Let's trade for Stephen Jackson... and an oncologist

[GSH]

Here's a fun little article for the people who keep saying the Spurs should spend big bucks to sign Stephen Jackson (or any of the other locker room cancers). I pulled a few excerpts for those who don't want to read the whole thing. My favorite part is his smug attitude about being pulled from the lineup, and the fact that the team is playing better without him.

The 34 points he dropped on the Spurs was impressive. His 2 PT, 0 REB, 1 AST, 28 minute game against Denver, a few nights later - not so much. But you really have to admire the 28 minutes he played against Atlanta where he only put up one shot, and pulled down only one rebound. (That one must have fallen into his hands.) With all his talent, how can you explain that except that he doesn't give a damn?

Stephen Jackson, Corey Magette, and a round of chemotherapy. Sign us up.

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/138450484.html

Jackson did not play a minute in the Bucks' 103-82 victory over the Detroit Pistons on Monday at the Bradley Center. The veteran guard was healthy and available after missing the previous game due to a one-game league suspension for verbally abusing an official.

Jackson also did not play against New York on Jan. 20 and was fined by the team after missing the morning shoot-around before that game.

He has struggled with his shooting, hitting just 36.7% from the field and 29.4% from three-point range (25 of 85).

Shaun Livingston was inserted in the starting lineup against the Knicks and has started the last seven games. The Bucks are 5-2 since he joined the starting five.

"They know my situation; they know how I feel so it's not disappointing," Jackson said of not playing against the Pistons. "We won the game. I supported the guys. "And you know what, for the most part, Scott is right. We are playing well without me in the lineup."


There's a reason why some very talented guys can't stay with a team, and get labeled as cancers. Stephen Jackson is their poster boy.


.

[jjktkk]

Nice post. This thread should be fun. :corn:

[xmas1997]

No way SJ.

[DesignatedT]

We need a big guy. Not a G/F

[Obstructed_View]

If he were 6'11" I'd be in favor of taking a chance on his talent. Not on the grocery list, sorry.

[Texas_Ranger]

In Pop's sistem he could play a PF :rollin

[jesterbobman]

Jackson is overrated, but people want him for nostalgic reasons and the fact that he had a great game against us, which is more salient than the poor performances that weren't watched and debated ad nauseam.

[ffadicted]

Anyone who still mentions SJ is an automatic retard in my books

[lefty]

Oh maaaaaan



I miss Jax :depressed



(fuck you ffaditcted)

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

captain jackass

[Mel_13]

There's a reason why some very talented guys can't stay with a team, and get labeled as cancers. Stephen Jackson is their poster boy.

Haven't you heard that he would be a candidate for NBA citizenship awards if he was on the same roster as Tim Duncan?

[phxspurfan]

We could really use a gunner to jack up some shots from 25 feet!

[lefty]

Spurs are too fucking nice :cry :cry


I dont care if he is a cancer, we could use his badassness

[timvp]

I know it's not really the point of the thread but, for the record, as bad as Jack is these days and as crazy as Jack is these days, I'd still rather have him than RJ. At least with Jack, there's hope he'd step up in the playoffs when the going gets tough. With RJ, it's already a given that he'll fold.

[manufan10]

As bad as Jack is these days and as crazy as Jack is these days, I'd still rather have him than RJ. At least with Jack, there's hope he'd step up in the playoffs when the going gets tough. With RJ, it's already a given that he'll fold.

Most days, I'd rather have a flaming bag of poop on my porch than the Spurs having RJ on the team.

http://clutch.mtv.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/billy-madison.jpg

http://cdn2.screenjunkies.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/billy-madison.jpg

[Bill_Brasky]

He called the shit poop!

[ace3g]

It definitely is a possibility: http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5596204&postcount=140 considering the bucks took him out of the starting line up the past couple of games in favor of Shaun Livingston.

If the Spurs can't make a trade (Kaman) or sign (K Mart) a PF/C then the next best option is get rid of RJ for another SF.

[tenbeersbold]

I know it's not really the point of the thread but, for the record, as bad as Jack is these days and as crazy as Jack is these days, I'd still rather have him than RJ. At least with Jack, there's hope he'd step up in the playoffs when the going gets tough. With RJ, it's already a given that he'll fold.

Yup,I gotta admit I was a happy camper when I saw Danny Green chuck Sam Young to the ground like a rag-doll when fighting over that rebound in the Memphis game in the 3rd qt.Musta rewinded that 3 or 4 times

[Agloco]

Here's a fun little article for the people who keep saying the Spurs should spend big bucks to sign Stephen Jackson (or any of the other locker room cancers). I pulled a few excerpts for those who don't want to read the whole thing. My favorite part is his smug attitude about being pulled from the lineup, and the fact that the team is playing better without him.

The 34 points he dropped on the Spurs was impressive. His 2 PT, 0 REB, 1 AST, 28 minute game against Denver, a few nights later - not so much. But you really have to admire the 28 minutes he played against Atlanta where he only put up one shot, and pulled down only one rebound. (That one must have fallen into his hands.) With all his talent, how can you explain that except that he doesn't give a damn?

Stephen Jackson, Corey Magette, and a round of chemotherapy. Sign us up.

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/138450484.html

Jackson did not play a minute in the Bucks' 103-82 victory over the Detroit Pistons on Monday at the Bradley Center. The veteran guard was healthy and available after missing the previous game due to a one-game league suspension for verbally abusing an official.

Jackson also did not play against New York on Jan. 20 and was fined by the team after missing the morning shoot-around before that game.

He has struggled with his shooting, hitting just 36.7% from the field and 29.4% from three-point range (25 of 85).

Shaun Livingston was inserted in the starting lineup against the Knicks and has started the last seven games. The Bucks are 5-2 since he joined the starting five.

"They know my situation; they know how I feel so it's not disappointing," Jackson said of not playing against the Pistons. "We won the game. I supported the guys. "And you know what, for the most part, Scott is right. We are playing well without me in the lineup."


There's a reason why some very talented guys can't stay with a team, and get labeled as cancers. Stephen Jackson is their poster boy.


.

Rad Onc or Med Onc?

[dylankerouac]

Yup,I gotta admit I was a happy camper when I saw Danny Green chuck Sam Young to the ground like a rag-doll when fighting over that rebound in the Memphis game in the 3rd qt.Musta rewinded that 3 or 4 times

LoL so did we.

[baseline bum]

Without Stephen Jackson the 2003 Spurs become the original 2007 Mavs. Just hope every Spurs fan remembers that when trashing the man.

[Maddog]

Yup,I gotta admit I was a happy camper when I saw Danny Green chuck Sam Young to the ground like a rag-doll when fighting over that rebound in the Memphis game in the 3rd qt.Musta rewinded that 3 or 4 times


LoL so did we.

Loved that also absolutely no fear in taking a shot driving etc.
In general I'm not a big fan of player comparisons - the kind that proliferate like crazy draft time- but Green does remind me a little of Mario Ellie
More the attitude- seems a bit bigger rangier maybe more athletic (Ellie was a decent athlete early days)

[Obstructed_View]

Without Stephen Jackson the 2003 Spurs become the original 2007 Mavs. Just hope every Spurs fan remembers that when trashing the man.

What's Jaren Jackson doing nowadays?

[baseline bum]

What's Jaren Jackson doing nowadays?

Note sure. Without him the 99 Spurs go what, 15-6 instead of 15-2? Besides, I never said I wanted Jack back now (way too old).

[EricD]

Last thing Spurs need is a < 39% volume shooting, ego-driven player who's best days are behind him.

As much as people bitch about RJ, he'd be better than 2012 Stephen Jackson.

Last thing Spurs need is for a player to steal shots away from Tony and Manu only to shoot 37% from the field.

Some people need to get a clue.

[Obstructed_View]

Not sure. Without him the 99 Spurs go what, 15-6 instead of 15-2? Besides, I never said I wanted Jack back now (way too old).

So you agree that what he is now has zero to do with what he was nine years ago.

[baseline bum]

So you agree that what he is now has zero to do with what he was nine years ago.

I wouldn't say zero, but he's not close enough to that 2003 player for me to want him at his current salary. I'd still trade Dick for him though since he has one less year.

[SpurNation]

I'd rather the team not make the playoffs, build youth through decent draft picks and see who they could bring in with cap space instead of wasting time on SJ. Nostalgia is one thing...the future of the team is another.

My thanks to "Buckets" for what he did for the team in the past...but he's the one who blew that deal with the Spurs by accepting less to go somewhere else just to "prove a point". He eventually got his money and A ring...not in that order...but I think the Spurs did just fine without him in his prime and would probably be better off without him not in his prime.

[GSH]

I know it's not really the point of the thread but, for the record, as bad as Jack is these days and as crazy as Jack is these days, I'd still rather have him than RJ. At least with Jack, there's hope he'd step up in the playoffs when the going gets tough. With RJ, it's already a given that he'll fold.



I know what you're saying, Timvp. I've disagreed with you way more than usual lately, and I really want to agree on this one. But I keep going back and forth. I know how bad Jefferson is, but I also know what Jax does to a team. I finally decided this:

Putting Stephen Jackson on your team is like getting a flu shot. If you're in your prime, and healthy, then the benefits probably don't outweigh the discomfort. But if you're very old or young, or already in bad health, then it may be worth the discomfort for a chance to keep yourself alive longer.

You may be right. Putting Jackson on this team might be an improvement, even knowing the mess that he brings. But if that's true, then it's probably a really good indicator of where this team really is. And you would still have to close your eyes and ignore the possibility of him having one of his breakdowns during a playoff series, when the pressure is really on. As bad as Jefferson is, having Jax on your team is a form of Russian roulette. And he sure isn't any help when he's suspended.

[HarlemHeat37]

I would take him over RJ, but he's a shitty player, at this point..

One of the biggest chuckers in the NBA, inefficient volume shooter..

He wouldn't fit with the Spurs, outside of the toughness he would provide..

[rmt]

need a pf so Bonner/Blair don't have to play in the playoffs

[MI21]

Buckets unfortunately fell off. He was actually quite useful for Charlotte recently, but has been hideous in Milwaukee.

He was the player the Spurs needed to add toughness, defensive versatility and balls from 04-09, possibly even last season - but he isn't the player they need now.

[urunobili]

RJ was really good while in Milwaukee so... One can only hope...

[Ice009]

Anyone who still mentions SJ is an automatic retard in my books

Well this might be the first time that I will say no to Sjax. The only way I would trade for him is if we couldn't amnesty RJ and it was a straight trade for the two. I'd take SJax over him any day of the week. He'd bring fire and passion to the team, and better defense, even if he does shoot poorly, whereas RJ brings nothing most of the time when he is shooting poorly.

Sjax is also likely to step up in the playoffs over most of the people on our current roster. A proven playoff performer is a big thing and shouldn't be discounted.

Since we'll have a decent amount of cap space next season though by amnestying RJ, I'd probably not want to do the trade even if it were available.

My first priority is a big.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

Sjax > RJ

we know this


But even down the road, barring any drastic injuries, I would not mind whatsoever if the Spurs somehow get him back for a vet's minimum or LLE or something like that where he's a guy in his last seasons and the Spurs get him for the bench.

Stephen Jackson is awesome. If we weren't a top 4 cheapest team of all time we'd have kept him and prob won 4 straight titles

[Ice009]

Did I say NO?

I think I'll change it to a yes. A lot of Spurs players have no HEART AT ALL.

[Manu-of-steel]

Rad Onc or Med Onc?

Both, most likely. The cancer is metastatic already.

[Manu-of-steel]

I know what you're saying, Timvp. I've disagreed with you way more than usual lately, and I really want to agree on this one. But I keep going back and forth. I know how bad Jefferson is, but I also know what Jax does to a team. I finally decided this:

Putting Stephen Jackson on your team is like getting a flu shot. If you're in your prime, and healthy, then the benefits probably don't outweigh the discomfort. But if you're very old or young, or already in bad health, then it may be worth the discomfort for a chance to keep yourself alive longer.

You may be right. Putting Jackson on this team might be an improvement, even knowing the mess that he brings. But if that's true, then it's probably a really good indicator of where this team really is. And you would still have to close your eyes and ignore the possibility of him having one of his breakdowns during a playoff series, when the pressure is really on. As bad as Jefferson is, having Jax on your team is a form of Russian roulette. And he sure isn't any help when he's suspended.

The risk far outweighs the benefit. I think i have to agree with gsh

[Wild Cobra Kai]

Jack isn't playing badly because he suddenly got old, He's dogging it because they won't give him an extension. That's some fucked up shit, and nothing we need any part of. It wouldn't suddenly stop if he were transplanted to another team, including SA.

[Das Texan]

I know it's not really the point of the thread but, for the record, as bad as Jack is these days and as crazy as Jack is these days, I'd still rather have him than RJ. At least with Jack, there's hope he'd step up in the playoffs when the going gets tough. With RJ, it's already a given that he'll fold.

So you are saying a Jax for Dick trade would be great.....


:hat

[GSH]

BTW - Milwaukee kicked Miami's ass tonight. Jax with 9 minutes, and a nearly empty stat sheet.

[xmas1997]

Not just no,
but HELL NO!

[therealtruth]

I know what you're saying, Timvp. I've disagreed with you way more than usual lately, and I really want to agree on this one. But I keep going back and forth. I know how bad Jefferson is, but I also know what Jax does to a team. I finally decided this:

Putting Stephen Jackson on your team is like getting a flu shot. If you're in your prime, and healthy, then the benefits probably don't outweigh the discomfort. But if you're very old or young, or already in bad health, then it may be worth the discomfort for a chance to keep yourself alive longer.

You may be right. Putting Jackson on this team might be an improvement, even knowing the mess that he brings. But if that's true, then it's probably a really good indicator of where this team really is. And you would still have to close your eyes and ignore the possibility of him having one of his breakdowns during a playoff series, when the pressure is really on. As bad as Jefferson is, having Jax on your team is a form of Russian roulette. And he sure isn't any help when he's suspended.

I agree. I am sure Jefferson's play will pick up when Manu and TJ get back. He plays better with those guys especially in his role on the second unit with Ford.