I'm not joining in the debate, I just wanted to ask why you are presenting a few opinionated statements as fact?
ing sucking brent barry. his asshole self went and talked about the spurs when he left. he ruined chemistry with his stupid ing "joker" personality and he came in to shoot 3's for ing 3 minutes a game. what a joke. i hope he finds a career ending injury waiting for him this season. brent barry in the asshole with a big rubber .
ill always hate brent barry
As for him being miles apart from Manu psychologically, it's true. Watching the Warriors game sometimes , Jax is a bit of a headcase. He gets mad about fouls/refs and that affects his game time decisons, he's not always making the optimal play when it comes to stupid shots. He gets too emotional. However, I disagree that Manu and Jax are fairly even talent wise.
I don't think it's just psychological. There's a reason for his poor FG % and TO's. He has no handles, nor a first step. Plus he makes stupider decisions because of his reliance on just jumpshots/the big shot, and isn't able to penetrate like Manu at a frequency.
SJax is only on Manu's talent level when it comes to defense (intangibles) and draining the big shot.
But as far basketball IQ goes Manu >>>> SJAX. I like SJax swagger but
Manu's shot selection is usually within the offense and on fewer shots, which means Manu's physical talent allows him to be smarter within plays.
I'd say their jump shooting ability is even mostly, and is Jax is more confident in his 3 ball than Manu is at times. That's the only edge I'll give Jackson over Manu..
Manu is too much of a confidence player when it comes to his jumpshots in-game, which is annoying because he should make them every time given his form.
And in spite of that, it's not like Manu can't improve getting more consistent with his jumpshot..so that's not even that big of an edge for SJax to be considered over Manu. Since some games SJax is so confident in his shot, he'll go 9-25 from three.
It's usually a sign of lower intelligence.
I love Jax, but if we could only have one or the other, which is the question at hand, I'd take Manu every day of the week.
Sure, Jax is a fine player, but would we have won in 2005 and 2007 with Jax rather than Manu at SG? 2007, maybe, but 2005, NO FREAKIN WAY. At that point Jax was still finding his game, yet Manu was at the peak of his and controlled those playoffs. In particular, Manu's performances in games 1, 2 and 7 of the Finals were an exemplar of efficiency and clutch brilliance. With 2005 Jax in those same situations I don't think we would have beaten those Pistons.
Also, we all recall Manu's brain explosion in 2006, but Jax is about 100x more prone to brain explosions than Manu has been. Jax's shot-selection is far worse than Manu's and would probably have cost us a bunch of games over the years.
Big fan of Jackson, but we are talking about a HoF guy who has won at every level (Euroleague, WC, Olympics, NBA), has 3 NBA rings, should have been joint NBA Finals MVP in 2005, and is the ultimate teammate. No frickin way you take Jax over that.
I hope you don't claim to be a Spurs fan.
1. Stats are cheap, rings are not.
2. Jax is NOT clutcher over the course of his career. Sure, Jax has hit some huge shots, no doubt, but during his prime (2005-7), Manu was rated top 3 in clutch scoring (performance in the final two minutes) in the NBA. We are not comparing the players today, it is about choosing one or the other since 2004.
3. Jax would play for the US given the chance. Manu's choice to play for his country is a negative? The NBA does not own its players. Holding that against him, like somehow playing for your COUNTRY is a crime, is absurd.
You really should check your head.
You might want to change that verb tense. SJax's season has been over for a while now.
I agree with most of what you said but SJax > Manu on defense. If the Spurs would have had SJax to defend Dirk in 2006, that could have been a sweep. When motivated, SJax is a pretty damn good defender. Ginobili is by no means a bad defender but he thrives as a help defender. On the ball, Ginobili these days is average at best.
But yeah, there's no case that could be made that the Spurs should have picked SJax over Manu in 2003. Even going forward, Manu is still the better option, IMO.
Eh I'd take Manu, he does a better job of making his teamates better and is more versatile than Jack but if you want someone to take open threes in playoff games I'd pretty much take Stephen Jackson over any other player in the NBA.
And please don't question Manu's toughness or ever utter the words like he is weak. Seriously...you shouldn't even be alloed to be a Spurfan for saying like that. ...I don't care what you want to say about the dude he's one of the mentally toughest players in the NBA...he doesn't play a lot of minutes because he's got the living beat out of him due to his style of play.
The same exact reason his career his going to end, much sooner than Stephen Jacksons.
Anyone that questions Ginobili's toughness or heart and uses words like weak to describe him should have their Spur card revoked IMHO...he gave his body to this team.
You are ing weak...no true Spur fan would ever say something like that about him.
You go ask the guys he's played against if he's tough...I've never heard Kenyon Martin say a kind of word about anyone but even he admitted the Nuggets were knocking the out of Manu as hard as they could during the 05 playoffs and they couldn't stop him, he just kep coming.
That is he why he can't play that 13 minutes, that is why his body is breaking down.
You want to say Manu is bonehead at times, fine, you want to say he's breaking down fine...but don't say the dudes weak, he's breaking down because he refuses to be weak and has for his entire career...
It only proves you don't know about the Spurs...anyone that was watching Manu play 5 years ago could see he wasn't going to have a long career due the nature of his play.
I forget who it was....I think it was Kenny Smith, he said Manu Ginobili is the type of player that will barely be able to walk anymore when he is 40...and he meant it as a compliment.
You should be banned for using the words weak and Manu in the same sentence.
You really should...because you are a pathetic excuse for a Spurfan.
You Keep Using That Word...
you have written here the words i wanted to write. +1
Jack - You know what they say about black men
Manu - Italian blood with Latin sensibilities
I think timvp, whottt and myself pretty much summed this one up.
Sig material... can I whottt?
This is actually a tough one for me. Everyone loves Manu, and I do too, but I love me some Captian Jack. Sure, the dude has been a knucklehead at times, but he is actually a great guy that does tremendous things for the community. Besides that, like timvp said, he is a of a defender when he is motivated, and Manu really isn't THAT great of a defender. His best defensive attribute is the way he gambles when he goes for steals, that's about. As far as shooting percentages and all of that stuff, both Manu and Jack are somewhat streaky players, so I can't really say. I think they're about even, but Jack has the better defense.
I'd love both. lol
Stephen is bigger and a better defender, but he usually sleepwalks thru quarters one to three. Manu plays hard for the minutes he can in all quarters.
Manu
Jack
FG% .418
3G% .341
Manu
FG% .454
3g% .377
'Nuff said
does "for a while" mean about a week? He just went down not too long ago after playing the whole season on a bad foot or toes or whatever.
Never thought I'd agree with a whott post as much as I do this one.
honestly I would pick Jackson rather than Manu if I had got a chance to make this sweet choice, Manu is a maestro on the court but he is no longer the flashy Manu of the old years. Along with his 3 rings and 1 finals' mvp, Manu has also gained many injuries as well. Captain Jack has played more years in this league but he is still more consistent than today's Manu IMHO.
"is averaging" means he's still playing. "was averaging" means that now he's out. It's fairly simple.
I'd rather have Manu, but its totally arguable that we could have won championships with Jack instead of Manu...not necessarily the 05 and 07 years, and not necessarily against the teams we ended up playing, but I think its a legit take.
I truly believe 3/4 of the people on this forum don't really remember how bad ass Jackson + Bowen were defensively in 2003. They put every other team's wings on total lock down.
The argument is not so automatic as alot of people in here intimate it is. Manu has heart, and the fire, and does make his teammates better, but Jackson is amazingly clutch in the one area that always kills us when teams pack the paint and was a lanky defensive beast under Pop and will have a longer career.
manu>jax
dont' argue coz it's just one of those facts of life.
As this point in their careers I would go with SJax and actually by a bit. Dont get me wrong manu is prob my fav spur and I appreciate all he's done, but his prime is passed. His injuries have been a result of so much play over the years internationally as well as long runs into the playoffs and lets be honest he isn't all that young anymore. SJax on the other hand is physical presence-if you've watched lakers/gstate games he gives kobe some tough D (if thats possible) because of his size and quickness-he's smart-relatively injury free-and I don't think his at ude is anywhere near the problem it was a few years ago. And I think in the right situation he can have a good at ude like when in SA.
I love Jax but Manu
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
