Stephen Jackson was kicked off the Pacers' bench by coach Rick Carlisle

Cleveland 107, Indiana 75
Cleveland 107, Indiana 75

Preview - Box Score - Recap

By TOM WITHERS, AP Sports Writer
December 9, 2006

AP - Dec 9, 10:40 pm EST
More Photos



CLEVELAND (AP) -- Stephen Jackson didn't last until halftime. By then, the Indiana Pacers were done anyway.

LeBron James scored 24 points -- mostly with Jackson trying to guard him -- in the first half and finished with 27 to lead the Cleveland Cavaliers to a 107-75 win over the flustered Pacers on Saturday night.

Indiana's ugly loss was compounded by an incident in the first half involving Jackson, who was kicked off the Pacers' bench by coach Rick Carlisle.

Late in the second quarter, Jackson was pulled by Carlisle and the two had words. Carlisle then pointed for Jackson to leave the bench area, banishing the fiery guard to the locker room for the remainder of the game.
"I substituted for him. He came to the bench and an exchange ensued that I thought was inappropriate and detrimental to the team," Carlisle said. "So I made a decision to remove him from the bench.

ADVERTISEMENT


"These games are difficult. If you don't have everybody with a laser-like focus on one task, which is playing like a team and competing hard, it gets even more difficult."

It's the latest controversy surrounding Jackson. The 28-year-old is facing charges of firing a gun during a fight outside a strip club in Indianapolis on Oct. 6. He could go to trial in February.

Two years ago, Jackson went into the stands and fought Detroit fans during the Pacers' infamous brawl with fans in Detroit.

Following the game, Jackson was on his way out of Quicken Loans Arena, escorted by two security personnel, when Pacers assistant coach Chuck Person summoned to have him brought back to the locker room.

Jackson went inside for a moment before leaving again. On his way out, Jackson declined an interview request.

"No," he said. "I'm cool."

Carlisle said he had not yet spoken with Jackson, and at this point no further discipline was planned.


AP - Dec 9, 10:27 pm EST
More Photos


"As of right now, this is a one-game situation and if that changes I'll let you know," Carlisle said. "I expect this is an incident that's isolated and will be dealt with as such.

"I loved the way Jack played the last two games. He was a leader and he was focused. He had a great demeanor and he's one of our better players and that's what we expect from him every night. But when something like this happens, it has to be addressed."

Jackson's teammates had little to say afterward.

"Oh, no," said forward Al Harrington. "Hear no evil, see no evil."

James had seven rebounds, six assists and spent the entire fourth quarter relaxing on the bench. The Cavaliers built a 24-point lead in the first half and coasted to their most lopsided win this season.

Zydrunas Ilgauskas had 15 points and Donyell Marshall added a season-high 17 rebounds for the Cavs. Cleveland outrebounded Indiana 57-34.

Darrell Armstrong had 13 points and Danny Granger 12 for the Pacers.

Ilgauskas scored just two points on only two shots when the teams met on Nov. 24 -- a 10-point win by Indiana. But the 7-foot-3 center was able to maneuver inside as the Pacers were without forward Jermaine O'Neal, who missed his second straight game with a strained left hamstring.

Leading by 14 at halftime, the Cavaliers outscored Indiana 28-13 to open an 84-55 lead entering the fourth.

James, who went 10-of-11 from the floor in the first half, was replaced with 20 seconds to go in the third and got some rare rest on the bench in the final 12 minutes.


AP - Dec 9, 10:27 pm EST
More Photos


"I'm not very good at sitting, but it was good," James said. "We did a good job jumping on a team and not letting up. It was great to finally get a blowout."

Larry Hughes, who missed Cleveland's previous 10 games with a sprained right ankle, scored eight points in 24 minutes.

However, Hughes' return was tempered by the loss of Cavs forward Drew Gooden, who injured his left groin trying to dunk during pregame warmups.

With no O'Neal to block or impede their way, the Cavaliers drove to the basket at will in the first half for layups, and of course, a few dunks by James.

Cleveland led by 15 in the first quarter and extended its lead to 24 when James blasted down the left side for a layup with 3:20 to go before halftime. The bucket incited a chant of "You can't stop him," from fans in the upper deck at about the same time Jackson was being yanked by Carlisle.

The Pacers, though, cut 10 points off Cleveland's lead as the 38-year-old Armstrong scored 10 points in the final 2:26 and started a 14-4 run as Indiana closed to 56-42 at halftime.

Notes

In the final seconds, LeBron James Jr. tossed an orange toy ball on the floor, drawing a roar from the crowd and a laugh from his dad. ... James was an Olympic teammate of Allen Iverson's and wouldn't mind playing again with the 76ers' troubled point guard, who appears to be on the verge of being traded by Philadelphia. "I'm not trying to stir something up around here, but he's a Hall of Famer, who wouldn't want to play with him?" James said. "Anyone in the league would want to play with a guy like that." James feels the best thing for Iverson and Philly is to part ways. "It's very difficult for him to swallow," he said. "But he has to understand that and move on." ... The Cavaliers are 20-2 at home since March 5.

LeBron James Jr. tossed an orange toy ball on the floor, drawing a roar from the crowd and a laugh from his dad.

so james son can do that and get away with it but an average fan's son can not
PATHETIC

sj + tinsley for ai LOL

Welcome back, son.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ducks

LeBron James Jr. tossed an orange toy ball on the floor, drawing a roar from the crowd and a laugh from his dad.

so james son can do that and get away with it but an average fan's son can not
PATHETIC

---

You gotta be kidding, right? I mean, right?

Pick
Him
Up

wish the Spurs could pull the trigger and pick him back up.

Jackson would solve so many problems.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by T Park

wish the Spurs could pull the trigger and pick him back up.

Jackson would solve so many problems.

---

Yup, we ARE looking for a trouble maker to fill that void. Fucking genious, forgive me for forgetting that one. :lmao

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MrChug

Yup, we ARE looking for a trouble maker to fill that void. Fucking genious, forgive me for forgetting that one. :lmao

---

he was never a headache when he played for us, the only problem was that he wanted to start instead of playiin from the bench

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TDMVPDPOY

he was never a headache when he played for us, the only problem was that he wanted to start instead of playiin from the bench

---

Actually the only problem was he wanted a lot of money that the Spurs weren't willing to offer.

Exactly, had the Spurs not been stupid, and ponied up for him in 03, wed be looking at a three peat this year. Jackson is a good rebounder, good defender, a LONG defender, and when coached and surrounded by good character guys, he does good.

Indiana is surrounded by knuckleheads and peanutheads and Jax has ALWAYS been easily influenced.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by T Park

Exactly, had the Spurs not been stupid, and ponied up for him in 03, wed be looking at a three peat this year. Jackson is a good rebounder, good defender, a LONG defender, and when coached and surrounded by good character guys, he does good.

Indiana is surrounded by knuckleheads and peanutheads and Jax has ALWAYS been easily influenced.

---

Oh I don't think he was worth the money he wanted at that time. He should have taken the Spurs offer. I don't think he was worth $7M+ a year or whatever back then.

yes, jackson was a good contributor. but the spurs way to keeping a winning team is to not overpay guys and usually make the right decisions (malik and rasho are exceptions).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kori Ellis

Oh I don't think he was worth the money he wanted at that time. He should have taken the Spurs offer. I don't think he was worth $7M+ a year or whatever back then.

---

how much was the low balled offer the spurs gave him? shouldve thrown the MLE at him....

Spurs have all they need at the 2/3, they don't need to add a "fiery" cancer there, they don't need a poor shooter who does not assist, rebound, or hustle.

SJax isn't the same as he was in 2003. He's got his big contract and his head is much bigger (but still empty).

As far as I remember there was some babysitting job in the 2003 playoffs

Young 2003 Manu and 2003 Buckets was definite good times.

Who would thought that S-Jack cold be kicked from the bench by his coach.?

He's a nice guy.:lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TDMVPDPOY

how much was the low balled offer the spurs gave him? shouldve thrown the MLE at him....

---

We offered him 3 yrs/$10 million if I remember correctly. Lots of people ragged on him for walking away from that and taking a one year/league min deal from Atlanta, but it obviously worked out for him from a financial standpoint...Maybe not so much from a quality of life standpoint.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by T Park

Exactly, had the Spurs not been stupid, and ponied up for him in 03, wed be looking at a three peat this year. Jackson is a good rebounder, good defender, a LONG defender, and when coached and surrounded by good character guys, he does good.

Indiana is surrounded by knuckleheads and peanutheads and Jax has ALWAYS been easily influenced.

---

The Spurs made a financial decision not to overpay S-Jax so they could lock up Tim, Tony and Manu for the long term AND keep some flexability to add other solid pieces around the big three.

The rumor is S-Jax was a model team player as a Spur. The truth is S-Jax was high maintence because of pouting and other character flaws. After one solid season, it was S-Jax and his agent that made the decision to price Stephen out of the market, in consideration of the Spurs other championship building considerations.

I appreciate what S-Jax delivered in 2003. But it is S-Jax and S-Jax Fans who need to understand; it is Stephen and only Stephen, who must take responsiblilty for where he is. And that is not with the Spurs.

They won't trade for him for one reason: it would fuck up their '08 plan. I don't think they've made the moves they have made (and not made) over the past several off seasons so that in '08 they can retain a (then) 30 YO Stephen Jackson from '08 to '10.

"Jackson is a good rebounder"

only in your opinion.

With 2.7 RB/game this season, he'd be the 8th best Spurs rebounder

His career AST and STL are even lower. His hustle stats are worthless.

He's a shitty 3G shooter, career 33% vs. Spurs team 40%.

He's stupid, adolescent head case who takes too much hand-holding and forgiving to produce too little.

Spurs staff and players have better things to do than nurse this jerk for such poor output.

Even with the Spurs in 02/03, his epitaph was "he keeps both teams in the game".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave McNulla

yes, jackson was a good contributor. but the spurs way to keeping a winning team is to not overpay guys and usually make the right decisions (malik and rasho are exceptions).

---

Actually Malik and Rasho and Nazr and Steve Jax aren't exceptions. They contributed to championships--but when their ratio of contibutions (+) to salary (-) got too lopsided, they were traded or let go.

Spurs FO and Pop make very unsentimental and very sharp judgements on this plus and minus ratio.

And they are almost invariably right as the cumulative results of their actions with these players show.

James has a son already? James can't be older than 23..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by v2freak

James has a son already? James can't be older than 23..

---

So? He's been a millionaire since he was 19.

Adopted son?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by v2freak

Adopted son?

---

Dude, what is your problem? Are you the reproduction police?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TDMVPDPOY

how much was the low balled offer the spurs gave him? shouldve thrown the MLE at him....

---

the spurs 'low-balled' him by offering more than 28 other teams in the league were willing to offer at that time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by exstatic

Dude, what is your problem? Are you the reproduction police?

---

Dude, what is your problem? Heaven forbid I ask a few questions regarding the extravagence of young billionaires.

First he's a millionaire, second he's been a baby daddy since high school

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trainwreck2100

First he's a millionaire, second he's been a baby daddy since high school

---

How DARE he have a child without freak's permission!! That's...that's...extravagant!!!

Thank goodness he has the funds to support a child. The problem of teenage pregnancy is very real as people don't understand the consequences of their actions / don't have self-control. ducks has a point - just because he's filthy-rich, he gets away with a lot more.

But my disagreeing with how he's already become so rich is a completely separate issue. And for the record, I am not a LeBron lover or hater. For example: I appreciate how he went to the 04 Olympics when few others would, but I don't think he went in 06 for the right reasons. I love that he works at his game furiously, but I hate that he gets star treatment. I like how he wanted to do the skills challenge so he wouldn't just be known as a dunker, but I don't like that he dunked on our franchise player. And so on..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by T Park

Jackson is a good rebounder, good defender

---

This is even funnier than your Ginobili threads.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by T Park

Exactly, had the Spurs not been stupid, and ponied up for him in 03, wed be looking at a three peat this year. Jackson is a good rebounder, good defender, a LONG defender, and when coached and surrounded by good character guys, he does good.

Indiana is surrounded by knuckleheads and peanutheads and Jax has ALWAYS been easily influenced.

---

Jackson was a headcase when he was in San Antonio, but the Spurs: (1) had veteran leadership (David Robinson, Steve Smith, Danny Ferry, etc . . . ) that put a lot of peer pressure on him; and (2) had a guy like Mike Brown around to babysit Buckets every time he pouted because Pop pulled him early from a game for some ridiculous on-court decision that Jackson made -- a circumstance that repeated itself with stunning frequency during the 2002-03 season and the 2003 NBA Playoffs. That's not to say that SJax isn't a wonderful basketball player; it's not to say that he's not talented or that he could never be an asset to a basketball team. But, I don't think you can just look at the current Spurs and fit SJax into the mix. There's too much from either a contractual standpoint or an on-court standpoint that wouldn't be the same.

Had they given in on Jackson (given Peter Holt's much-noted frugality) they likely wouldn't have been able, down the road, to keep Ginobili AND extend Parker in that scenario -- unless they decided against resigning Bruce Bowen or bringing in Robert Horry. Ginobili's departure would have seemed most likely, since Jackson wasn't likely to take kindly to coming off the bench and Manu made clear that he preferred to start. I'm not sure the Spurs would be better off right now if they had Stephen Jackson and didn't have Manu Ginobili.

SJax wasn't that good even when he was good, if you follow me. He was a turnover machine in SA. I really don't miss him.

Nba Forum

"He was a turnover machine in SA."

Career AST / TO = 2.4 / 2.22.

Steven Jackson is a player much like Horry: you put up with his inconsistency and limited production because you KNOW that he's going to hit big shots. That being said, Horry accepts a limited regular season role, something I don't see Buckets EVER warming to. If you could play him only in the 4th Q and pay him the MCE, it would be the perfect storm. Unfortunately, that would never happen. Maybe later in his career, he'd accept such a role in SA.

He probably would have flourished here had he stayed, and would have continued to improve as a player

"probably, woulda, coulda, shoulda, maybe, if --are all words that precede any discussion about SJAX.

In his place Manu made the All-Star team. JAX did not get an All Star berth at either of the two teams he's played for as a starter since he left the Spurs.

We don't need JAX. Q.E.D.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by v2freak

He probably would have flourished here had he stayed, and would have continued to improve as a player

---

I'm not even sure on what basis you say that. He's gotten full time starting minutes in ATL and IND since he's left, and hasn't really developed at all. His 3 point shooting has progressed from mid-average to high average, but his overall FG% has never equalled what it was in SA in any year since, and the other numbers are a function of minutes.

"His 3 point shooting has progressed from mid-average to high average"

WTF? 3G% = 33% career, 26% this season

02/03 with Spurs: 32%.

SJax is a HORRIBLE 3G shooter, on average.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trainwreck2100

First he's a millionaire, second he's been a baby daddy since high school

---

:rolleyes

His baby was born right before the 2004-05 season. When LeBron was almost 20. He wasn't in high school, he was beginning his second year in the league.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wildbill2u

Actually Malik and Rasho and Nazr and Steve Jax aren't exceptions. They contributed to championships--but when their ratio of contibutions (+) to salary (-) got too lopsided, they were traded or let go.

Spurs FO and Pop make very unsentimental and very sharp judgements on this plus and minus ratio.

And they are almost invariably right as the cumulative results of their actions with these players show.

---

actually, malik and rasho are exceptions. first, they overpaid malik for sentimental reasons AND to keep him off the lakers. he was in the dog house the entire time because not only was he costing the team, he was tying up funds. traded, the proof is in the pudding.

second, rasho was overpaid because the spurs had to get a drob replacement. it seemed like a good deal at the time because it was cheaper than drob and his numbers were better (in minny). turned out that his numbers are better because garnett doesn't have to get the ball most of the time. traded, proof...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by exstatic

I'm not even sure on what basis you say that. He's gotten full time starting minutes in ATL and IND since he's left, and hasn't really developed at all. His 3 point shooting has progressed from mid-average to high average, but his overall FG% has never equalled what it was in SA in any year since, and the other numbers are a function of minutes.

---

Continued influence from battle-hardened veterans and a strong system that would have sharpened his defensive skills led me to say this. Also, his 3 point percentage would have continued to increase as a result of playing with TD. TD's hardly as injured as O'Neal and doesn't play outside as much.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave McNulla

actually, malik and rasho are exceptions. first, they overpaid malik for sentimental reasons AND to keep him off the lakers. he was in the dog house the entire time because not only was he costing the team, he was tying up funds. traded, the proof is in the pudding.

---

he wasn't in the doghouse the entire time. actually after year 1 of the new deal, his contract was not looking too bad (well, maybe it still did in terms of length, but not in annual salary). it wasn't towards the end of the second year and him providing next to nothing in the 2004 playoffs that things turned for the worse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boutons_

"His 3 point shooting has progressed from mid-average to high average"

WTF? 3G% = 33% career, 26% this season

02/03 with Spurs: 32%.

SJax is a HORRIBLE 3G shooter, on average.

---

To be fair, it's been better than his SA 3G% every year EXCEPT this year. He's had better years and this is definitely a worse year, but overall, he hasn't really progressed.

Pop has that mind control over Sjax.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kori Ellis

:rolleyes

His baby was born right before the 2004-05 season. When LeBron was almost 20. He wasn't in high school, he was beginning his second year in the league.

---

And to keep you updated on the sperm in the rest of basketball, Amare also has a daughter that was born in his second year in the league, Antione Wright had a kid while he was at A&M, which undoubtedly contributed to his leaving a year early for the NBA, and Greg Oden already has a kid, which was probably conceived while he was in high school. Finally, my friend Frank who was on my college intramural basketball team has a one-year-old daughter who was born while her mom was still in college.

He sure to end up in prison one day. Too bad, he's got talent.

His also suspended for tonites game against watever team they're playin