« previous next »
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Stephen Jackson  (Read 2684 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Stephen Jackson
« on: February 07, 2012, 01:36:47 PM »

Offline Greenbean

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3739
  • Tommy Points: 418
What would you give up to get him?

He is clearly dissatisfied in Millwauke and he is not playing right now.

He is on the books for 10 mil next year. Is that enough to scare us away?

In my opinion, adding SJax makes us a better matchup for Miami.

That being said, we would have to give up JO...

Thoughts? Dont kill me on this one...I'm a big SJax fan.
Logged
Re: Stephen Jackson
« Reply #1 on: February 07, 2012, 01:37:41 PM »

Offline wdleehi

  • In The Rafters
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 34114
  • Tommy Points: 1612
  • Basketball is Newtonian Physics
No.



Can't give up a big man to upgrade Daniels (4th swing man)
Logged
Re: Stephen Jackson
« Reply #2 on: February 07, 2012, 01:42:01 PM »

Offline Greenbean

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3739
  • Tommy Points: 418
Quote from: wdleehi on February 07, 2012, 01:37:41 PM
No.



Can't give up a big man to upgrade Daniels (4th swing man)

I just have no faith that JO will be around in the plyoffs...that  balky knee of his and all.

But I get your point...
Logged
Re: Stephen Jackson
« Reply #3 on: February 07, 2012, 01:43:09 PM »

Offline Who

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 52998
  • Tommy Points: 2571
Not sure Jacks adds much to the C's. I wouldn't pursue it.
Logged
Re: Stephen Jackson
« Reply #4 on: February 07, 2012, 01:43:28 PM »

Offline wdleehi

  • In The Rafters
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 34114
  • Tommy Points: 1612
  • Basketball is Newtonian Physics
Quote from: Greenbean on February 07, 2012, 01:42:01 PM
Quote from: wdleehi on February 07, 2012, 01:37:41 PM
No.



Can't give up a big man to upgrade Daniels (4th swing man)

I just have no faith that JO will be around in the plyoffs...that  balky knee of his and all.

But I get your point...


That's why they need to look to add another big man.
Logged
Re: Stephen Jackson
« Reply #5 on: February 07, 2012, 01:50:06 PM »

Offline action781

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5227
  • Tommy Points: 611
I'm a SJax fan as well and would like to add him if possible, but we just have too much depth at the wing and not enough at the C to make that deal.
Logged
2020 CelticsStrong All-2000s Draft -- Utah Jazz
 
Finals Starters:  Jason Kidd - Reggie Miller - PJ Tucker - Al Horford - Shaq
Bench:  Rajon Rondo - Trae Young - Marcus Smart - Jaylen Brown -  Peja Stojakovic - Jamal Mashburn - Carlos Boozer - Tristan Thompson - Mehmet Okur
Re: Stephen Jackson
« Reply #6 on: February 07, 2012, 01:53:21 PM »

Offline greenpride32

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1310
  • Tommy Points: 83
Quote from: Greenbean on February 07, 2012, 01:36:47 PM

That being said, we would have to give up JO...


Why does everyone here seem to think JO is a highly tradable asset?  Why don't we trade JO for X or for Y or for Z?  Despite the fact he is an expiring contract I don't see many teams wanting to take him on; especially for an asset that has value (or what we'd be looking for).
Logged
Re: Stephen Jackson
« Reply #7 on: February 07, 2012, 02:00:49 PM »

Offline Greenbean

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3739
  • Tommy Points: 418
Quote from: greenpride32 on February 07, 2012, 01:53:21 PM
Quote from: Greenbean on February 07, 2012, 01:36:47 PM

That being said, we would have to give up JO...


Why does everyone here seem to think JO is a highly tradable asset?  Why don't we trade JO for X or for Y or for Z?  Despite the fact he is an expiring contract I don't see many teams wanting to take him on; especially for an asset that has value (or what we'd be looking for).

Um...we'd be trading him for a guy who hasnt left the bench the last 5 games for his team.

Right now, SJax has even less value to his team than JO does to the C's. Also, JO would give the Bucks some much needed depth at C.

Of course, we would be giving up depth at C as well but what I have seen from KG at the Center position has surprised me quite a bit. I think we match up with Miami and Chi with more wing depth as opposed to more C depth.

Plus I dont think JO is going to last much longer. Let's get somehting for him before he is just an expiring.
Logged
Re: Stephen Jackson
« Reply #8 on: February 07, 2012, 02:03:00 PM »

Offline Who

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 52998
  • Tommy Points: 2571
I'd like to see Orlando or Dallas make a run at S-Jax.
Logged
Re: Stephen Jackson
« Reply #9 on: February 07, 2012, 02:03:51 PM »

Offline Marcus13

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2578
  • Tommy Points: 119
Just not a fan.  Not the right attitude, not the right decision-making.  That just isn't how we want to start off the new era of Celtics Basketball.  Celtic Pride!
Logged
Re: Stephen Jackson
« Reply #10 on: February 07, 2012, 02:12:52 PM »

Offline Inside-Out

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 521
  • Tommy Points: 32
Quote from: greenpride32 on February 07, 2012, 01:53:21 PM
Quote from: Greenbean on February 07, 2012, 01:36:47 PM

That being said, we would have to give up JO...


Why does everyone here seem to think JO is a highly tradable asset?  Why don't we trade JO for X or for Y or for Z?  Despite the fact he is an expiring contract I don't see many teams wanting to take him on; especially for an asset that has value (or what we'd be looking for).

JO is pretty much fodder to match salaries, but could be a servicable backup somewhere.  We imagine his value to other teams, but really, his highest value is to a team like us, but as a backup, not a starter.

So it's a catch-22:  need to trade him to upgrade, but need to keep him, too.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »