Stephen Jackson- Who will pick him up. Why not us?

[Eric_Suede]

Why aren't the Celts looking to sign the likes of Stephen Jackson. He & Wallace have played together before and actually did some good things in charlotte. He is the best of free agents left IMHO. I'm not sure if the pay works out but I don't see it as a bad idea. I bleed green guys but this team doesn't excite me at all. We need some vets. Jackson to me is a good start. Good Swingman to help fill the void from the exit of Paul Pierce

[Mazingerz]

The Cs don't want to go to luxury tax hell this season;

The best they could offer is for camp invitees only which will allow the team to stay within the cap;

[bfrombleacher]

The Heat will pick him up.

[ImShakHeIsShaq]

Yep, can't afford him, even vet min for him is too much. We don't need him anyway. We have enough bodies already, this is a year where the youngins need to get their PT. The only old guy who will get minutes is Wallace. We don't need anymore vets anyway, that's what we did with the coaching staff (guys like Waltah).

[European NBA fan]

Stephen Jackson was really, really bad last season. And he was a disturbance in the Spurs locker room, complaining about his minutes, which eventually got him fired.

We don't need any of that here on a rebuilding team. Furthermore even if he played better and didn't complain, I'm not sure that he is the kind of veteran, I want around our team. He probably wouldn't really care about the Celtics, and might give our new coach a very hard time.

[chambers]

dont need him in the locker room.
He needs big egos around him that command respect.
Even on the Spurs he couldn't fit because they don't have big egos.
We don't want big egos and we don't want his gangstaness in the locker room.
I love the guy but he's the opposite of what we need right now.

[wdleehi]

What does he add to the team?


He doesn't really improve them, just adds more unneeded depth.  The Celtics have SGs and SFs.


He has never been what I call a great locker room leader. 


The Celtics already have a vet player who is an example of playing all out to maximize your talent in Wallace (even though he is on the big slide now)

[Birdman]

1. Cause Celtics wants to be bad this year
2. Jackson is a headache to handle

[pearljammer10]

35 year old swing man way past his haydays on a rebuilding team thats nearing the luxury tax?

How would that make sense to sign him?

[Moranis]

What would be the purpose in signing him.  To possibly win 1 more game and potentially hurt Boston's draft position.  Jackson would be a solid deep rotation player on a winner, but a team rebuilding has no room for a guy like him.  Just silly talk.

[Eric_Suede]

What would be the purpose in signing him.  To possibly win 1 more game and potentially hurt Boston's draft position.  Jackson would be a solid deep rotation player on a winner, but a team rebuilding has no room for a guy like him.  Just silly talk.

Not silly talk,

#1 I admitted already I wasn't sure if the math works by no means is he worth going over the luxury tax.

#2 as with years past arguing on the forum. I HATE the idea of enduring multiple 20-win seasons to then one day hope to not suck..... I can't think of an example of the "puppy squad" method actually working and bringing a championship (Puppy Squad= team full of young players who don't win but you hope and pray they grow to be full grown pitbulls and bring a championship to the city)

#3 I still think jackson has gas left in the tank just as much as or moreso than pierce had we kept him, As stated earlier charlotte with a nucleus of him & Wallace was actually pretty decent squad. Add rondo & Green to the mix maybe a solid #7 seed type team. Just a thought Bottomline I hate the idea of sucking for the next 3 years. hate to be "debbie downer" but i'm not on sullinger watch or looking to olynyk/pressey as saviors. they're rookies (or young) and they're going to suck.  we need to have our eye on some vets.

[Moranis]

What would be the purpose in signing him.  To possibly win 1 more game and potentially hurt Boston's draft position.  Jackson would be a solid deep rotation player on a winner, but a team rebuilding has no room for a guy like him.  Just silly talk.

Not silly talk,

#1 I admitted already I wasn't sure if the math works by no means is he worth going over the luxury tax.

#2 as with years past arguing on the forum. I HATE the idea of enduring multiple 20-win seasons to then one day hope to not suck..... I can't think of an example of the "puppy squad" method actually working and bringing a championship (Puppy Squad= team full of young players who don't win but you hope and pray they grow to be full grown pitbulls and bring a championship to the city)

#3 I still think he has gas left in the tank, As stated earlier charlotte with a nucleus of him & Wallace was actually pretty decent squad. Add rondo & Green to the mix maybe a solid #7 seed type team. Just a thought Bottomline I hate the idea of sucking for the next 3 years. we need to have our eye on some vets.

Your premise that Jackson somehow will help a mediocre team be not mediocre is why the talk is silly.  Jackson was cut by the Spurs last year, that should tell you all you need to know about him as a useful player.  He isn't a leader or a great lockerroom guy either.  He could potentially add a win or two to a team, but that is all.  It is silly talk for Boston to add him for those reasons.

And people on this board need to come to terms very quickly with the fact that this years Boston Celtics' are not going to be very good without major roster changes. 

[Eric_Suede]

What would be the purpose in signing him.  To possibly win 1 more game and potentially hurt Boston's draft position.  Jackson would be a solid deep rotation player on a winner, but a team rebuilding has no room for a guy like him.  Just silly talk.

Not silly talk,

#1 I admitted already I wasn't sure if the math works by no means is he worth going over the luxury tax.

#2 as with years past arguing on the forum. I HATE the idea of enduring multiple 20-win seasons to then one day hope to not suck..... I can't think of an example of the "puppy squad" method actually working and bringing a championship (Puppy Squad= team full of young players who don't win but you hope and pray they grow to be full grown pitbulls and bring a championship to the city)

#3 I still think he has gas left in the tank, As stated earlier charlotte with a nucleus of him & Wallace was actually pretty decent squad. Add rondo & Green to the mix maybe a solid #7 seed type team. Just a thought Bottomline I hate the idea of sucking for the next 3 years. we need to have our eye on some vets.

Your premise that Jackson somehow will help a mediocre team be not mediocre is why the talk is silly.  Jackson was cut by the Spurs last year, that should tell you all you need to know about him as a useful player.  He isn't a leader or a great lockerroom guy either.  He could potentially add a win or two to a team, but that is all.  It is silly talk for Boston to add him for those reasons.

And people on this board need to come to terms very quickly with the fact that this years Boston Celtics' are not going to be very good without major roster changes.

And Gerald Wallace was pretty awful last year for the nets. But somehow now that he's in green folk are excited hoping to get the "old gerald" back. I can use that same logic & say "he sucked last year for brooklyn, that's all you need to know" Yes Jackson had issues with Staff on the spurs but it wasn't on the court. Meaning it's not like he sucks and doesn't have gas in the tank, it was an ego thing because he felt he was better than the young players the spurs had and felt he needed more pt. (a sentiment I don't necessarily disagree with)

 Jackson just happens to come to mind. I'm not suggesting he's the savior for the c's but I wish we'd have that mindset to want to bring in vets. Then, other free agents would be attracted to the idea of coming here. As opposed to the alternative of having a pupply 20-win squad. What vet wants to come endure that?

[fairweatherfan]

As opposed to the alternative of having a pupply 20-win squad. What vet wants to come endure that?

I think you just answered the question of why we don't want to sign Jackson.  Whatever our record winds up being, Jackson's not going to move it by more than a game or two.  Which means if we're going to suck without him, we're going to suck with him.  And if he's ticked off at not playing enough on a crappy team, he'll be an active detriment in the locker room and will hinder the growth of the team. 

Not nearly enough reward and too much risk.  Doesn't add up.

[D.o.s.]

As opposed to the alternative of having a pupply 20-win squad. What vet wants to come endure that?

I think you just answered the question of why we don't want to sign Jackson.  Whatever our record winds up being, Jackson's not going to move it by more than a game or two.  Which means if we're going to suck without him, we're going to suck with him.  And if he's ticked off at not playing enough on a crappy team, he'll be an active detriment in the locker room and will hinder the growth of the team. 

Not nearly enough reward and too much risk.  Doesn't add up.

Nicely said. The guy was mad because he was losing minutes to Kawahi Leonard... what's going to happen when our (much worse) young guys get the playing time instead?

Also, I doubt he'd want to play for us. Players like that want to be in the playoffs.