PDA

View Full Version : NY Times- Harrington to Cleveland rumor.



Will Galen
06-22-2004, 07:32 AM
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/22/sports/basketball/22nba.html

McGrady Likely to Team With Yao in Houston
By CHRIS BROUSSARD
Published: June 22, 2004

The Houston Rockets and the Orlando Magic engaged in talks that would send the Magic's superstar, Tracy McGrady, and three other players to Houston for Steve Francis, Cuttino Mobley and Kelvin Cato. The deal would team McGrady, the league's scoring leader the past two years, with Yao Ming, the Rockets' 7-foot-5 All-Star center.

Officials from two separate teams, one from each conference, said yesterday afternoon that the deal, which would also send Tyronn Lue, Andrew DeClerq and Juwan Howard to Houston, had been agreed upon. But later, several other officials, including one from one of the participating clubs, said that that nothing had been completed.

The proposed trade could not be made official until July 15 because of a stipulation in Francis's contract that makes him a base-year compensation player.

The talk of the 25-year-old McGrady going to Houston dominated a day in which two of the league's top players, the other being O'Neal, were discussed in several trade possibilities.

On the coaching front, it appeared likely that Rudy Tomjanovich would replace Phil Jackson as coach of the Los Angeles Lakers. Tomjanovich, who won two N.B.A. titles as the coach of the Rockets in the 90's, flew to Los Angeles yesterday and will meet with Jerry Buss, the Lakers' owner, and General Manager Mitch Kupchak today. On a list that includes the Jackson assistants Jim Cleamons and Kurt Rambis, and possibly George Karl, Tomjanovich is reportedly the front-runner.

The expansion Charlotte Bobcats and the Clippers completed a minor trade yesterday, swapping their first-round picks in Thursday's draft. The Clippers gave their No. 2 pick to Charlotte for its No. 4 selection. Charlotte also sent its second-round pick, the 33rd selection over all, to Los Angeles and agreed to draft the Clippers' Predrag Drobnjak in today's expansion draft.

Charlotte will select either Emeka Okafor or Dwight Howard, the 6-10 high school phenom, with its first-round pick, giving it what it hopes will be a centerpiece for the future. The latest indications are that the Bobcats will end up with Okafor, since Orlando is believed to be leaning toward Howard now that McGrady has demanded a trade.

Several clubs have been trying to trade with the Bobcats through the expansion draft. The Knicks, who have much interest but little hope of landing any of the top three available superstars (O'Neal, McGrady and Bryant), tried to swing a deal with Charlotte that would have sent Dallas's Antoine Walker to New York. Charlotte was going to take Walker in the expansion draft and then trade him to the Knicks for several role players with favorable contracts. But the Knicks did not have enough players in the final year of their contracts to make the Bobcats bite.

Thursday's draft could be the occasion for several trades, with many teams looking to trade lottery picks in a year where the draft is regarded as underwhelming. Chicago, with a roster full of young hopefuls, would prefer not to add another project, and it is willing to trade its No. 3 pick. Washington, with the fifth pick, has also been active in discussions.

Indiana was as talkative as any club yesterday, and among its discussions was a deal to send Al Harrington to Cleveland for the Cavaliers' first-round pick, the 10th over all. The Pacers would use the pick to take the Oregon swingman Luke Jackson, who is believed to be a favorite of Larry Bird, the team's president of basketball operations. Several general managers said Indiana was also looking to trade Ron Artest, its All-Star small forward, but Donnie Walsh, the Pacers' president, denied that.

"We've got a lot of offers for different people," Walsh said. "People are calling us about Ron, but we're not shopping him."

Most of the talk revolved around McGrady, O'Neal and Bryant. With Jackson out as the Lakers' coach and O'Neal asking for a trade, most league officials assume that Bryant, who will be a free agent on July 1, will return to the Lakers.

Dallas was attempting to unite O'Neal and McGrady, who are good friends and often talk about playing together. Dallas could still land O'Neal, as the Mavericks are one of the few teams that has the assets, both in talent and finances, to get the game's most dominant player. With several talented, well-paid players in Dirk Nowitzki, Michael Finley, Antawn Jamison and Steve Nash, the Mavericks could make the Lakers an enticing offer.

Although O'Neal wants out of the Lakers' organization and every team in the league would love to have him, O'Neal's salary of $27.7 million next season makes it difficult to trade him. Second, if O'Neal did not like the team he was traded to, he could opt out of his contract next season, so a team might ruin its future for one season with O'Neal. As a result, most officials believe he will probably remain with Bryant in Los Angeles for at least another year.

With Yao and McGrady perhaps on the horizon, that sounds like a good idea for the Lakers.

TheSauceMaster
06-22-2004, 07:34 AM
Not shoppin Ron , hmmm Intresting ;)

SpADeD
06-22-2004, 07:35 AM
Why would we trade Al for an unproven kid? :confused:

We don't need another project.

Will Galen
06-22-2004, 07:41 AM
Why would Cleveland want Harrington when they have Boozer? Of course Al can play both forward positions.

http://www.draftcity.com/lukejackson.htm
Luke Jackson profile from Draftcity.

Name: Luke Jackson DOB: 11/6/81
Height: 6'7" Weight: 215 pounds
College: Oregon Year: Senior
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
High School: Creswell HS
Hometown: Crewell Oregon
Current Position: PG/SG/SF/PF
Expected Position: SF
Possible Positions: SG/SF

STRENGTHS
A very skilled and versatile player, Jackson is one of the better overall offensive talents in the country. Possessing a deadeye shot (which has improved greatly since he first entered college) from mid-range and three-point territory (shooting 51% from the field and 47% from beyond the arc so for the season), his jumper is difficult to defend when combining both his height and quick release. When he spots an opening in the defense Luke is not at all hesitant to take the ball to the basket and usually finishes when he does so or ends up at the line where he rarely misfires (or both). He has a quick first step to go along with an ability to hit tough shots in the lane, where he is not intimidated by bigger opponents. What sets Jackson apart from many scorers of his size are his guard-like ballhandling and passing skills. He sees the court exceptionally well and can almost always find open teammates any where on the court. He can crash the boards fairly well and does a good job following his own shots inside. Although his athleticism is not widely considered a strongpoint of his, he can get up significantly and at times surprisingly well and goes hard to the rim when he has the open path.

WEEKNESSES
Skill-wise, there is not very much that Jackson lacks on the offensive end. The nature of his game is very unselfish, sometimes to his own detriment, and he has frequently been knocked for not being assertive enough. He will have to adjust to not being able to use his height as much to his advantage in the Pros, when he can seemingly see the entire court or shoot over many opponents with relative ease at the college level. His on the ball defense will have to improve as well if he expects to defend quicker guards and forwards while he does not possess great lateral quickness either.

Aw Heck
06-22-2004, 07:45 AM
Why would we trade Al for an unproven kid? :confused:

We don't need another project.

My thoughts exactly. Doing this trade would be a major step backward. As would a Bonzi-Ron trade.

TheSauceMaster
06-22-2004, 07:46 AM
The NY papers seem to be busy with Artest Trade Rumors , Funny I see Donnie saying were not shopping artest , then I find another article who says were desperately trying to deal Artest.

The Pacers are trying desperately to trade Artest, a St. John's product from Queensbridge, who suffered several meltdowns in the playoffs. According to a league source, the Pacers spent an hour trying to convince Artest to get on the team plane after their Game 4 loss at Miami in the second round. Artest wanted to remain in Miami with his wife before finally boarding the plane.

So is donnie sending out some more smoke screens :confused:

Doug in CO
06-22-2004, 08:20 AM
Luke Jackson is white - correct?

Do I need to say anything else? Maybe all us ig-ner-ent white folk will buy more tickets.


As far as Ron - I think it would be a terrible mistake to trade him. There is no way we get equal value for him. I do not consider Bonzi Wells value.

Unclebuck
06-22-2004, 08:58 AM
The NY papers seem to be busy with Artest Trade Rumors , Funny I see Donnie saying were not shopping artest , then I find another article who says were desperately trying to deal Artest.

The Pacers are trying desperately to trade Artest, a St. John's product from Queensbridge, who suffered several meltdowns in the playoffs. According to a league source, the Pacers spent an hour trying to convince Artest to get on the team plane after their Game 4 loss at Miami in the second round. Artest wanted to remain in Miami with his wife before finally boarding the plane.

So is donnie sending out some more smoke screens :confused:


Where did this come from

Suaveness
06-22-2004, 09:15 AM
I would love to get him. It is worth it. Definitely. A shooter.

"We've got a lot of offers for different people," Walsh said. "People are calling us about Ron, but we're not shopping him."

MAN i love hearing that.

Slick Pinkham
06-22-2004, 09:18 AM
I like Luke.

I'd also like to get Wagner from them. His last season was ruined by knee injury, but if recovered he can an explosive bench scorer at backup 1/tiny2.

Suaveness
06-22-2004, 09:25 AM
I would love to get him. It is worth it. Definitely. A shooter.

"We've got a lot of offers for different people," Walsh said. "People are calling us about Ron, but we're not shopping him."

MAN i love hearing that.

They weren't "shopping" Jalen Rose either. I wouldn't consider that statement to exactly be glowing support.

Just GO and puncture a hole in my balloon, will you :mad:

:P

Still makes me happy.

And I really like Luke.

wintermute
06-22-2004, 09:33 AM
i like luke jackson, and he is about as ready as any rookie in the draft. that said, he will still take some time to learn the ropes and is nowhere near as seasoned as al. it's definitely a step back, and i don't think luke has a lot of star potential to make up for it.

as to doug in ct's statement, that is exactly one big reason why larry bird shouldn't have shot his mouth off about race. every trade indiana now makes will face speculation that it's racially motivated :shakehead:

Unclebuck
06-22-2004, 09:37 AM
Did he play with Fred Jones

Someone who has seen the kid play who does he remind you of

Suaveness
06-22-2004, 09:48 AM
Did he play with Fred Jones

Someone who has seen the kid play who does he remind you of

I would assume so if he is a senior. So probably for 2 years.

MSA2CF
06-22-2004, 09:59 AM
If Al wants to leave, I guess I'm fine with it.

Unclebuck
06-22-2004, 10:05 AM
he sounds good, why will he slip to number 10.

Suaveness
06-22-2004, 10:06 AM
he sounds good, why will he slip to number 10.

Seems as though the teams before 10 or so would rather have HS or international projects.

Cactus Jax
06-22-2004, 10:07 AM
The only problem with this is I don't think Jackson will be avialable at the 10 spot.

Aw Heck
06-22-2004, 10:07 AM
From CBS Sportsline:

Luke Jackson profile (http://www.sportsline.com/nba/players/draft/495893)

SportsLine's Analysis

NBA comparison: Wally Szczerbiak. Jackson has had some fabulous workouts, displaying the scoring prowess that made his one of the Pac-10's biggest stars over the past four years. There's now talk that he'll end up a lottery team, giving whoever selects him some punch from the wing.

Scouting Report

DOB: Nov. 6, 1981. Improved draft prospects with outstanding senior season, averaging 21.2 points - second in Pac-10 - and 7.2 rebounds per game. Finished as second-leading scorer in Oregon history with 1,970 points, and was finalist for Naismith and Wooden Awards. Scored 29 consecutive points in second half and overtime of a 77-72 victory over Colorado in first round of NIT, and had a career-high 42 points in 100-87 win over Arizona on Feb. 19. Excellent shooter whose size and quickness could create matchup problems in the pros. Played small forward in college, but may be better suited to playing shooting guard in the NBA. Unselfish player with solid all-around game. Quickness doesn't extend to his lateral movement, making him an average defender. Not an outstanding athlete, but has good leaping ability. Likely to be a late first-round to early second-round pick. - AP

Suaveness
06-22-2004, 10:09 AM
From CBS Sportsline:

Luke Jackson profile (http://www.sportsline.com/nba/players/draft/495893)

SportsLine's Analysis

NBA comparison: Wally Szczerbiak. Jackson has had some fabulous workouts, displaying the scoring prowess that made his one of the Pac-10's biggest stars over the past four years. There's now talk that he'll end up a lottery team, giving whoever selects him some punch from the wing.

Scouting Report

DOB: Nov. 6, 1981. Improved draft prospects with outstanding senior season, averaging 21.2 points - second in Pac-10 - and 7.2 rebounds per game. Finished as second-leading scorer in Oregon history with 1,970 points, and was finalist for Naismith and Wooden Awards. Scored 29 consecutive points in second half and overtime of a 77-72 victory over Colorado in first round of NIT, and had a career-high 42 points in 100-87 win over Arizona on Feb. 19. Excellent shooter whose size and quickness could create matchup problems in the pros. Played small forward in college, but may be better suited to playing shooting guard in the NBA. Unselfish player with solid all-around game. Quickness doesn't extend to his lateral movement, making him an average defender. Not an outstanding athlete, but has good leaping ability. Likely to be a late first-round to early second-round pick. - AP


WRONG.

I say he goes anywhere from 8-13.

Pacer4fun
06-22-2004, 10:19 AM
Wagner, at 6-3 has terrific potential but seems to have his problems playing for the coach. I would think they would let him go.

"The Akron Beacon Journal reports that Dajuan Wagner has not been playing well while replacing Jeff McInnis (shoulder) in the lineup. He is 2 of 19 from the field with seven assists in two games. "He's a basketball player, he has to handle it," said head coach Paul Silas of Wagner. "If you want to play, you have to do it. If not, you can come sit by me."
(Updated 03/23/2004)."

-- I hope Cleveland continues to give Wagner a chance to gain a permanent spot in the rotation, rather than dangle him as trade bait. Hes another kid who has the potential to put up a lot of points in a matter of minutes.

More likely it might be for the big Z, as I am not sure what either player's salary is.

So who else would you want because I would want more than the 10th pick for Al, especially when we were close to getting the 3rd.

diego
06-22-2004, 10:20 AM
Well lets take a look at the draft order and look at team needs.

5. Washington - Stackhouse and Arenas are their guards so they have no need for jackson, plus 5 is to high for them

6. Atlanta - who knows with them but i still dont see Jackson as a top 6 pick here

7. Phoenix - seem very happy with Joe Johnson at SG and have Marion at SF, they really have no need for Luke

8. Toronto - With carter and Peterson, again no need for Jackson...they need a PG or PF

9. Philly - They need an upgrade at PG and PF...plus they have Kyle Korver who is last years Luke Jackson, so i dont see them as interested

10. cleveland

11. Golden State -- here is where i think we could make a move...GS doesnt need this pick and would like Harrington....IMO here is a spot where we could put a package together for possibly Dampier and their pick for Al, Pollard, etc... Cleveland wont be selecting Luke as they have LBJ, i guess they could, but its not really a need for them

If i could get that package from GS, i would be very interested as you only move down one spot in draft and pick up another big man as well. Probably still able to get Jackson if thats who they want and fill 2 needs with one trade.

I know many here dont liek Damp, but if we could get at reasonable price and pick up draft pick, while cleaning out the glut at PF, i like it.

Suaveness
06-22-2004, 10:21 AM
So who else would you want because I would want more than the 10th pick for Al, especially when we were close to getting the 3rd.

We are? Link please

Pacer4fun
06-22-2004, 10:34 AM
So who else would you want because I would want more than the 10th pick for Al, especially when we were close to getting the 3rd.

We are? Link please

See any of the previous 100 threads on it. Thanks.

Suaveness
06-22-2004, 10:39 AM
So who else would you want because I would want more than the 10th pick for Al, especially when we were close to getting the 3rd.

We are? Link please

See any of the previous 100 threads on it. Thanks.


Last time I checked, chicago wasn't going to give Al for a number 3....

MSA2CF
06-22-2004, 10:40 AM
Last time I checked, chicago wasn't going to give Al for a number 3....

I think it was Al for Pip + #3?

Suaveness
06-22-2004, 10:42 AM
Last time I checked, chicago wasn't going to give Al for a number 3....

I think it was Al for Pip + #3?


Why would they give up Pip and the 3??? Cap?

ChicagoJ
06-22-2004, 10:42 AM
It was back in the Trib today... I read two articles about Al for the #3 on the train... The jist of it (according to Randy the helpful pineapple or Sam Smith, neither is very credible, IMO) is that we are really high on Luke Jackson and we want to move up to the late lottery to get him. If we get the #3, look for another move to fall back to #10 or so and pick up another player.

Suaveness
06-22-2004, 10:46 AM
It was back in the Trib today... I read two articles about Al for the #3 on the train... The jist of it (according to Randy the helpful pineapple or Sam Smith, neither is very credible, IMO) is that we are really high on Luke Jackson and we want to move up to the late lottery to get him. If we get the #3, look for another move to fall back to #10 or so and pick up another player.

Pippin makes 5.4 mil this year. i think we could take that. Then trade back a few slots and get a Center from that team, then draft Jackson...sounds like a plan to me.We can give them pippen too.

Pacer4fun
06-22-2004, 10:51 AM
So who else would you want because I would want more than the 10th pick for Al, especially when we were close to getting the 3rd.

We are? Link please

See any of the previous 100 threads on it. Thanks.


Last time I checked, chicago wasn't going to give Al for a number 3....

I don't know if you are being serious or not, but you are correct, right now the deal isn't going anyway because the Pacer's wanted Pippen, Chicago wanted us to take a different player off their hands. But in the world of predraft rumors and confirmed by Chicago's Paxon this can be called "close."

It may be that the Pacers want that extra money (instead of taking on another Chicago contract) to fill more needs. I'm not sure how Luke really helps us, does he remind anyone of a Dunleavy?

Slick Pinkham
06-22-2004, 10:52 AM
One possible motivation for Chicago is to enter the Shaq sweepstakes. Al, Curry or Chandler, Antonio, another guy, and they could have caproom so that LA doesn't have to take back full salary on Shaq.

Suaveness
06-22-2004, 10:54 AM
So who else would you want because I would want more than the 10th pick for Al, especially when we were close to getting the 3rd.

We are? Link please

See any of the previous 100 threads on it. Thanks.


Last time I checked, chicago wasn't going to give Al for a number 3....

I don't know if you are being serious or not, but you are correct, right now the deal isn't going anyway because the Pacer's wanted Pippen, Chicago wanted us to take a different player off their hands. But in the world of predraft rumors and confirmed by Chicago's Paxon this can be called "close."

It may be that the Pacers want that extra money (instead of taking on another Chicago contract) to fill more needs. I'm not sure how Luke really helps us, does he remind anyone of a Dunleavy?


Luke gives us a shooter. A very very good shooter. And that is what we are lacking.

Slick Pinkham
06-22-2004, 10:57 AM
I'm not sure how Luke really helps us, does he remind anyone of a Dunleavy?

Glen Rice

SkipperZ
06-22-2004, 10:57 AM
So who else would you want because I would want more than the 10th pick for Al, especially when we were close to getting the 3rd.

We are? Link please

See any of the previous 100 threads on it. Thanks.


Last time I checked, chicago wasn't going to give Al for a number 3....

they were if we took on eddie robinson or jyd with that number 3...

i agree... pick 10? thats a terrible trade. we got a pick 5 for antonio, and al is a younger better player than antonio was at the time.

jesus this kid is a sf... we dont need another one. and even if we DID try to play him at the 2, I'd MUCH Rather have freddie there, as at least freddie can play some defense. Cmon we can sign a jon barry for outside shooting, and at least jon barry is actually a shooting guard. luke can play shooting guard but only on one end of the court.

terrible trade, this guy will never amount to an al harrington in the league. mike miller most likely...

like ive said before IF we trade up to the lottery, we BETTER be getting dwight howard, okafor, livingston or childress or else theres NO point.

is cleveland over the cap? if so tthey would have to send us someone too. i assume they are since they have the 14 million dollar man ilgauskas on their roster. my thoughts on this deal would change dramatically if we could get a dajuan wagner out of this. or if cleveland is under the cap and just absorb al's contract, and we put the extra money to good use.

Pacer4fun
06-22-2004, 11:00 AM
I've heard Luke has really played well at the workouts, which is why he has moved up in the draft. I would still like to get another player out of this for Al. Any other thoughts about who Cleveland would HAVE to include to match money?

Pacer4fun
06-22-2004, 11:08 AM
Last time I checked, chicago wasn't going to give Al for a number 3....

I think it was Al for Pip + #3?

For what it is worth....this from the indystar
The Trib claims the Bobcats-Clips swap killed their hope of getting Okafor or Howard and now they may come crawling back to the Pacers to try to get Al, so our leverage may have improved if we want to go down that road... (posted 6-21-04 at 11:55 pm.)

Anyone with access to the trib that can confirm?

diego
06-22-2004, 11:09 AM
So who else would you want because I would want more than the 10th pick for Al, especially when we were close to getting the 3rd.

We are? Link please

See any of the previous 100 threads on it. Thanks.


Last time I checked, chicago wasn't going to give Al for a number 3....

they were if we took on eddie robinson or jyd with that number 3...

i agree... pick 10? thats a terrible trade. we got a pick 5 for antonio, and al is a younger better player than antonio was at the time.

jesus this kid is a sf... we dont need another one. and even if we DID try to play him at the 2, I'd MUCH Rather have freddie there, as at least freddie can play some defense. Cmon we can sign a jon barry for outside shooting, and at least jon barry is actually a shooting guard. luke can play shooting guard but only on one end of the court.

terrible trade, this guy will never amount to an al harrington in the league. mike miller most likely...

like ive said before IF we trade up to the lottery, we BETTER be getting dwight howard, okafor, livingston or childress or else theres NO point.

is cleveland over the cap? if so tthey would have to send us someone too. i assume they are since they have the 14 million dollar man ilgauskas on their roster. my thoughts on this deal would change dramatically if we could get a dajuan wagner out of this. or if cleveland is under the cap and just absorb al's contract, and we put the extra money to good use.



Dont get me wrong Skipper, but what exactly has Al proved thus far in the league. I am not sying he doesnt have potential, hell he is my favorite player on the roster, but in reality he hasnt proved anything yet except that he disappears in playoffs and whines about starting even though he is playing 3rd most minutes on team.

bulletproof
06-22-2004, 11:15 AM
I've heard Luke has really played well at the workouts, which is why he has moved up in the draft. I would still like to get another player out of this for Al. Any other thoughts about who Cleveland would HAVE to include to match money?

All this talk of trading Al to move up in the draft has me wondering if the Pacers are looking to dump salary because they were looking to dump salary early in the season, but didn't.

Will Galen
06-22-2004, 11:20 AM
So who else would you want because I would want more than the 10th pick for Al, especially when we were close to getting the 3rd.

We are? Link please

See any of the previous 100 threads on it. Thanks.


Last time I checked, chicago wasn't going to give Al for a number 3....

I don't know if you are being serious or not, but you are correct, right now the deal isn't going anyway because the Pacer's wanted Pippen, Chicago wanted us to take a different player off their hands. But in the world of predraft rumors and confirmed by Chicago's Paxon this can be called "close."

It may be that the Pacers want that extra money (instead of taking on another Chicago contract) to fill more needs. I'm not sure how Luke really helps us, does he remind anyone of a Dunleavy?

The rumor was we were offering Al and Our #29 for Chicago's #3 and Pippen. The rumor continued that Chicago wasn't interested. Chicago showed how much they thought of that trade by leaving Pippen unprotected.

Roy Munson
06-22-2004, 11:21 AM
Luke Jackson is a little bit quicker and taller version of Chris Mullin. He is an extremely smart player.

Interesting trivia note:
1997 Oregon High School Player of the year: Freddie Jones
1998 Oregon High School Player of the year: Freddie Jones
1999 Oregon High School Player of the year: Mike Dunleavy
2000 Oregon High School Player of the year: Luke Jackson

When Luke and Freddie were college teammates there were an exceptional passing team. They played a 3-guard offense (along with Luke Ridnour) and the team had TERRIBLE players at the 4 and 5 position. Essentially it was Oregon's three outside players against the other team's 5 guys. They were pretty good and they made it to the elite 8 before losing to Kansas.

Their final season together Freddie was the better overall player (more consistent), but since then Luke Jackson has improved a lot and has become more consistent. He doesn't have many bad games any more.

I think Luke Jackson is the white kind of player for Larry Bird.

Suaveness
06-22-2004, 11:23 AM
Luke Jackson is a little bit quicker and taller version of Chris Mullin. He is an extremely smart player.

Interesting trivia note:
1997 Oregon High School Player of the year: Freddie Jones
1998 Oregon High School Player of the year: Freddie Jones
1999 Oregon High School Player of the year: Mike Dunleavy
2000 Oregon High School Player of the year: Luke Jackson

When Luke and Freddie were college teammates there were an exceptional passing team. They played a 3-guard offense (along with Luke Ridnour) and the team had TERRIBLE players at the 4 and 5 position. Essentially it was Oregon's three outside players against the other team's 5 guys. They were pretty good and they made it to the elite 8 before losing to Kansas.

Their final season together Freddie was the better overall player (more consistent), but since then Luke Jackson has improved a lot and has become more consistent. He doesn't have many bad games any more.

I think Luke Jackson is the white kind of player for Larry Bird.





:laugh:

But that is intruiging. His outside shooting is something we can use.

Suaveness
06-22-2004, 11:26 AM
I'm not sure how Luke really helps us, does he remind anyone of a Dunleavy?

Why? Because they're both white and lived in Oregon? They don't play remotely the same kind of basketball game, so I'm not sure what the point of comparing them is other than they're both skilled players (at different things) and both white.


They were both Oregon HS POY... :flirt:

LAPacer
06-22-2004, 11:26 AM
Luke Jackson is good, but this is a bad trade. If we didn't have Jermaine, Al would be a 20pt 7reb player. I don't think Luke would do that.

Basically we are getting the 2 best Oregon players from a team (2002) that barely won to get to the elite eight only to be blown out. Jones, Jackson, and Ridnour were all on Oregon together a few years back.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/ncaatourney02/teamPage?collegeId=2483

I know Jackson has improved alot since then, and looks to be a good fit, but we should get more in return for Al. I wouldn't mind the #3 from the Bulls and then a trade down later to get Luke.

LAPacer
06-22-2004, 11:35 AM
Luke Jackson is good, but this is a bad trade. If we didn't have Jermaine, Al would be a 20pt 7reb player. I don't think Luke would do that.

The only way in which Al Harrington will EVER be a 20 pt 7 reb player is if he's on a team that features him exclusively, and doesn't have any plans on winning more than 15 games. About 95% of the guys in the NBA could do that too.

I'm not a big Al fan, but everytime Artest or Jermaine go down, Al has a big game and the Pacers usually don't lose those games. Yes, I know he is a playoff choker and a black hole. But he is a quality player. If AD is worth the 5th pick in a good draft, Harrington is worth more than 10th in a poor draft.

Snickers
06-22-2004, 11:38 AM
We'd definitely have to get more than #10 for Al.

On an unrelated note, we're going to take Desmon Farmer with our second round pick. You heard it here first, unless you already heard it somewhere else.

Suaveness
06-22-2004, 11:39 AM
Luke Jackson is good, but this is a bad trade. If we didn't have Jermaine, Al would be a 20pt 7reb player. I don't think Luke would do that.

The only way in which Al Harrington will EVER be a 20 pt 7 reb player is if he's on a team that features him exclusively, and doesn't have any plans on winning more than 15 games. About 95% of the guys in the NBA could do that too.

I'm not a big Al fan, but everytime Artest or Jermaine go down, Al has a big game and the Pacers usually don't lose those games. Yes, I know he is a playoff choker and a black hole. But he is a quality player. If AD is worth the 5th pick in a good draft, Harrington is worth more than 10th in a poor draft.

If he is a playoff choker, why do we need him then? We are a playoff team. And if Artest and JO go down, I would expect Luke and Fred to pick up the slack. And Bender, if he isn't injured...

Snickers
06-22-2004, 11:41 AM
For what it's worth, www.nbadraft.net 's mock draft has Jackson going at #10.

Suaveness
06-22-2004, 11:43 AM
It's not all about posting big numbers too. People can do that. It is about playing within a team concept and a team role in order to acheive a good balance between the players. That is why Detroit won this year. They didn't have anyone off the bench who wanted to score 20 pts.

Unclebuck
06-22-2004, 11:45 AM
ESPN's Chad Ford is saying the Pacers would send AL and the 29th pick to the Cavs for the 10th pick, Kevin Ollie and Dujuan Wagner

Suaveness
06-22-2004, 11:48 AM
ESPN's Chad Ford is saying the Pacers would send AL and the 29th pick to the Cavs for the 10th pick, Kevin Ollie and Dujuan Wagner

Where does it say that...insider?

Hmm....It is interesting, but then we woudl have too many guards...way too many.

Tinsley, Freddie, Reggie, AJ, DW, KO, and then likely Luke. too many there.

Snickers
06-22-2004, 11:49 AM
ESPN's Chad Ford is saying the Pacers would send AL and the 29th pick to the Cavs for the 10th pick, Kevin Ollie and Dujuan Wagner

Hmm....

Three guards for a SF.... seems we'd be shifting our logjam to a different position. :hmm:

But I think I'd do that deal, just because Jackson is almost exactly what we need, in terms of a shooter [a vet would be nice, but hey, if the shoe fits.... find the other one :disturbed:]

Dajuan still has a chance to be a very good player, and I always liked Kevin Ollie.

Unclebuck
06-22-2004, 11:51 AM
ESPN's Chad Ford is saying the Pacers would send AL and the 29th pick to the Cavs for the 10th pick, Kevin Ollie and Dujuan Wagner

Where does it say that...insider?
Hmm....It is interesting, but then we woudl have too many guards...way too many.

Tinsley, Freddie, Reggie, AJ, DW, KO, and then likely Luke. too many there.


yes

Suaveness
06-22-2004, 11:51 AM
ESPN's Chad Ford is saying the Pacers would send AL and the 29th pick to the Cavs for the 10th pick, Kevin Ollie and Dujuan Wagner

Hmm....

Three guards for a SF.... seems we'd be shifting our logjam to a different position. :hmm:

But I think I'd do that deal, just because Jackson is almost exactly what we need, in terms of a shooter [a vet would be nice, but hey, if the shoe fits.... find the other one :disturbed:]

Dajuan still has a chance to be a very good player, and I always liked Kevin Ollie.

Like I said, and like you said, there are too many guards. We would have to trade some. I'd rather have AJ than Ollie. And I'd rather have Fred than Wagner.

Will Galen
06-22-2004, 11:52 AM
ESPN's Chad Ford is saying the Pacers would send AL and the 29th pick to the Cavs for the 10th pick, Kevin Ollie and Dujuan Wagner

So if we drafted Luke, we would get three guards. Hmmm.

Of course Luke can play SF too.

MSA2CF
06-22-2004, 11:53 AM
I like that Cleveland trade. We'd get a couple vets.

Suaveness
06-22-2004, 11:53 AM
ESPN's Chad Ford is saying the Pacers would send AL and the 29th pick to the Cavs for the 10th pick, Kevin Ollie and Dujuan Wagner

So if we drafted Luke, we would get three guards. Hmmm.

Of course Luke can play SF too.

I'd rather have Luke play SG.

Suaveness
06-22-2004, 11:54 AM
I like that Cleveland trade.


As long as we end up getting Luke.

MSA2CF
06-22-2004, 11:54 AM
I like that Cleveland trade.


As long as we end up getting Luke.

Not necessarily, but it would depend on who we selected, yes.

Suaveness
06-22-2004, 11:56 AM
ESPN's Chad Ford is saying the Pacers would send AL and the 29th pick to the Cavs for the 10th pick, Kevin Ollie and Dujuan Wagner

Ah, the Colts approach to team-building. Take the shortest guys possible, and install your "super-secret" system to compensate for it.

But seriously, I like this deal. And obviously, I'm a big Jackson fan.

But what about AJ...................:uhoh:


Ahh the Colts... :(

What about AJ?

Slick Pinkham
06-22-2004, 11:58 AM
I love the Cleveland trade. Like a said earlier, I love Wagner's potential.

An considering AJ's free agent status, Reggie's retirement after next year, and the possibility that Jamison gets picked tonight,

I don't see that much of a 2-guard problem. Heck, Bender would never have to play the 2 again!

:)

Suaveness
06-22-2004, 11:59 AM
ESPN's Chad Ford is saying the Pacers would send AL and the 29th pick to the Cavs for the 10th pick, Kevin Ollie and Dujuan Wagner

Ah, the Colts approach to team-building. Take the shortest guys possible, and install your "super-secret" system to compensate for it.

But seriously, I like this deal. And obviously, I'm a big Jackson fan.

But what about AJ...................:uhoh:


Ahh the Colts... :(

What about AJ?

You think we'd re-sign him with the sudden overload of guards?

Yeah I noticed that. Hopefully we could trade Wagner and Ollie for a center or something.

Will Galen
06-22-2004, 12:05 PM
I like that Cleveland trade. We'd get a couple vets.

I checked it out and it works cap wise. Here would be our lineup. The guard rotation would have to be worked out.


PF........JO/Croshere
SF........Ron/Bender/JJ
C.........Foster/Pollard/Brezac
PG.......Tins/Ollie/AJ if he resigns
SG.......Reggie/Luke/Fred/Wag

Looking at it this way it doesn't make a good deal of sense unless we plan on making another deal. Most likely we would trade Ron for a big if this went down.

Suaveness
06-22-2004, 12:07 PM
I like that Cleveland trade. We'd get a couple vets.

I checked it out and it works cap wise. Here would be our lineup. The guard rotation would have to be worked out.


PF........JO/Croshere
SF........Ron/Bender/JJ
C.........Foster/Pollard/Brezac
PG.......Tins/Ollie/AJ if he resigns
SG.......Reggie/Luke/Fred/Wag

Looking at it this way it doesn't make a good deal of sense unless we plan on making another deal. Most likely we would trade Ron for a big if this went down.

Yeah, looking at that, too many PG and SG. I would rather keep Tinsley and AJ and Luke and Fred.

Hicks
06-22-2004, 12:23 PM
Luke Jackson is hardly a "project". In fact, based on Al Harrington's performances in the games that matter, I would venture on opinion that he and Jackson are about at the same point in their respective learning cuvres. Jackson, however, brings everything to this team that is desperately needs.

If that's true, and we could get him, Wagner, and maybe Ollie (per Insider rumor), I could live with that.

Snickers
06-22-2004, 12:24 PM
What if we could get them to swap Wagner for Battie? :hmm:

Hicks
06-22-2004, 12:25 PM
This could be a good chant/saying around here:

Unite the Ducks!

Unclebuck
06-22-2004, 12:30 PM
Not sure this is the correct thread for this. But Carlisle said on the Dan Patrick show yesterday (Mon) that they have not heard if Reggie is playing next year, they have not heard one way or the other, but that he fully expects and wants reggie back next season.

indygeezer
06-22-2004, 12:40 PM
I still look at the salaries. Remove Al's 6.2 mil and replace with a rookie salary and take off Jamison's 3/4 mil (replace with a 2nd round pick or low vet minimum ad it's a wash). We reduce the projected $61 mil salary structure down to about 55 mil. Keeps us well under the LTax threshold. NOw maybe that goes away thru the new CBA and maybe not, but anytime you can show your bosses you are trying to control costs it is a good thing. That is assuming we can get an expiring contract (like Pip's) otherwise its going to all be a wash.

SkipperZ
06-22-2004, 01:35 PM
ok that is not that bad a deal. Ollie is a little redundant. maybe a dasanga diop? at the least it would give us more size and he cant possibly contribute less than pollard at teh backup c position.

wagner has the potential to be a great one. He's got a great outside shot, and a real knack for scoring. i think he would be a great addition to the team.

on another note, childress wouldnt drop that far but IF he did and the pacers could choose between childress and jackson, and they picked jackson i would be PISSED. but that situation probably wouldnt arise anyways.

Young
06-22-2004, 01:49 PM
Just wondering is Jackson's vertical really 39 inches?

That's what NBAdraft.tk said.

SkipperZ
06-22-2004, 02:26 PM
So who else would you want because I would want more than the 10th pick for Al, especially when we were close to getting the 3rd.

We are? Link please

See any of the previous 100 threads on it. Thanks.


Last time I checked, chicago wasn't going to give Al for a number 3....

they were if we took on eddie robinson or jyd with that number 3...

i agree... pick 10? thats a terrible trade. we got a pick 5 for antonio, and al is a younger better player than antonio was at the time.

jesus this kid is a sf... we dont need another one. and even if we DID try to play him at the 2, I'd MUCH Rather have freddie there, as at least freddie can play some defense. Cmon we can sign a jon barry for outside shooting, and at least jon barry is actually a shooting guard. luke can play shooting guard but only on one end of the court.

terrible trade, this guy will never amount to an al harrington in the league. mike miller most likely...

like ive said before IF we trade up to the lottery, we BETTER be getting dwight howard, okafor, livingston or childress or else theres NO point.

is cleveland over the cap? if so tthey would have to send us someone too. i assume they are since they have the 14 million dollar man ilgauskas on their roster. my thoughts on this deal would change dramatically if we could get a dajuan wagner out of this. or if cleveland is under the cap and just absorb al's contract, and we put the extra money to good use.



Dont get me wrong Skipper, but what exactly has Al proved thus far in the league. I am not sying he doesnt have potential, hell he is my favorite player on the roster, but in reality he hasnt proved anything yet except that he disappears in playoffs and whines about starting even though he is playing 3rd most minutes on team.

oh i totally agree, he has done nothing to prove anything as of yet, and i think that trading him for cap space would make us a better team. i think we are better off without him.

however, it is apparent that there is interest around the league for him, and that he is a talented player (just not a good fit for this team, and quite honestly i dont believe he is a very smart one) and we can do better than luke jackson is all i was saying.

however, the insider rumor of wagner coming along with luke jackson makes me like the deal. i still think we could do better, but not much, and i would not be upset if we got wagner and the number 10 pick for him.

Natston
06-22-2004, 02:38 PM
Basically we are getting the 2 best Oregon players from a team (2002) that barely won to get to the elite eight only to be blown out.

Why should I give a crap about what Oregon did in the NCAA tourney?

SkipperZ
06-22-2004, 02:42 PM
terrible trade, this guy will never amount to an al harrington in the league.

You're right, Jackson may actually show up in games that aren't against sub-.500 teams.

Your assessment of Jackson shows you've never actually seen him play. Given that fact, please don't make any broad generalizations without having the slightest clue what you're talking about regarding what he can or can't do.

ok this is what i said about him...

[quote]"jesus this kid is a sf... we dont need another one. and even if we DID try to play him at the 2, I'd MUCH Rather have freddie there, as at least freddie can play some defense. Cmon we can sign a jon barry for outside shooting, and at least jon barry is actually a shooting guard. luke can play shooting guard but only on one end of the court.

terrible trade, this guy will never amount to an al harrington in the league. mike miller most likely...

like ive said before IF we trade up to the lottery, we BETTER be getting dwight howard, okafor, livingston or childress or else theres NO point. "

i HAVE in fact seen him play. Tell me where you disagree with me about his GAME? you can disagree all you want about how good he is going to be, but tell me if im wrong about his game as of now.

you want something more than a generalization? ill try to be more specific as to how i percieve jackson from watching him play.

he is not a good defender. He is athletic, a good passer, a good shooter, decent ball handler, fast but not quick, decent rebounder because of his size and leaping ability. but he wont jump out the gym and he wont blow by defenders due to his less than stellar first step. much like mike miller.

he IS more of a sf than a sg. he can play either wing position on offense but he cant guard the pierce's and the tmacs and the kobes, or even the jason richardsons of the league. hes athletic, but nothing extroadinary.

i mean am I WRONG about any of that, since youve watched him play so many times? i mean granted ive only seen him play in probably 5-10 games, but so my opinion doesnt count about him? im SURE some people on this thread are saying that they want him, that hes a good player, and havent even watched him those 5 times.

i dont think hes a bad player. hes a solid mid first round draft pick. but, i think we can do better for harrington. i think harrington is a better player than him rite now, and i dont think jackson will ever catch up, because harrington is going to get better. Hell they are almost the same age. thats my opinion, and theres NO way you can say that im wrong. feel free to disagree but you cannot possibly know.

and NO i dont think jon barry is better. but he wouldnt cost us al harrington, and is just as good a shooter than jackson, is a veteran, and is a pure shooting guard. and dont get me wrong, i dont want jon barry i was just making an example. I dont think jackson fits as good with this team as most people do. i would much rather have a childress, livingston, or if it didnt cost us harrington, a JR Smith or maybe even kirk snyder to a lesser extent (i dont trust his jumper).

maybe you shouldnt just assume that someone didnt watch someone play just because you dont seem to agree with said persons assessment of him. You CANNOT know that he is going to be better than Harrington from watching him play. so therefore you must be knocking my assessments that he cannot play defense, but is a good shooter, as those are the two things i stated about his game in my original post. and if you disagree with that then i mite have to assume that YOU have never in fact watched him play.

ChicagoJ
06-22-2004, 02:43 PM
Basically we are getting the 2 best Oregon players from a team (2002) that barely won to get to the elite eight only to be blown out.

Why should I give a crap about what Oregon did in the NCAA tourney?

Clark and Herb. You'd think they tore up the Big Ten as teammates, right? 9-9. Then they averaged 24 wins per season together with the Pacers. If the Ducks won a championship and Fred and Luke were the two best players, then it might make some sense. But they weren't that potent of a backcourt, certainly not by NBA standards. To build your backcourt of the future around those two guys would certainly raise some eyebrows.

Kstat
06-22-2004, 02:44 PM
Luke Jackson didnt even show up in the NIT finals, let alone the NCAA's.....

LAPacer
06-22-2004, 02:46 PM
Basically we are getting the 2 best Oregon players from a team (2002) that barely won to get to the elite eight only to be blown out.

Why should I give a crap about what Oregon did in the NCAA tourney?

Crap crap. If you don't like my post ignore it, don't need you giving crap to stink it up. :unimpressed:

My point was if Jones and Jackson are so good, why didn't they go further in the tourney. Yeah, they've improved, but I don't want the franchise to hope that with Jackson and Jones getting major minutes, they'll win an NBA Championship.

SkipperZ
06-22-2004, 02:48 PM
You can type all that without actually saying anything? Strike 2.

harrington is better than luke jackson. strike me out see if i care.

Natston
06-22-2004, 02:49 PM
Basically we are getting the 2 best Oregon players from a team (2002) that barely won to get to the elite eight only to be blown out.

Why should I give a crap about what Oregon did in the NCAA tourney?

Clark and Herb. You'd think they tore up the Big Ten as teammates, right? 9-9. Then they averaged 24 wins per season together with the Pacers. If the Ducks won a championship and Fred and Luke were the two best players, then it might make some sense. But they weren't that potent of a backcourt, certainly not by NBA standards. To build your backcourt of the future around those two guys would certainly raise some eyebrows.

One of my sports peeves are the people that say Player X will be a better pro because he won a 'ship in college while Player Y didn't get past the sweet 16. Hence, I don't give a crap about college awards, success or hype.

MSA2CF
06-22-2004, 02:51 PM
If the kid can play, he can play.

Slick Pinkham
06-22-2004, 02:51 PM
LSU couldn't win anything with Shaq.

Shaq must suck.

:)

Natston
06-22-2004, 02:51 PM
Basically we are getting the 2 best Oregon players from a team (2002) that barely won to get to the elite eight only to be blown out.

Why should I give a crap about what Oregon did in the NCAA tourney?

Crap crap. If you don't like my post ignore it, don't need you giving crap to stink it up. :unimpressed:

My point was if Jones and Jackson are so good, why didn't they go further in the tourney. Yeah, they've improved, but I don't want the franchise to hope that with Jackson and Jones getting major minutes, they'll win an NBA Championship.

So lets go get the waterboy and towelboy from UCONN because they won a championship. :rolleyes:

SkipperZ
06-22-2004, 02:52 PM
LSU couldn't win anything with Shaq.

Shaq must suck.

:)

he does :cool:

ChicagoJ
06-22-2004, 02:53 PM
Basically we are getting the 2 best Oregon players from a team (2002) that barely won to get to the elite eight only to be blown out.

Why should I give a crap about what Oregon did in the NCAA tourney?

Clark and Herb. You'd think they tore up the Big Ten as teammates, right? 9-9. Then they averaged 24 wins per season together with the Pacers. If the Ducks won a championship and Fred and Luke were the two best players, then it might make some sense. But they weren't that potent of a backcourt, certainly not by NBA standards. To build your backcourt of the future around those two guys would certainly raise some eyebrows.

One of my sports peeves are the people that say Player X will be a better pro because he won a 'ship in college while Player Y didn't get past the sweet 16. Hence, I don't give a crap about college awards, success or hype.

I don't dispute that point. Hell, I'm actually re-inforcing it. If you've got former teammates that couldn't win a championship in college, why would you expect them to be able to win anything against the pros?

Kstat
06-22-2004, 02:54 PM
NCAA success is one thing, I just havent seen Jackson actually SHOW UP against a team that wasnt loaded with rejects.......

SkipperZ
06-22-2004, 02:56 PM
You can type all that without actually saying anything? Strike 2.

harrington is better than luke jackson. strike me out see if i care.

Hee hee hee. One of us has been playing around (and I don't think it was you).

nah im just trying to get a rise out of you

oh and trying to drive home the point... I DONT WANT LUKE JACKSON (but i would want dajuan wagner)

Kstat
06-22-2004, 02:57 PM
BTW you guys are forgetting a guy names Luke Ridnour was on those Oregon teams too......

Its not as if Jackson and Jones were on the team by themselves.

Suaveness
06-22-2004, 03:07 PM
I bet this doesn't even happen. We probably will end up picking at 29. That is what I think. I don't know how good this guy is, but that is the TYPE of player we need.

ahhteeth
06-22-2004, 03:09 PM
LSU couldn't win anything with Shaq.

Shaq must suck.

:)

Christian Laettner won a championship in college he must be a SUPERSTAR!!

Kegboy
06-22-2004, 05:09 PM
So lets go get the waterboy and towelboy from UCONN because they won a championship. :rolleyes:

That's about the best we can do with our draft picks this year. :unimpressed:

dipperdunk
06-22-2004, 05:25 PM
If you guys can land Luke Jackson and Wagner for Harrington and your pick I think it would be a good deal. Jackson can turn out to be the best all around offensive player in this years draft. Hes Kyle Korver but with way more athleticism and offensive skills.

Wagner hasn't shown much in the league thus far but he is a terrific talent. In his 1st game for the Cavs against the 76ers he went toe to toe with Iverson and scored about 31 or so in a losing effort. He has great upside as an offensive player he just hasn't shown it yet because of injuries and now he plays pretty much the same position as Lebron so he will probably get traded. Hes from Camden just across the bridge from Philly and had some serious hype coming out of high school. To give you an idea of his offensive potential he had a game in high school where he scored 100 points.

Pic below of Luke showing some hops.

http://www.draftcity.com/playerimages/lukejackson/lukejackson2.jpg

Suaveness
06-22-2004, 05:28 PM
Does the guy play defense?

LAPacer
06-22-2004, 05:29 PM
Wagner hasn't shown much in the league thus far but he is a terrific talent. In his 1st game for the Cavs against the 76ers he went toe to toe with Iverson and scored about 31 or so in a losing effort. He has great upside as an offensive player he just hasn't shown it yet because of injuries and now he plays pretty much the same position as Lebron so he will probably get traded. Hes from Camden just across the bridge from Philly and had some serious hype coming out of high school. To give you an idea of his offensive potential he had a game in high school where he scored 100 points.



Is Wagner similar enough to Wade that he can run the point?

Kstat
06-22-2004, 05:30 PM
Does the guy play defense?

I've yet to see any out of him.

+: great shooter, good handles and athletic ability

-: not especially fast, weak defensively and he's soft. Be physical with him and you can get him off his game.

indygeezer
06-22-2004, 05:33 PM
Does the guy play defense?

I've yet to see any out of him.

+: great shooter, good handles and athletic ability

-: not especially fast, weak defensively and he's soft. Be physical with him and you can get him off his game.

Sounds like a perfect fit for a WC team.

Slick Pinkham
06-22-2004, 05:33 PM
Is Wagner similar enough to Wade that he can run the point?

Not as big as Wade.

A thinner Billups with more off the dribble potential? :whoknows:

Kstat
06-22-2004, 05:35 PM
Is Wagner similar enough to Wade that he can run the point?

Not as big as Wade.

A thinner Billups with more off the dribble potential? :whoknows:[/quote]

Wagner has no buisness being an NBA PG. Neither does Wade. Both of them are shooting guards in PG bodies.

Billups bought into a system in which he sacrificed his scoring for long period sof time, I dont know if Wade or Wagner can or will do that.

ChicagoJ
06-22-2004, 05:37 PM
As much as it pains me to say this,

I'd rather have Travis Bust than Wagner.

:banghead:

Suaveness
06-22-2004, 05:38 PM
Does the guy play defense?

I've yet to see any out of him.

+: great shooter, good handles and athletic ability

-: not especially fast, weak defensively and he's soft. Be physical with him and you can get him off his game.

Isn't he supposed to have a long wingspan or something? Or is that just wrong?

Kstat
06-22-2004, 05:41 PM
Does the guy play defense?

I've yet to see any out of him.

+: great shooter, good handles and athletic ability

-: not especially fast, weak defensively and he's soft. Be physical with him and you can get him off his game.

Isn't he supposed to have a long wingspan or something? Or is that just wrong?

I don't recall that.

Slick Pinkham
06-22-2004, 05:42 PM
As much as it pains me to say this,

I'd rather have Travis Bust than Wagner.

:banghead:

:confused:

Travis Best was still in college at age 21 and was nowhere near as good as Wagner.

The gamble is whether he wants to become a PG. Wagner has off-the-dribble skills to be an effective "tiny 2" even if he never becomes a 1.

Travis never approached that level.

Suaveness
06-22-2004, 05:45 PM
Does the guy play defense?

I've yet to see any out of him.

+: great shooter, good handles and athletic ability

-: not especially fast, weak defensively and he's soft. Be physical with him and you can get him off his game.

Isn't he supposed to have a long wingspan or something? Or is that just wrong?

I don't recall that.


Well, this is probably crap, but....

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=2051178cap&prov=st&type=lgns


VITALS: 6-7, 212, Oregon

OVERVIEW: Jackson played four years at Oregon, where he finished as the second-leading scorer in school history. The Oregon native was named the Pac-10 Player of the Year after averaging 21.2 points and 7.2 rebounds as a senior, helping lead the Ducks to the National Invitation Tournament semifinals. Jackson is an adequate 3-point shooter who has a knack to get to the basket. Jackson also possesses a long wingspan that contributes to his excellent perimeter defense. His size, strength and skills make him an intriguing prospect.

Kstat
06-22-2004, 05:46 PM
Does the guy play defense?

I've yet to see any out of him.

+: great shooter, good handles and athletic ability

-: not especially fast, weak defensively and he's soft. Be physical with him and you can get him off his game.

Isn't he supposed to have a long wingspan or something? Or is that just wrong?

I don't recall that.


Well, this is probably crap, but....

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=2051178cap&prov=st&type=lgns


VITALS: 6-7, 212, Oregon

OVERVIEW: Jackson played four years at Oregon, where he finished as the second-leading scorer in school history. The Oregon native was named the Pac-10 Player of the Year after averaging 21.2 points and 7.2 rebounds as a senior, helping lead the Ducks to the National Invitation Tournament semifinals. Jackson is an adequate 3-point shooter who has a knack to get to the basket. Jackson also possesses a long wingspan that contributes to his excellent perimeter defense. His size, strength and skills make him an intriguing prospect.

if his perimeter defense ever APPROACHES excellent I'll eat my shoe. Hes way too damn slow side-to-side to keep up with NBA swingmen on a constant basis. He's a very well-rounded offensive player. If his defense was even CLOSE to good he'd be a top-5 pick.

Hicks
06-22-2004, 05:47 PM
NCAA success is one thing, I just havent seen Jackson actually SHOW UP against a team that wasnt loaded with rejects.......


Yea like dropping 42/10/4 on that reject Iguodala?

Bumping for Kstat. :devil:

Pacer4fun
06-22-2004, 05:58 PM
Aleksandar Pavlovic as I understand it is to be traded to Cleveland, he is a 6-7 SF. I'm not sure what he brings that Al wouldn't

Okay, I like the idea of trading Al to Cleveland for the 10th pick if we get Wagner, but isn't there anyone else you would rather have wth the 10th pick? Is Luke that much different from the skills of James Jones? Watching James Jones last summer, I was really impressed by him (Fred didn't look like he was going to make the team.) I know we might use Luke at the 2 guard but I'm not sure James couldn't play some as well.

It would be interesting to see Reggie Miller's bio prior to the draft cause I wasn't thrilled with the pick but have loved him over the years.

Another pick we could have at the 10th might be to go big, how about Pavel Podkolzine, at 7-5 and 300 lbs he would be something. I'm not sure what, but he would be something.

If we get cap room, could we use the extra money left over from the trade of Al, along with the mid exception to go after Blount? Anyone know how that works?



Pavel Podkolzine

ChicagoJ
06-22-2004, 06:03 PM
As much as it pains me to say this,

I'd rather have Travis Bust than Wagner.

:banghead:

:confused:

Travis Best was still in college at age 21 and was nowhere near as good as Wagner.

The gamble is whether he wants to become a PG. Wagner has off-the-dribble skills to be an effective "tiny 2" even if he never becomes a 1.

Travis never approached that level.

I just don't see Wagner as ever being as good as Travis Bust, circa the Larry Bird era. Both are woefully undersized "2's". At least with Travis, we knew what to expect - he could get to the basket, then get his shot blocked. I see Wagner as having similar weaknesses to Travis, but more turnover prone.

Natston
06-22-2004, 06:10 PM
As much as it pains me to say this,

I'd rather have Travis Bust than Wagner.

:banghead:

:confused:

Travis Best was still in college at age 21 and was nowhere near as good as Wagner.

The gamble is whether he wants to become a PG. Wagner has off-the-dribble skills to be an effective "tiny 2" even if he never becomes a 1.

Travis never approached that level.
At least with Travis, we knew what to expect - he could get to the basket, then get his shot blocked.

:laugh:

Hicks
06-22-2004, 06:38 PM
NCAA success is one thing, I just havent seen Jackson actually SHOW UP against a team that wasnt loaded with rejects.......


Yea like dropping 42/10/4 on that reject Iguodala?

Bumping for Kstat. :devil:

Kstat
06-22-2004, 06:43 PM
NCAA success is one thing, I just havent seen Jackson actually SHOW UP against a team that wasnt loaded with rejects.......


Yea like dropping 42/10/4 on that reject Iguodala?

Bumping for Kstat. :devil:




..he lit up Arizona, who makes the Mavs look like the Pacers defensively. :unimpressed:

The Pac-10 might have 2 or 3 players in the whole CONFERENCE that can play D.

TheSauceMaster
06-22-2004, 06:47 PM
The NY papers seem to be busy with Artest Trade Rumors , Funny I see Donnie saying were not shopping artest , then I find another article who says were desperately trying to deal Artest.

The Pacers are trying desperately to trade Artest, a St. John's product from Queensbridge, who suffered several meltdowns in the playoffs. According to a league source, the Pacers spent an hour trying to convince Artest to get on the team plane after their Game 4 loss at Miami in the second round. Artest wanted to remain in Miami with his wife before finally boarding the plane.

So is donnie sending out some more smoke screens :confused:


Where did this come from

Sorry Been busy today , havent finished reading the whole thread , sorry if it's been answered

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/basketball/story/205093p-177036c.html

scroll down to the notebook comments

Snickers
06-22-2004, 06:51 PM
I haven't seen enough of Jackson to comment on him, but this caught my eye....


http://www.draftcity.com/playerimages/lukejackson/lukejackson2.jpg

Our future 2-guard likes humping the net.... great. :(

LuckyMcPhearson
06-22-2004, 08:45 PM
NCAA success is one thing, I just havent seen Jackson actually SHOW UP against a team that wasnt loaded with rejects.......


Yea like dropping 42/10/4 on that reject Iguodala?

Bumping for Kstat. :devil:




..he lit up Arizona, who makes the Mavs look like the Pacers defensively. :unimpressed:

The Pac-10 might have 2 or 3 players in the whole CONFERENCE that can play D.


Ahhhhh! So Iggy is being drafted for his tremendous offensive skills! I should have known. :idea:

Other rejects Jackson put up all his numbers on...

27 points and 8 boards on that bum Langford from Kansas.

40 points including 31 of Oregon's last 33 on that second team all-big 12 chump Michel Morandais.


:sarcasm:

wintermute
06-23-2004, 07:36 AM
juannie wagner and #10 for al sounds good. ollie in addition is not bad too, if this goes through aj probably won't be back, well he rolled the dice on his option.

wagner's no pg, but i think a backcourt of wagner and jones has enough playmaking to do well. a bit undersized though.

i'm surprised many people are so high on luke jackson already. one, we might not even drfat him if we get #10. two, college success does not guarantee nba success. to be the fair though, luke looks like he has nba skills. in fact, he's one of my favorites. but it's getting a little overboard i think.