Reply With Quote
I've always felt the same way. He's a great athlete with average talent.
http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/pos...ay-bullets-162
On his SIRIUS XM Mad Dog Radio show “Stack’s House,” Bucks swingman Jerry Stackhouse talks about Richard Jefferson's performance in San Antonio: "I just don’t think he’s as good as everybody talked him up to be, to me. I mean, I think he has some talent, he’s an athlete but a lot of the best basketball we’ve seen from Richard Jefferson came when he played with Jason Kidd, when he was just pretty much spoon-fed at the basket and was able to run out and just be an athlete. When it comes down to a half-court set and just being able to play half-court basketball I don’t think he’s that special of a player, in my opinion. It’s just one of those things where it’s just not a good fit. It wasn’t a great fit for him in Milwaukee when he was here. He had some big games but really nothing special. He wasn’t a guy that really helped them go to another level as far as wins and losses. And I think they’re finding out in San Antonio that he may not be the right fit for what they want to do. If I know [head coach Gregg] Popovich like I know him I could very easily see him not in a San Antonio uniform next year."
I've always felt the same way. He's a great athlete with average talent.
Averaging 20 a game while playing 82 in Milwaukee kinda makes Stack's comments look uninformed, at best.
He's just jacking up shots on a bad team. Somebody has to score the points.
and the team sucked ass, as he was the #1 option with a poor FG% and awful assist/turnover ratio. he sucked so bad that they traded him away for pretty much nothing in return. and now his suckassness is hurting the spurs, as they may finish with an 8th seed and less than 50 wins.
What's funny is that the did set a career high in 3-pt % at 39% last year, when for his career he's always been around 34-35%. I think that's one of the reasons that the Spurs decided to acquire him, because they're always looking for good 3-pt shooters who can space the floor for Duncan. And yet he's regressed back to what he's always been behind the arc.
how is this smack???
I agree 100% and so does the rest of the world. This is like saying the sky is blue.
ive said it a million times... the spurs were going to miss bowens corner 3. it created so much more floor spacing on offense for them, its ridiculous. but now, jefferson just clogs up space that Parker, Manu, and Timmy need in the middle.What's funny is that the did set a career high in 3-pt % at 39% last year, when for his career he's always been around 34-35%. I think that's one of the reasons that the Spurs decided to acquire him, because they're always looking for good 3-pt shooters who can space the floor for Duncan. And yet he's regressed back to what he's always been behind the arc.
except z0sa apparently, but hes a rehow is this smack???
I agree 100% and so does the rest of the world. This is like saying the sky is blue.
Pop liked RJ from the days at the olympics. I guess RJ gave good head at the USA olympic concentration
You need to take the s out your sig Findog.
Truth.
Stackhouse might be right but he is half the player Jefferson is. Talking about a player jacking up bad shots. lol
As an individual player, Stack was always the better player between the two.
I think Stack knows what he's talking about because he probably sees a lot of himself in Richard Jefferson. And Richard Jefferson probably sees Stack in him too...
Stack's basically right but his description of Jefferson more or less fits his as well. Both players had their best numbers on teams IIRC.
mmm I give it 2 and 1/2 stars
20ppg, 82 games does anywhere closely resemble "nothing really special." He also enjoyed a career high 3FG% and a career low MPG.
I agree it was a bad team and he's not anywhere close to a #1 option, but it's stupid to make vague generalizations then back em up with some ungrounded "opinions".
lol butthurt spurfan
Lol fair.
The first sentence was actually intended as a serious comment. Then I read what it sounded like and added the second sentence.
kelly tripucka averaged 20 PPG before. . . . . kelly tripucka
Well he was arguably the best player on a team, so I think that's what Stack meant by "nothing really special." Putting up #s on a bad team doesn't really mean much in the grand scheme of things. Some of the time guys like Pau Gasol go on to a better team and show that they are indeed gifted players who contribute to winning, and other times guys go on to better situations like Jefferson did and expose themselves as nothing special. And I agree with whoever said that the same kind of criticism directed at Jefferson could be lobbed right back at Stack.
In his Detroit days, he was a good player. Dantley was better of course.
Difficult to dispute what Stack said, but is it really smack?
If he had said this last summer, when nearly the whole basketball world applauded the RJ trade as a great move, that would have been something. Now he's just another voice in the chorus.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
