PDA

View Full Version : Who is better Jax2 or Quis ??



esabyrn333
11-21-2006, 12:45 PM
I personally don't like Jax, I think he makes bad decisions, shoots to often and lets people get into his head. I think Quis has something special, I was very impressed with his proformance agianst Miami last year. While everyone from Dallas looked scared and was playing to win and had the look of a champion. The Jax supports on this board blows me away.

Robobtowncolt
11-21-2006, 12:56 PM
Ack! Private poll!

Moses
11-21-2006, 12:57 PM
I have to go with Quis.

He's one of the few players on this team that can create his own shot. I also like Quis because he's less likely to cause trouble if his team is losing.

Isaac
11-21-2006, 01:00 PM
The Jax supports on this board blows me away.

It is so funny to me that someone would get that impression. I still think of Jack as one of the most hated Pacers.

I like both players a lot, and they bring different things to the table. I think Jack is an important piece to this team, but Marquis has shown me a lot, and I'm extremely glad we have him.

Anthem
11-21-2006, 01:14 PM
How are we defining "better?"

Better fit in the starting lineup? Better in a fight? A better shooter? A better scorer? A better passer?

This thread is going to be nasty.

Unclebuck
11-21-2006, 01:17 PM
I'm not sure how to answer this, but I'm not a huge fan of JT and Marquis in the backcourt. JT dominates the ball, and Marquis needs the ball, to be effective. If Marquis is going to stand at the 3 point line waiting for Jamaal to dribble for 15 seconds before passing it, Daniels won't be very effective.

Slick Pinkham
11-21-2006, 01:18 PM
Quis

turkey franks are a little better than chicken franks but neither one is particularly satisfying. Reggie was filet.

Pitons
11-21-2006, 01:20 PM
I think Quis is better than Jax, but Jax is better than Quis. I mean that one game Quis plays better, other - Jax. And I agree with Isaac. They are both important pieces.

It's too early to say who's better. So I didn't vote.

Anthem
11-21-2006, 01:26 PM
The Jax supports on this board blows me away.
Supporting Jack = Supporting the Pacers. :devil:

Quis
11-21-2006, 01:34 PM
You people need to stop over complicating things.

It's a simple question - which player is better overall.

And it's Quis quite easily. The only thing Jackson can do better is hit the three, but with Quis that's not even necessary.

AesopRockOn
11-21-2006, 01:41 PM
You people need to stop over complicating things.

It's a simple question - which player is better overall.

And it's Quis quite easily. The only thing Jackson can do better is hit the three, but with Quis that's not even necessary.

Don't hesitate to have a biased opinion; you really need to do more of it.

Pitons
11-21-2006, 01:44 PM
You people need to stop over complicating things.

It's a simple question - which player is better overall.

And it's Quis quite easily. The only thing Jackson can do better is hit the three, but with Quis that's not even necessary.

I don't think Quis was better, for example, in the last game, looking at the stats and +/-.

Jax was better of the bench, while Quis wasn't always better coming of the bench.

I don't say Quis won't be better in the future, but now it's hard to say.

Israfan
11-21-2006, 01:45 PM
You people need to stop over complicating things.

It's a simple question - which player is better overall.

And it's Quis quite easily. The only thing Jackson can do better is hit the three, but with Quis that's not even necessary.

HEHEHHEHEHEHHHE

Are you sane? :hmm:

Anthem
11-21-2006, 01:45 PM
And it's Quis quite easily. The only thing Jackson can do better is hit the three, but with Quis that's not even necessary.
I'm not even remotely against Quis... I'm glad we got him. But at the very least, Jack is a superior passer. You could also make the case that Jack is a better defender, but that's somewhat subjective because it depends on who they're guarding. And I certainly wish Jack had a higher bball IQ, but it can't be denied that he has the more well-rounded offensive game.

Look, we know you only post here because you love Marquis Daniels. We get it. But you should at least try to be your own person, instead of the one-trick pony you seem to be aiming for.

Quis
11-21-2006, 02:38 PM
I'm not even remotely against Quis... I'm glad we got him. But at the very least, Jack is a superior passer. You could also make the case that Jack is a better defender, but that's somewhat subjective because it depends on who they're guarding. And I certainly wish Jack had a higher bball IQ, but it can't be denied that he has the more well-rounded offensive game.

Look, we know you only post here because you love Marquis Daniels. We get it. But you should at least try to be your own person, instead of the one-trick pony you seem to be aiming for.

Jackson is a superior passer to Quis? :laugh:

Quis can play point guard effectively he's such a gifted passer. Let's see you try that with Jackson. :laugh:

During Quis' rookie season, while Nash was out a couple of games with the flu, Quis started at point guard and had games of 14/9/9 and 16/7/8. This coming from a 6'6" rookie. And once the Mavs started struggling, Quis was inserted back into the starting lineup at 2-guard, and through those 10 games, averaged 19.7, 6 rebounds, and 5 assists from the shooting guard position.

So to say Stephen Jackson is anywhere near the passer Quis is is flat out wrong.

Quis
11-21-2006, 02:47 PM
Don't hesitate to have a biased opinion; you really need to do more of it.

There's nothing biased about my opinion.

I like Quis more because he's the far better player. Period. Case closed.

JayRedd
11-21-2006, 02:48 PM
I don't like Jack's game much at all really...never have. But he is without question the better scorer. He's better in the post, better shooting the ball from three or anywhere else, and they are equal slashers without the ball. The only place Quis may have the edge is in breaking down a defender to penetrate off the perimeter, but even given that, I'd still say Jack is better at finishing his penetration than Marquis.

The only other superior thing Marquis gives you on offense is his positional versatility. But he's not a good point guard no matter what people might say--he's serviceable at best.

Pitons
11-21-2006, 02:49 PM
Jackson is a superior passer to Quis? :laugh:

Quis can play point guard effectively he's such a gifted passer. Let's see you try that with Jackson. :laugh:

During Quis' rookie season, while Nash was out a couple of games with the flu, Quis started at point guard and had games of 14/9/9 and 16/7/8. This coming from a 6'6" rookie. And once the Mavs started struggling, Quis was inserted back into the starting lineup at 2-guard, and through those 10 games, averaged 19.7, 6 rebounds, and 5 assists from the shooting guard position.

So to say Stephen Jackson is anywhere near the passer Quis is is flat out wrong.

And how many times Quis is better than Jax in your opinion?

1. 100 times
2. 1000 times
3.10000 times
4. More

So which answer is correct?

spazzxb
11-21-2006, 02:50 PM
Jackson is a superior passer to Quis? :laugh:

Quis can play point guard effectively he's such a gifted passer. Let's see you try that with Jackson. :laugh:

During Quis' rookie season, while Nash was out a couple of games with the flu, Quis started at point guard and had games of 14/9/9 and 16/7/8. This coming from a 6'6" rookie. And once the Mavs started struggling, Quis was inserted back into the starting lineup at 2-guard, and through those 10 games, averaged 19.7, 6 rebounds, and 5 assists from the shooting guard position.

So to say Stephen Jackson is anywhere near the passer Quis is is flat out wrong.

I just thought i would take this opportunity to label you a hater. Try talking about your favorie player without have to bash another. You have any idea what kinda stats we could find if we pck and choose between jacks es games. Oh and I forget who has a ring on this team.

D-BONE
11-21-2006, 02:59 PM
Based on what they have contributed this year to the Pacers, which is all I really care about and the only time they've played together in their careers, I'd probably say Jack by a tad, but really it's way too early to tell. I'd say they are approximately equivalent.

Why does it have to consistently be Quis vs Jack or Quis or Jack? What if Quis and Jack turns out to be better for team success?

Isaac
11-21-2006, 03:08 PM
UB and D-BONE both made good points here. I think of Quis as a point/off guard, while Jack is a 2/3 swingman. I want to see them both on the court together often.

Quis
11-21-2006, 03:10 PM
I'm all for givign Quis a go at point guard. But then we'd still be left with an 8th man-level starting shooting guard. :(

ajbry
11-21-2006, 04:20 PM
Ask anyone besides Pacers fans and this poll becomes a landslide in Jack's favor.

Also, stating in the initial post that you hate Jack and love Quis gives the poll a completely biased origin.

No offense, but most of these polls are garbage - let's face it - a lot of people here absolutely loathe Jack; and any alternative will automatically be "superior."

Trader Joe
11-21-2006, 04:31 PM
Jackson is a superior passer to Quis? :laugh:

Quis can play point guard effectively he's such a gifted passer. Let's see you try that with Jackson. :laugh:

During Quis' rookie season, while Nash was out a couple of games with the flu, Quis started at point guard and had games of 14/9/9 and 16/7/8. This coming from a 6'6" rookie. And once the Mavs started struggling, Quis was inserted back into the starting lineup at 2-guard, and through those 10 games, averaged 19.7, 6 rebounds, and 5 assists from the shooting guard position.

So to say Stephen Jackson is anywhere near the passer Quis is is flat out wrong.

:deadhorse:

Trader Joe
11-21-2006, 04:35 PM
There's nothing biased about my opinion.

I like Quis more because he's the far better player. Period. Case closed.

Oh that makes sense. No need for logic or facts to back up an argument. Opinion is definetely the best thing.:rolleyes:

Oh and as far as the poll goes I didn't vote because I think they are about equal both of them do certain things well and both have major deficiencies.

Trader Joe
11-21-2006, 04:37 PM
I'm all for givign Quis a go at point guard. But then we'd still be left with an 8th man-level starting shooting guard. :(

You don't even like Quis do you? You just hate Jack. We could have Ira Newble backing up Jack and you would be saying what a great player he is. I finally get it, thats your deal. You aren't a Quis fan, you're just a Jack hater.

Quis
11-21-2006, 04:38 PM
Ask anyone besides Pacers fans and this poll becomes a landslide in Jack's favor.

Also, stating in the initial post that you hate Jack and love Quis gives the poll a completely biased origin.

No offense, but most of these polls are garbage - let's face it - a lot of people here absolutely loathe Jack; and any alternative will automatically be "superior."

What seems to be going over your head is the reason people "loathe" Stephen Jackson.

It isn't anything personal. I don't care if he beats his girlfriend like a government mule. His personal life is his business as long as it doesnt affect his physical capabilities. The reason people loathe Stephen Jackson is - get ready for it - he's not a very good basketball player. He plays selfishly. He plays unintelligently (can't say dumb, it's against the rules lol). And even without those two things, he's still not a very skilled player. If he could play smart, he'd make a great 6th man. As it stands now, I'd rather he be the towel boy at the end of the bench then step on the court and hurt the Pacers like he has since he's arrived here.

Trader Joe
11-21-2006, 04:42 PM
What seems to be going over your head is the reason people "loathe" Stephen Jackson.

It isn't anything personal. I don't care if he beats his girlfriend like a government mule. His personal life is his business as long as it doesnt affect his physical capabilities. The reason people loathe Stephen Jackson is - get ready for it - he's not a very good basketball player. He plays selfishly. He plays unintelligently (can't say dumb, it's against the rules lol). And even without those two things, he's still not a very skilled player. If he could play smart, he'd make a great 6th man. As it stands now, I'd rather he be the towel boy at the end of the bench then step on the court and hurt the Pacers like he has since he's arrived here.

And it all shines through...I am so happy I figured you out. It makes it so much easier to dislike. You aren't a Quis fan, just a Jack hater like I said in the above post. Can't believe I didn't see it earlier.

ajbry
11-21-2006, 04:44 PM
What seems to be going over your head is the reason people "loathe" Stephen Jackson.

It isn't anything personal. I don't care if he beats his girlfriend like a government mule. His personal life is his business as long as it doesnt affect his physical capabilities. The reason people loathe Stephen Jackson is - get ready for it - he's not a very good basketball player. He plays selfishly. He plays unintelligently (can't say dumb, it's against the rules lol). And even without those two things, he's still not a very skilled player. If he could play smart, he'd make a great 6th man. As it stands now, I'd rather he be the towel boy at the end of the bench then step on the court and hurt the Pacers like he has since he's arrived here.

He's averaged 16+ PPG the last 3 seasons and when JO was hurt during the 04-05 season, he put up 22 PPG to keep this team afloat. If you legitimately feel Stephen Jackson is not a good basketball player, I simply do not wish to pursue any of your baiting further. Have a nice life.

Quis
11-21-2006, 04:49 PM
Oh that makes sense. No need for logic or facts to back up an argument. Opinion is definetely the best thing.:rolleyes:

Oh and as far as the poll goes I didn't vote because I think they are about equal both of them do certain things well and both have major deficiencies.

After watching the two players for over 3 years now, I can say without an ounce of doubt that Marquis Daniels is the superior player. Quis may not be the second coming of Dwyane Wade, but he's light years better than Stephen Jackson, and management knew that before they even traded for him. They knew since day 1 that Quis would eventually become the starter.

Quis
11-21-2006, 04:52 PM
He's averaged 16+ PPG the last 3 seasons and when JO was hurt during the 04-05 season, he put up 22 PPG to keep this team afloat. If you legitimately feel Stephen Jackson is not a good basketball player, I simply do not wish to pursue any of your baiting further. Have a nice life.

He shot a lot. You shoot a lot, and even if you do hit only 40% of your shots, you're bound to put up a nice average.

The Hustler
11-21-2006, 05:00 PM
I started of liking this thread thinking it was a good idea and had scope for being an interesting debate .... but i dont see the point in reading post which simply state flat often biased statements with seemingly no thought or result coming from them. i no im not a PD veteren but i liked this board because of intelegent well thought out sensible posts, not random drivel

Sorry about the rant.

As for Jax Vs Quis ... currently i think Jax is a better player. I think his all round game provides a lot more flexability and is better polished. However my major concerns with Jax are both his attitude and his court IQ. I think if he can learn his place and control his shot (in many ways like he did as a 6th man in SAS,) he can be a very effective and strong player. This said i still love Quis as an addition he has an interesting and effective set of skills that can contribute to a team successfully but i feel his game has holes in it, including shooting i think in the future Quis could become a very valuable player but i think Jax is closer to the complete product and therefor gets my Vote.

esabyrn333
11-21-2006, 10:02 PM
I like Quis's intangables over S-Jax. Jax takes to many forced shots. I think the team as a hole takes to many threes. I don't like the make up of the team I believe it is flawed. We have a group of guy's that play the same way. I think we need a pure shooter very badly. You have to have a guy to kick the ball out to that can hit a open jumper. But back to the Quis Vs. Jack debate. I think Jack likes to be the go to guy and he can do that with the second string guys. But what sways me most is simple. When Jack gets the ball I say OH No he is going to force something when Quis gets it I have hope.

Unclebuck
11-21-2006, 10:37 PM
Tonight Jax was better, but Marquis made a couple of key plays, helping out on Redd with about 35 seconds left, and a hard cut to the basket to bail Jamaal out

skyfire
11-21-2006, 10:45 PM
There is alot of animosity on this subject.

Quis is a distributor/scorer
Jax is a shooter/scorer

They are both above average defenders, with Quis being quicker and Jax being longer.

Both of them have consistency issues but also have the ability to be productive players on good teams.

I think Jax is more suited to being a primary option with the second unit, similar to Stackhouse in Dallas. But Quis and Tins as a starting backcourt is desperately short on perimeter shooting, so I dont see those two as a permanent fixture.

Fireball Kid
11-21-2006, 10:48 PM
I agree with what UB said earlier. Having a back court of Daniels and Tinsley is not a very good idea because Tinsley is a poor shooter. We could pair him with Saras but he is just a terrible defender and his shot isn't really automatic.

Having Daniels at PG isn't something you should look forward too sometimes because he will have problems against quick point guards. Plus, his decision making at times will make destroy your television set with a baseball bat. I believe he will get better as he matures but when he was playing for Dallas, he would just make the some of the most stupidest mistakes at the most critical situations.

As for who is the better player? Well I think its Marquis. I just don't think he'll fit well with Tinsley.

Naptown_Seth
11-21-2006, 10:59 PM
I'm really big on Daniels at this point and have been saying so quite a bit. However, other than Jack's 3pt shot I consider him one of the better players on the court for the Pacers.

I call it a dead heat between the two. I think the defense really goes up when they are both on the court together, just like we saw to end the MIL game tonight. Jack forced Redd to take possession out at the HC logo with outstanding defense, and then kept him from coming to the lane as Redd drove which ran him right into a smart Daniels who moved into position to take anything else away from him.

The thing is the two of them had a very similar defensive combo play in the last game vs MIL. They work well together.

Take away the 4 3pt misses tonight (and you can't overlook those, the dude is struggling badly and needs to find it in practice before he takes 4 during a game) and Jack's line is very all-around solid for the night. Much like Daniels he is doing just a little of everything.


I'm very pleased with the games they both bring...I just wish Jack could find his 3pt shot because I'd take 1-3 and 2-5 every other night from him (which would be in his normal PCT range).



The only place Quis may have the edge is in breaking down a defender to penetrate off the perimeter, but even given that, I'd still say Jack is better at finishing his penetration than Marquis.
Yeah. Here is what Jack does VERY well - he feeds JO (or other) from the wing, runs the Give and Go usually baseline and that's money I'd guess 80% of the time or more.

He also gets the ball out on the wing for clear outs, sometimes the 3pt corner too, and can go baseline or over top if the guy cheats baseline and that's money as well. In the @MIL game they ran this back to back to start the 2nd and he went right in for easy layups both times.

Finally he is a good SG post-up player. He's a little bigger and stronger than a lot of SGs and can work this for scores in the paint pretty well. One problem is that more than other spots he is TO prone here, but only on the double-down help defense.

His 3pt shot is bland normally, certainly below average for more shooting guards, but serviceable. This year it stinks beyond belief. Guys normally do not lose their shots this badly unless they are injured. Dude looks like Steve Sax out there suddenly. Can't figure that.

Otherwise driving the ball I give it to Daniels totally. He's not a "slasher", he doesn't go first step to the rim like Jack does. He's like Barry Sanders, he steps back and forth, lots of horizontal moves, and picks his way into the lane. He can do this AT WILL.

The issue with him had been finishing, though the other night he was much stronger with it. Normally Jack is a better finisher than Daniels, but MD is very good about making something happen off the penetration, usually a pass instead.

He rarely wastes his penetration with a kickout - something only a casual fan could love because it generally means you just wasted all the mismatches you got on the drive. You don't need drives to get open 3pt looks which is why kickouts are terribly overrated.

MD will dump to a big or someone coming to the rim instead which means a nice high % shot and maybe the foul too, plus you then have offensive board action.

MD has no 3pt shot and previously he knew this. His attempts jumped 2-3 times when he got to Indy. Hopefully that will go away when they get the offensive system settled.


MD is a little more instinctive as a help defender. Jack is more physical. Jack is a master of the from-behind blocks and tap away's (something Reggie was great at too) and he often baits players into putting up shots they think they are clear on and then swipes it when they get it over their head. He gets these nearly every game for a TO.

Jack muscles guys better and while MD is more OG due to the ball handling, Jack fares better vs SGs because he uses his size more. MD uses speed and smarts which IMO has given him more success on SFs on either end. Yes he can be posted, and if they try that I'd like to see Jack switch with him, but otherwise Jack is better vs Wade and Redd than bigger guys like Pierce (who shoot over him with ease).

MD hurts a guy like PP more because his defense is about denial and speed rather than size.


At least this is how I've read both their games. Obviously I've watched Jack play a lot more.

Naptown_Seth
11-21-2006, 11:17 PM
my major concerns with Jax are both his attitude and his court IQ
This has been his biggest flaw since day 1. The main reason I'm so happy with his game right now despite the 3pt shooting (which is awful even for him) is that his attitude is 100% better (smiles, claps, discusses with refs rather than throwing fits, calms OTHER players down, etc) and his game looks A LOT smarter overall that last year.

The "aww Jack come on" plays are way down this year. They needed to be, and even more so considering his outside shot is gone. I'd estimate he used to be about 35-40% plays where you were frustrated with him, and now it's down to maybe 10% or less.

When I say "you" I mean fans like me who don't carry a huge grudge against him for being alive.

Jack is getting older and where I think he differs from Artest is that each time he goes through some crap he does seem to improve it a little. His arguing actually dropped way off last year after the first two months, which were a disaster. He had a tech in the @LA game (JAN or early FEB) and then went about a month before getting a tech for catching the ball on his own made shot (delay of game tech, total BS IMO).

I've posted photos before of him actually calming down AJ as he lost it on a ref toward the end of the season last year (I think the PORT game), he listened to AJ rather than just pulling him away, listened to the ref, let them air some of the stuff out and then politely started pulling AJ away. It was a very mature moment for a guy who just a few months before was the one that always had to be calmed down.

That's what I mean about learning. He stunk at dealing with those issues, especially the refs. But he's gotten better. That suggests a guy that listens and learns. Sure a fan would rather he didn't learn on the job with the Pacers, but it's better than never getting it at least.

I think Jack is trying to not make the same mistakes and does regret a lot of his actions. He's just not been emotionally smart and apparently has only begun to learn how to be in the last 2 years. To me it suggests that this could be a guy that as an elder player he'll be a leader type where fans look back and say "THAT guy became THIS guy?"

A little like you've seen with Barkley for example, or better yet Jim Brown who was far from the stand-up leader type he is now. Contrast that with Ron who actually seems to be more good natured instinctively yet also maybe a little crazy in the literal sense. For him I don't think it's control problems but just that he sees the world in an unusual way all the time.

Naptown_Seth
11-21-2006, 11:31 PM
There's nothing biased about my opinion.

Jackson is a superior passer to Quis? :laugh:
Not counting tonight's game...
Assists
Jack 3.8
MD 1.8

Assists per 48
Jack 5.9
MD 3.8

Assist to TO
Jack 2.00
MD 1.13

In tonight's game MD had 4 assists to 2 for Jack, played less than Jack so his per 48 is even better, each had 2.00 A/TO on the night. So tonight MD was better. Not enough to overturn those numbers of course.

That's just full disclosure on my part anyway. You made your posts BEFORE tonights game. So in fact there is something EXTREMELY biased about your opinion, as in the FACTS clearly contradicted it.

PacerFan31
11-21-2006, 11:37 PM
Jack is my 3rd favorite Pacer behind JO and Al, that being said, I'm going to keep this simple.

We're 2-0 with Quis starting, so let's ride it while we can.

Quis
11-21-2006, 11:48 PM
Not counting tonight's game...
Assists
Jack 3.8
MD 1.8

Assists per 48
Jack 5.9
MD 3.8

Assist to TO
Jack 2.00
MD 1.13

In tonight's game MD had 4 assists to 2 for Jack, played less than Jack so his per 48 is even better, each had 2.00 A/TO on the night. So tonight MD was better. Not enough to overturn those numbers of course.

That's just full disclosure on my part anyway. You made your posts BEFORE tonights game. So in fact there is something EXTREMELY biased about your opinion, as in the FACTS clearly contradicted it.


Career Minutes Per Game
Quis: 23.6
Jack: 30.1

Career Assists Per Game
Quis: 2.3
Jack: 2.4

Career Assists Per-48 Minutes.
Quis: 4.7
Jack: 3.8

You stand corrected.

But hey, why bother with over 3 years worth of data when you can just use 11 games? :laugh:

larry
11-21-2006, 11:52 PM
It doesn't matter who would win if they were playing 1 on 1.
I like Jack coming off of the bench. It lightens his burden & gives us a bit more of an offensive punch with the subs.
It also gives us better defense w/ our starters imo.
We have enough scoring w/ J.O., Al, & Danny in the starting string.
There are several reasons to keep this current lineup in operation.
If they did play 1 on 1... I would probably take Jack in 6, hahaha.