls to the ground a lot.

But anyway, on the fast break, Jack has some improvement to make..


----------



## BlazerFan22 (Jul 4, 2006)

I can see Roy as the PG for the future for the Blazers. I can also see Jack being trade bait near trade deadline. Thare are many teams that could use a gaurd like JJ he will draw interest around the league. Should make for some good discussion especially if the Blazers are in the mix for a playoff picture.:cheers:


----------



## darkhelmit54 (Jan 23, 2005)

ProZach said:


> I've arrived at the same conclusion from what I've read - he is a leader. The things I like about him the most are his attitude and toughness. That's why he and Joel are important.


For all you hear Quick, Nate, or himself talk about him and his leadership how often do you hear other players talk about Jarret leading them and being tough? He seems like that kid who always kisses coaches butt and plays hard but his teammates really are cynical of his advice and "pumping them up" all the time.


----------



## darkhelmit54 (Jan 23, 2005)

Oldmangrouch said:


> What makes it even weirder, is that many people constantly preach patience for Webster and Outlaw - but are unwilling to give Jack even half a season to settle into his new role!


Well, Webster is three years younger than Jack and has never really gotten the chance to have plays run for him and be a weapon where Jack has been given tons of freedom and responsibility for three seasons now. Outlaw is only a year younger but still hasn't had the same opportunities as Jack before. Both are less cocky too and always talking about leadership while not backing it up on the court. And Jack is in front of Sergio who nate must hate because he's been playing well lately but getting no time.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

BBert said:


> Yes. I've also seen him pass up easy shots after Sergio made a great pass to get him the ball. I first noticed it early this season, right after Jack was benched for Blake.


Ditto, happens every game pretty much.

He'll pass up a wide open 3, dribble around awhile so Sergio won't get an assist, then try to go 1 on 3 and TO the ball.

Hugely unprofessional, and it's only going to hasten his exit from the Blazers.


----------



## Draco (Jun 28, 2003)

I guess with ZBo gone the fans need a new Blazer to rip on.

I wonder who it'll be when Jack leaves?


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

darkhelmit54 said:


> Well, Webster is three years younger than Jack and has never really gotten the chance to have plays run for him and be a weapon where Jack has been given tons of freedom and responsibility for three seasons now. Outlaw is only a year younger but still hasn't had the same opportunities as Jack before. Both are less cocky too and always talking about leadership while not backing it up on the court. And Jack is in front of Sergio who nate must hate because he's been playing well lately but getting no time.


also, Webster and Outlaw have tons of upside. Jack isn't uber-athletic, hasn't demonstrated any great court vision, and isn't a brilliant shooter. he's a lot like Nate was, a hard-nosed combo guard who tries hard and wants to be a leader. he's just not as talented as Nate was. he is what he'll probably always be--a good combo guard role player.


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

If Jack really is as bad as a lot of you say he is, why will there be any interest around the trading deadline? And look at what we got for Zach -- do you REALLY think we could get something even approaching that for Jack? Especially if he's really as bad as you think?

I don't think Jarrett's been freezing Sergio out of plays any more than anyone else. You can't tell me, with a straight face, that Nate would allow that to, not only happen, but CONTINUE over the course of several games. It doesn't matter how much he likes Jack or whatever. But Nate -- or any other coach worth his salt -- wouldn't let that happen or continue.


----------



## darkhelmit54 (Jan 23, 2005)

wastro said:


> If Jack really is as bad as a lot of you say he is, why will there be any interest around the trading deadline? And look at what we got for Zach -- do you REALLY think we could get something even approaching that for Jack? Especially if he's really as bad as you think?
> 
> I don't think Jarrett's been freezing Sergio out of plays any more than anyone else. You can't tell me, with a straight face, that Nate would allow that to, not only happen, but CONTINUE over the course of several games. It doesn't matter how much he likes Jack or whatever. But Nate -- or any other coach worth his salt -- wouldn't let that happen or continue.


Like you'd want to believe that was happening as a coach, or let it get out to the media if there was problems like that. There are all kinds of personal politics in NBA players, no doubt. After Garnett was traded the owner of the timberwolves gave an interview and talked about Kevin freezing out Ricky Davis and not getting in on position during certain plays to make him look dumb, which caused Ricky to be more selfish. I'm sure it's not in an obvious way but you can bet players have favorites, rivals, and competetion on their own team.

If they want to trade him, bringing attention to his tiff's, emotional side, or unwillingness to take a small role isn't exactly good marketing. They'll keep playing him hoping to keep his value afloat, however that SCREWS Sergio.

Jack is not a horrible player, we're not saying that. He just needs to be in a half-court system with post players, and he needs to be relied upon to score. We don't want to play half-court, we have better scorers and scorers off the bench, (Roy, Aldridge) (Outlaw, James Jones), and better PG's. He doesn't fit here at all. I think he could fit fine in Miami, New York, or many other teams as the sixth or seventh guy. It's no secret we have too many young guys to develop, other teams may want what doesn't fit here, a cheap investment.

POR - NY
Jack, Miles, Lafrentz, a second rounder for Jones, Starbury, Rose

you can argue bad PR, but I think it would end up net positive. The good PR of dumping Darius, getting back jones offsets the bad PR of Starbury (even though he's bought out) and getting rid of Jack. No one cares about Lafrentz.

Blake/Sergio
Roy/Jones
Webster/Jones
Aldridge/Outlaw
Pryzbilla/Frye

then

Roy/Sergio
Fernandez/? (would either Jones be re-signed?)
Webster/Outlaw
Aldridge/Frye/Mcroberts
Oden/Pryzbilla


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

Jack would be fine if he would just play shooting guard, and stop trying to play point guard. He just needs to simplify his game, and then let the rest come as he gets experience.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

why do so many want to trade for NYC junk?


----------



## darkhelmit54 (Jan 23, 2005)

I wouldn't say Fred Jones is junk, he'd be a lot better backup SG than Jarret Jack and if we want to be in the playoffs this year it makes sense. Jones could play good perimeter D and really help us on the break, and put Sergio in a better position to succeed overall by playing better with guys who are off the ball and good on the break. Our shooting is coming from the 3/4 position anyways. This would set us up for more cap room in 09, and are we trading away anything but junk anyways? I know Raef is a big winner but...


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

If you compare Fred's and Jarrett's stats this season, they're almost the same player. It's really not that far off.

But we're not trading Miles, no matter how much we want to, and we're not taking Starbury, no matter how much New York wants to.


----------



## darkhelmit54 (Jan 23, 2005)

Jarret and Fred play much much much differently. Fred is hard nosed, full court press, athletic for his size, great on the break, and not as good at drawing fouls but much better at moving without the ball, getting steals, and many other things. Have you looked at stats other than points, mpg, and fg%?

I could see (if he came back and played a couple of games looking impressive) Jarret, Darius, and (something else of decent value) for Malik Rose and Fred Jones, Darius would have to be fairly impressive in those first couple of games though.

Thinking of NY it's interesting to me how interchangable the suns have been over the last couple of years. (Q-Rich) I mean when they were first making noise Joe Johnson and Q-Rich were big pieces for sure, and then they had Tim Thomas and even he played well for them, Kurt Thomas played a big part. Really they just need players who know their role, can shoot, and play pressure D next to Nash, Amare, and Marion. It'll be interesting to see if they miss a beat if Marion is traded (or lost, they'll cut money any way they can).


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

Jarrett: 9.9 ppg / 2.3 rpg / 3.5 apg / .7 spg / 43.7 fg% / 34.6 3p%
Freddy: 7 ppg / 2.4 rpg / 2.1 apg / 1.1 spg / 43.1 fg% / 36.4 3pg%

And a couple of impressive games from Darius won't get him traded. What GM is going to say, "Okay, he's had bum knees for two years, and he's been a locker room cancer in the past, and he doesn't have his explosiveness anymore, so let's trade for him?" And if Darius DOES come back and play impressively, why would we trade him?


----------



## darkhelmit54 (Jan 23, 2005)

wastro said:


> And a couple of impressive games from Darius won't get him traded. What GM is going to say, "Okay, he's had bum knees for two years, and he's been a locker room cancer in the past, and he doesn't have his explosiveness anymore, so let's trade for him?"


Isaiah Thomas, he would be dumping a bad contract too, just not as bad, and getting two players who can play for one who doesn't and distracting all the media attention from himself a little on new players. Desperate people do desperate things. Darius (if athletic) can provide a couple of highlight reel plays a night, who on NY does that now?



wastro said:


> And if Darius DOES come back and play impressively, why would we trade him?


[/QUOTE}

Because we have lots of good young players who play well "within" an offense and we have some who play well going one on one already. Plus we'd get that cap space...duh


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

that Jack has pretty similar stats to Jones is probably as good an argument as any I can think of to trade him. 

if we could get a similar quality of player for Jack without the history of being entitled to a major role on the team, I think it'd be real progress. there's a slot here for a Jack-type role player. it's just that I don't think Jack sees himself in that role. and there's not much you can do to convince him otherwise without a change in scenery. 

I'd love to find out that Jack was worth a lot more than Freddy Jones. but if that's what the market values him at right now, then we ought to deal him. 

the value of point guards doesn't always go up over time. just ask Boston about Sebastian Telfair.


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

wastro said:


> What GM is going to say, "Okay, he's had bum knees for two years, and he's been a locker room cancer in the past, and he doesn't have his explosiveness anymore, so let's trade for him?"


Who is Isiah Thomas, for $9 million, please...

barfo


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

mook said:


> the value of point guards doesn't always go up over time. just ask Boston about Sebastian Telfair.



Funny, but Seabass has actually turned into an adequate NBA player. No one has ever accused Randy Wittman of being a *great* coach, but he apparently has more on the ball than Cheeks or Rivers! :biggrin:


----------



## darkhelmit54 (Jan 23, 2005)

barfo said:


> Who is Isiah Thomas, for $9 million, please...
> 
> barfo


give them Jack, Darius, and our 2010 first round pick (we won't need it anyways, it'll be high) for Malik Rose, Fred Jones, and their 2010 second rounder.

They'd be gambling we're not that great next year and Oden, Fernandez, and our pick this year have a tough time adjusting to the NBA (not totally unreasonable) and that James Jones opts out. We'd be gambling that our pick is like 20 and the one we get back is like 35 or so, not that far down, cut a bunch of salary. 

Plus in their tabloids they talk about their new players that play (unlike Rose) and that they have an extra pick from the youngest team in the NBA, instead of firing Isaiah (at least for a couple of days).


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

I think Whittman must've hit the point where he said to himself, "When you got nothing, you got nothing to lose." (thank you Bob Dylan)

anyway, I haven't watched Minnesota at all this year. (has anybody?) but judging by the stats I'd say he's not the completely hopeless wreck he looked like in his last stint.


----------

