PDA

View Full Version : Has Jarret Jack taken his game to a new level?



aceace
03-04-2009, 09:16 AM
I have to say this guy is really starting to grow on me as a guy we must sign to long term contract. The last several games he has looked like the best player on the floor. Is he tall enough to be a permanent starting guard on this team? He can finish near the hoop. His shooting percentage is 44% and avg 24/5/5 over his last 5 games. His defense is pretty good. Has he become a must sign player this off-season?

2minutes twowa
03-04-2009, 09:38 AM
It sure seems like he has. I think he should be a priority this off season. It will all depend on his asking price.

Einstein
03-04-2009, 09:42 AM
Game to a new level? Yes.

Leadership on the floor? Yes.

Good defender? Well...

Smart to sign? Yes

Kid Minneapolis
03-04-2009, 09:44 AM
A month ago, he kinda drove me crazy... but this past month he's been very very good.

My only thing is, he needs to prove he can SUSTAIN this play, before the organization makes a big dollar, long-term commitment. We don't need another bad contract.

Dr. Goldfoot
03-04-2009, 09:49 AM
He's played exceptionally well as a starter, but less than stellar when he comes off the bench. Does he need to start to be effective?

MillerTime
03-04-2009, 09:55 AM
I really hope we re-sign him this offseason. He has stepped in big for us, especially when Ford was out

Dr. Hibbert
03-04-2009, 10:01 AM
As long as he's not on the court at the same time as Ford, he seems to be fine.

danman
03-04-2009, 10:11 AM
His numbers really aren't that different than last year. He has proven that he can shoulder more of a scoring load when needed, which is nice.

He's a good fit because he can play the 2... truth is, he's better suited for that than the point. Not exactly a creator. He's a bit short for a 2, but he's strong enough to handle it anyway.

He's a good fit for the Pacers because we've got pure PG's in Travis and TJ. Jack gives us a more physical option and he bulls to the basket with the best of them.

Hard to say whether we'll resign him. Even if the Simons are willing to take on more salary, they may prefer Marquis. And they may not go for either one.

flox
03-04-2009, 10:19 AM
He seems to be one of those players like Salmons who needs to start, and who also is streaky. We've seen him explode for ridiculous amounts of points before and then hang up horrible stinker games later. Look at his career game log.

OakMoses
03-04-2009, 10:19 AM
I think a lot of Jack's good play recently has been the result of O'Brien playing him at SG. I think he also knows that he's the best scorer in the Pacers starting lineup right now. He's clearly been given the green light by O'Brien or else he wouldn't be taking those open 18 footers with 20 seconds left on the shot clock.

To sum it all up, I think Jack is doing exactly what O'Brien is asking him to do since Granger has been out. He's usually on the floor with Ford or Diener, and that's working out for him on the offensive end. Last night he had 0 turnovers.

I'm all for resigning Jack. If I had to pick, I'd take him over 'Quis. Jack's proven that he can be very successful in right situation, and O'Brien's proving that he knows how to create that situation.

What I think we all need to be careful of is overhyping him. Right now he's showing that he can be very good as long as two conditions are met: 1. He's not the primary or sole creative force on the floor. 2. He feels encouraged to aggressively pursue his own offensive game. In short, he's not going to ever be your starting PG unless he makes some significant improvements (this is certainly possible as most of his mistakes are mental). I think you can play him at PG, but he's going to be more successful if he's paired with someone who can get the ball up the court and initiate the offense (better than Granger or 'Quis or Rush can). I think he'd be good with Dunleavy, but I don't think we've seen them play enough together to know.

count55
03-04-2009, 10:32 AM
I think a lot of Jack's good play recently has been the result of O'Brien playing him at SG. I think he also knows that he's the best scorer in the Pacers starting lineup right now. He's clearly been given the green light by O'Brien or else he wouldn't be taking those open 18 footers with 20 seconds left on the shot clock.

To sum it all up, I think Jack is doing exactly what O'Brien is asking him to do since Granger has been out. He's usually on the floor with Ford or Diener, and that's working out for him on the offensive end. Last night he had 0 turnovers.

I'm all for resigning Jack. If I had to pick, I'd take him over 'Quis. Jack's proven that he can be very successful in right situation, and O'Brien's proving that he knows how to create that situation.

What I think we all need to be careful of is overhyping him. Right now he's showing that he can be very good as long as two conditions are met: 1. He's not the primary or sole creative force on the floor. 2. He feels encouraged to aggressively pursue his own offensive game. In short, he's not going to ever be your starting PG unless he makes some significant improvements (this is certainly possible as most of his mistakes are mental). I think you can play him at PG, but he's going to be more successful if he's paired with someone who can get the ball up the court and initiate the offense (better than Granger or 'Quis or Rush can). I think he'd be good with Dunleavy, but I don't think we've seen them play enough together to know.

This pretty much sums up my position.

I have the same general feeling about Jack that I've had about Foster over his career. He has flaws that will occasionally get exploited, and there will be times where you just want to choke him, however...

He's the type of guy you want on your team. Now, we can't break the bank on him, but I believe that he is going to be our #1 priority for re-signing this summer for three reasons: (1) the note at the top of this paragraph, (2) he's versatile, and (3) he'll be relatively cheap.

OakMoses
03-04-2009, 10:45 AM
He's the type of guy you want on your team. Now, we can't break the bank on him, but I believe that he is going to be our #1 priority for re-signing this summer for three reasons: (1) the note at the top of this paragraph, (2) he's versatile, and (3) he'll be relatively cheap.

(4) He's played in 303 of 309 possible games over the course of his career.

flox
03-04-2009, 10:48 AM
(4) He's played in 303 of 309 possible games over the course of his career.

you could have said the same about dunleavy before this season lol.

But yes I mostly agree with your points.

McKeyFan
03-04-2009, 10:51 AM
Also, Jack is generally very good in the clutch, when it really matters.

He is really good at the free throw line at the end of games.

He has made a couple game winners at the buzzer this year.

I think this is the x-factor in whether to re-sign someone, more important than general stats.

Speed
03-04-2009, 11:36 AM
I couldn't agree more on everything said here. Just a quick comment on his intangibles though. He seems to be a natural leader, a glue guy, a guy the other players listens to. That's pretty important.

Unclebuck
03-04-2009, 11:41 AM
I think he's been great the whole season - really not sure why he was "driving anyone crazy"

BRushWithDeath
03-04-2009, 11:46 AM
I think he's been great the whole season - really not sure why he was "driving anyone crazy"

Because of his high propensity for boneheaded turnovers when he's on the ball. He's much better off of it.

Justin Tyme
03-04-2009, 11:51 AM
Let me add a thought. I have always wanted and campaigned for Jack as a Pacer. At the same time, I have to admit that, as of late, he's better than I had ever envisioned. I will also say I had expected his "D" to be better to help the perimeter "D" problem the Pacers had for years.

Now why is Jack better? I can't believe what I'm about to suggest.:eek: Jack seems to play well in JO'B's run n gun with little "D" system. Now with that being said can he play to this level in another system under another coach? What if he can't have this type success in another system, and the Pacers sign him to a long term contract?

The other thing is I'm not sure that Jack won't be offered more than some think from another team. Pacer fans aren't the only ones aware of how Jack has been playing. Let's say 5 mil or more. I don't see the Pacers spending that type of money to resign him.

My only problem with resigning Jack, even at a resonable salary, is that O'Brien will have him playing SG in front of Rush. If Rush is the future SG, that seems to be problem to me. JMOAA

OakMoses
03-04-2009, 11:55 AM
If Rush is the future SG, that doesn't seem to be the thing to do. JMOAA

If Rush is the future SG, he'll take the job from Jack when he's good enough. I say this as a big Rush fan.

Anthem
03-04-2009, 11:58 AM
Forget the pick that got us Rush. Would anybody here trade Jack for Bayless?

danman
03-04-2009, 11:59 AM
Because of his high propensity for boneheaded turnovers when he's on the ball. He's much better off of it.

Plus Jack cannot see the court. At all. Bad passers with no vision are... um... limited as point guards.

Justin Tyme
03-04-2009, 12:00 PM
If Rush is the future SG, he'll take the job from Jack when he's good enough. I say this as a big Rush fan.


If Rush can't, then my belief in Bird's inability to draft players will be that much more confirmed.

Justin Tyme
03-04-2009, 12:10 PM
Forget the pick that got us Rush. Would anybody here trade Jack for Bayless?


That's a great question. Not at the present time with the way Jack is playing, but that could change in the future.

I haven't been hearing any touting of Bayless' play of recent, so I'll guess he hasn't been playing or producing much of late. :D

CableKC
03-04-2009, 12:15 PM
My only problem with resigning Jack, even at a resonable salary, is that O'Brien will have him playing SG in front of Rush. If Rush is the future SG, that seems to be problem to me. JMOAA
In the next season, if we resign Jack ( instead of Marquis....which I am still 50/50 on...depending on whether we are able to draft a PG like Jennings ), whatever current minutes ( about 20+ mpg ) that went to Marquis would have gone to either BRush or Graham ( or whoever replaces Graham in the lineup ).

As mellifluous suggests:

If Rush is the future SG, he'll take the job from Jack when he's good enough. I say this as a big Rush fan.
if BRush is ready to take the Starting SG spot in the near future, then he will take it. In his sophmore season....as long as BRush is getting 20+ mpg ( which he hopefully should ) then I'm okay with that. Hopefully by the 2010-2011 season ( at the latest ), BRush will be starting...until then....baby-steps is all I can hope for.

duke dynamite
03-04-2009, 12:38 PM
I feel that Jack's recent play is a product of Danny not being on the floor. With that said, yes, Jack has improved his game drastically.

I think that it is possible for Jarrett to maintain this momentum.

I say re-sign.

count55
03-04-2009, 12:38 PM
Forget the pick that got us Rush. Would anybody here trade Jack for Bayless?

I guess it really all depends on what you mean by "Bayless."

I had made the comment at the time of the trade that, until proven otherwise, Jarrett Jack was actually the best NBA player in the trade. Now, that was strictly because he was the only guy who'd proven he could actually play at a productive level in the league. In the minds of all involved in the trade, (Por & IND) Bayless was the "most valuable" player in the trade, while I'm sure Bird,etal, were hoping that Rush became the best player in the trade.

So, therefore, I suspect many would trade Jack for "the idea of Bayless." That is to say, what they think he'll become.

However, Bayless needs to improve a lot, and prove a lot, right now, just to catch up with Jack.

I'm a huge fan of Jarrett Jack, but I couldn't, in good conscience, pass up the "idea" of Bayless to keep Jack. However, I think we'd all agree that if Bayless were able to produce the way Jack has over the last ten games or so, he'd be considered a very good player.

Kid Minneapolis
03-04-2009, 01:04 PM
I think he's been great the whole season - really not sure why he was "driving anyone crazy"

Because he had a habit of committing some stupid turnovers, and kind of killing the offense on occasion instead of creating offense by not passing it off and instead taking it himself, and not always successfully. Right now he's hot, so everyone is cool with him, but earlier in the season he frustrated me.

My memory isn't that short.

I'm very happy with his play in the last month or so. His previous play was not consistent... he had periods of good play mixed with periods of "wtf are you doin" kind of play.

pizza guy
03-04-2009, 01:10 PM
Forget the pick that got us Rush. Would anybody here trade Jack for Bayless?

I wouldn't for one simple reason.

P.R.

Some folks on this board hated the Bayless trade from a talent perspective. Others loved it from a maturity perspective. What we heard of Bayless was that he has so much talent, but may find it hard to "fit into a team concept." "Bayless is the next Iverson!" I remember hearing.

While Jack may not have the ceiling as high as Bayless, he's definitely what our team needed. A mature, proven, solid player that can produce with the team. If we had brought Bayless in here and started losing like crazy, or not giving him his minutes, he would've been a distraction and a troublemaker, and this team has had its fill of those, and needed someone who could come in, look good, play well, and act like a professional.

Besides, last time I checked, Iverson still doesn't have a ring. But, his counterpart in this year's trade, Mr. Big Shot sure does. On talent alone, it's not close. But, I think we'd all agree that Chauncey Billups is better for a team than Allen Iverson. Of course, Jack and Bayless may never reach those kind of standards, or they may exceed them, who knows? But, there's no way I'd trade Jack for Bayless now.

--pizza

rexnom
03-04-2009, 01:13 PM
I guess it really all depends on what you mean by "Bayless."

I had made the comment at the time of the trade that, until proven otherwise, Jarrett Jack was actually the best NBA player in the trade. Now, that was strictly because he was the only guy who'd proven he could actually play at a productive level in the league. In the minds of all involved in the trade, (Por & IND) Bayless was the "most valuable" player in the trade, while I'm sure Bird,etal, were hoping that Rush became the best player in the trade.

So, therefore, I suspect many would trade Jack for "the idea of Bayless." That is to say, what they think he'll become.

However, Bayless needs to improve a lot, and prove a lot, right now, just to catch up with Jack.

I'm a huge fan of Jarrett Jack, but I couldn't, in good conscience, pass up the "idea" of Bayless to keep Jack. However, I think we'd all agree that if Bayless were able to produce the way Jack has over the last ten games or so, he'd be considered a very good player.
Ha! If Bayless had just one ten game stretch like Jack, we'd never hear the end of it.

duke dynamite
03-04-2009, 01:17 PM
I think he's been great the whole season - really not sure why he was "driving anyone crazy"
Jack is at least during the beginning of the season was turnover prone. He gave his game a little too much razzle-dazzle and was somewhat trigger happy. In the process he commited a few turnovers. Jarrett has gotten much better with that, and in turn I am very happy with his play.

duke dynamite
03-04-2009, 01:18 PM
EDIT:


Ha! If Bayless had just one ten game stretch like Jack, we'd never hear the end of it from Shade.

Unclebuck
03-04-2009, 01:30 PM
I guess I tend to look at what a player does right as opposed to what they do wrong. And I also grade on a scale - expect more out of Granger than I do out of Jack.

If Jack didn't make mental mistakes and if he had some really good point guard skills then he'd be one of the better point guards in the NBA. So sure he has weaknesses - but his positives are what we have needed

PaceBalls
03-04-2009, 01:32 PM
I was reading last week on this forum that people thought we could get him for 3-4 mil a year. That is not gonna happen. Some team is going to offer him a lot more money than the Pacers can pay. I hope we can retain him, because he is my kind of player, but I seriously doubt it unless the Simons wanna pay up. I would definately take him over Marquis.

The dude is tough minded, hardly ever misses games and is just a great over all player. It will be sad to see him go.

duke dynamite
03-04-2009, 01:36 PM
I guess I tend to look at what a player does right as opposed to what they do wrong. And I also grade on a scale - expect more out of Granger than I do out of Jack.

If Jack didn't make mental mistakes and if he had some really good point guard skills then he'd be one of the better point guards in the NBA. So sure he has weaknesses - but his positives are what we have needed
I do that as well, Buck. I think at times though I over-value our players with some sort of sentimental reasoning.

BUT, I really do think that Jack has earned his stay with our team next season. I really hope that he could remain with us.

danman
03-04-2009, 01:59 PM
I guess I tend to look at what a player does right as opposed to what they do wrong. And I also grade on a scale - expect more out of Granger than I do out of Jack.

If Jack didn't make mental mistakes and if he had some really good point guard skills then he'd be one of the better point guards in the NBA. So sure he has weaknesses - but his positives are what we have needed

That's the right way to look at it. He's not a true point by any stretch, but he is an effective tweener and an excellent fit for this year's Pacer team. I expect Jack to be a solid NBA player for years.

If you've got even one great skill -- like Jack's bulling into the paint -- you can go a long way. Combine that with Jack's intensity and his decent jumper, and you've got a rotation guy that you feel comfortable with when you need him for a start. Ain't nothing wrong with that.

CableKC
03-04-2009, 02:12 PM
Okay....so is one of the main reasons why Jack more effective now because he is playing more "off the ball" as our primary SG as opposed to primarily our PG?

Unclebuck
03-04-2009, 02:16 PM
Okay....so is one of the main reasons why Jack more effective now because he is playing more "off the ball" as our primary SG as opposed to primarily our PG?

probably. I figured when we traded for him that he would play as many minutes at shooting guard as he would at point guard. But Diener has been injured for much of the season and Ford has missed some games, so Jack has had to play more point guard.

I like having Jack on the floor with either Ford or Diener. You can never have enough ball handlers

Thesterovic
03-04-2009, 03:22 PM
I freaking love Jack. Another good thing about him is his work ethic. Him, TJ, Danny, and Marquis are always the four guys out on the court 24/7. Jack has a great work ethic and he won't get lazy on us. He's young, we can trust him, he has only missed six games in his career due to injury. It's not like he'll get worse as he gets more experience.

OakMoses
03-04-2009, 03:58 PM
I was reading last week on this forum that people thought we could get him for 3-4 mil a year. That is not gonna happen. Some team is going to offer him a lot more money than the Pacers can pay.

There are quite a few guys similar to Jack in the league. Most of them make around $4 million a year. I posted the contracts of a bunch of guys I thought fit the bill in another thread. If you look at the contracts of Delonte West, Charlie Bell, and Willie Green, you should see about what we should be willing to pay for Jack. If a team offers him a contract that starts at $5+ million, we've got to let him walk.

One thing working in our favor is that this summer looks to be a bad market for FA's to cash in. Hopefully Jack will sign some ridiculously low offer sheet with another team like Landry did and we'll get him on the cheap.

Justin Tyme
03-04-2009, 04:07 PM
I was reading last week on this forum that people thought we could get him for 3-4 mil a year. That is not gonna happen. Some team is going to offer him a lot more money than the Pacers can pay. I hope we can retain him, because he is my kind of player, but I seriously doubt it unless the Simons wanna pay up. I would definately take him over Marquis.

The dude is tough minded, hardly ever misses games and is just a great over all player. It will be sad to see him go.




I agree, and stated earlier it will be hard to keep Jack due to other teams interest that will be willing to pay more than 3-4 mil.

The one thing I want to see is how Jack plays after Granger comes back. To be quite honest I want to see how the team plays when Granger comes back. Someone is going to get their minutes cut and some won't do as much scoring. Who is going to defer to Granger and how will it affect them and the team?

BRushWithDeath
03-04-2009, 04:26 PM
Okay....so is one of the main reasons why Jack more effective now because he is playing more "off the ball" as our primary SG as opposed to primarily our PG?

Completely.

duke dynamite
03-04-2009, 04:48 PM
I like having Jack on the floor with either Ford or Diener. You can never have enough ball handlers
http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n254/faustus777/TheOffice-ThatsWhatSheSaid-Michael.jpg

count55
03-04-2009, 05:16 PM
Ha! If Bayless had just one ten game stretch like Jack, we'd never hear the end of it.

I was actually trying to make the point that Jack is, these days, a very good player...playing at a higher level than I'd ever expected.

I still think he's a 4/$16 contract.

CableKC
03-04-2009, 05:21 PM
http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n254/faustus777/TheOffice-ThatsWhatSheSaid-Michael.jpg
Hicks, you should just make this one of those pictures that Duke Dynamite can post as a Smiley ( kind of like that Darth Vader one that we use from time to time ) :laugh:

Hoop
03-04-2009, 05:29 PM
I like Jack, we should resign him, no question. TJ is the one that drives me crazy.

Naptown_Seth
03-04-2009, 05:48 PM
This pretty much sums up my position.

I have the same general feeling about Jack that I've had about Foster over his career. He has flaws that will occasionally get exploited, and there will be times where you just want to choke him, however...

He's the type of guy you want on your team. Now, we can't break the bank on him, but I believe that he is going to be our #1 priority for re-signing this summer for three reasons: (1) the note at the top of this paragraph, (2) he's versatile, and (3) he'll be relatively cheap.
I was actually more on board with this view back at the start of the year. Now I think I'd rather have Quis starting at SG with Danny at SF, and I really am not blown away by Jack at either PG or SG. He's inconsistent, thus this feeling that he's wonderful now after frustrating so many people early on.

I don't dislike him as a backup PG that can obviously swing to SG, but at this point I'm more a fan of having Quis/Rush as the SG situation and Ford(other)/Diener as the PG solution.

And then on top of all this is another huge question that impacts keeping Jack - DUNLEAVY.

If Dun is on the team he's starting at SG, so even if you don't keep Quis you run into that. Then you just took Rush with a high pick and while he's not been a great scorer (yet), he's more talented all around and a much better defender. He doesn't give up size to other SGs like Jack does either.

The Pacers could use a combo of Dun and Rush, a great deep ball threat with strong defense, but short of that the team has a glut of 2nd tier SG options now...except that you then swing half of them to their unnatural SF spot. At least I don't think Dun or Rush are nearly as well suited for that position, and both would then come off the bench behind Danny.


JJ is hot right now, but let's just temper that with maybe some December opinions too. I don't recall fans swooning for his 33% from deep or his 44% overall. Or his fading defense.

I guess I just end up jocking Quis all the time, but I mean look at his year. He didn't have a hot month, he's been dead on the entire time except when hurt. He's controlled his 3PAs, keeping them at the same level despite playing 33% more time this year and I'd consider that his main weakness.

Bottom line, the Pacers will probably have to let at least one of these 2 guys go and it's going to be a shame considering how well they fill their specific role on the team.

Naptown_Seth
03-04-2009, 05:54 PM
Because he had a habit of committing some stupid turnovers, and kind of killing the offense on occasion instead of creating offense by not passing it off and instead taking it himself, and not always successfully. Right now he's hot, so everyone is cool with him, but earlier in the season he frustrated me.

My memory isn't that short.

I'm very happy with his play in the last month or so. His previous play was not consistent... he had periods of good play mixed with periods of "wtf are you doin" kind of play.
OMG it was pretty painful. He and TJ were hurting as much as helping down the stretch of many games. When you look at a blown 10 point lead and say "okay, well they had to not only score, but had to keep us from scoring" and then go look at truly empty possessions out on top where a guy just fumbled away his dribble...brutal.

And that's not even adding in the fact that often this would then lead to a break the other way which denied the Pacers the chance to even D up and salvage the thing.

flox
03-04-2009, 05:58 PM
Also, Jack is generally very good in the clutch, when it really matters.

He is really good at the free throw line at the end of games.

He has made a couple game winners at the buzzer this year.

I think this is the x-factor in whether to re-sign someone, more important than general stats.
Haha please he's clutch Jack at times and at other times it's I can't make the right cut off of the screen Jack or dribble off of the foot with a few seconds left Jack or rushed jumper Jack. He's streakly clutch.

CableKC
03-04-2009, 06:05 PM
I was actually more on board with this view back at the start of the year. Now I think I'd rather have Quis starting at SG with Danny at SF, and I really am not blown away by Jack at either PG or SG. He's inconsistent, thus this feeling that he's wonderful now after frustrating so many people early on.

I don't dislike him as a backup PG that can obviously swing to SG, but at this point I'm more a fan of having Quis/Rush as the SG situation and Ford(other)/Diener as the PG solution.
This is where I fall on the "Keep Jack or Marquis" question. I know that having Jack teamed with Ford/Diener works from time to time.....but it doesn't work for the majority of the time. We end up having situations where Jack is the one that has to defend the opposing SG...which doesn't always work out well. This also plays into my concern that JO'B would rely too much on a Ford+Jack Backcourt due to his apparent overuse of Small Ball lineups.

IF we have other PG options in the Offseason ( like trying to sign Sessions or drafting Jennings ), then I would be more apt to resign Jack....simply cuz he's our best PG option that we would have. But if we are able to do one of the above....then I would choose to make an attempt at signing Marquis over Jack ( at the same $3-4 mil range ). As a SG, I think that Marquis fits better and complements Granger/Dunleavy better. This doesn't mean that I don't think that Jack hasn't stepped up since Granger/Dunleavy went down....it just means that I think that if we have our backup PG needs filled...I would much rather keep Marquis over Jack since he IMHO complements Granger or Dunleavy at the SF spot.

count55
03-04-2009, 06:11 PM
I was actually more on board with this view back at the start of the year. Now I think I'd rather have Quis starting at SG with Danny at SF, and I really am not blown away by Jack at either PG or SG. He's inconsistent, thus this feeling that he's wonderful now after frustrating so many people early on.

I don't dislike him as a backup PG that can obviously swing to SG, but at this point I'm more a fan of having Quis/Rush as the SG situation and Ford(other)/Diener as the PG solution.

And then on top of all this is another huge question that impacts keeping Jack - DUNLEAVY.

If Dun is on the team he's starting at SG, so even if you don't keep Quis you run into that. Then you just took Rush with a high pick and while he's not been a great scorer (yet), he's more talented all around and a much better defender. He doesn't give up size to other SGs like Jack does either.

The Pacers could use a combo of Dun and Rush, a great deep ball threat with strong defense, but short of that the team has a glut of 2nd tier SG options now...except that you then swing half of them to their unnatural SF spot. At least I don't think Dun or Rush are nearly as well suited for that position, and both would then come off the bench behind Danny.


JJ is hot right now, but let's just temper that with maybe some December opinions too. I don't recall fans swooning for his 33% from deep or his 44% overall. Or his fading defense.

I guess I just end up jocking Quis all the time, but I mean look at his year. He didn't have a hot month, he's been dead on the entire time except when hurt. He's controlled his 3PAs, keeping them at the same level despite playing 33% more time this year and I'd consider that his main weakness.

Bottom line, the Pacers will probably have to let at least one of these 2 guys go and it's going to be a shame considering how well they fill their specific role on the team.

I have the same basic opinion of Jack that I had in December. He's shown me more ability to score, but really, I just think he's a good player. I suspect that Daniels will cost more, and I still think Jack will be a 4/$16 contract. That's about all that we can afford.

Arcadian
03-04-2009, 07:37 PM
Jack's my favorite current Pacer. I hope that doesn't up his asking price.

Taterhead
03-04-2009, 08:29 PM
I can't even really believe this is even a thought.This team should be looking forward to 2011 and saving as much cap space for that summer as possible. Guys like Jack are a dime a dozen. JMO

CableKC
03-04-2009, 09:03 PM
I can't even really believe this is even a thought.This team should be looking forward to 2011 and saving as much cap space for that summer as possible. Guys like Jack are a dime a dozen. JMO
We're going to need a Backup PG one way or another between now and then. What are we going to do? Resign Diener to another cheap contract and hope that he can run backup PG duties til then?

My hope is that if Monroe isn't drafted...that Jennings is an option as a future PG in the lineup....but even if that happens....we still need to add some depth to the SG/SF rotation. One way or another.....$$$ is going to be spent to fill the PG/SG/SF rotation.

D-BONE
03-04-2009, 11:16 PM
Because he had a habit of committing some stupid turnovers, and kind of killing the offense on occasion instead of creating offense by not passing it off and instead taking it himself, and not always successfully. Right now he's hot, so everyone is cool with him, but earlier in the season he frustrated me.

My memory isn't that short.

I'm very happy with his play in the last month or so. His previous play was not consistent... he had periods of good play mixed with periods of "wtf are you doin" kind of play.

So, in other words, just like everyone else on our team other than (arguably) Granger and Murphy.

Taterhead
03-05-2009, 12:16 AM
We're going to need a Backup PG one way or another between now and then. What are we going to do? Resign Diener to another cheap contract and hope that he can run backup PG duties til then?

My hope is that if Monroe isn't drafted...that Jennings is an option as a future PG in the lineup....but even if that happens....we still need to add some depth to the SG/SF rotation. One way or another.....$$$ is going to be spent to fill the PG/SG/SF rotation.



I think the best direction for next year is to slice payroll and pick up some cheaper young guys with some upside and hope a few of them pan out. I might offer Jarret a two year deal or something like that. But I assume he'll want more than that.

duke dynamite
03-05-2009, 09:08 AM
Jack's my favorite current Pacer. I hope that doesn't up his asking price.
See what you did!?

Kemo
03-05-2009, 05:53 PM
Here is an interesting stat for today .. per Pacers.com
.
.
.
.

Jack has averaged 23.0 points, 4.5 assists, 3.3 rebounds and 1.67 steals in the last six games, shooting .511 from the field and .360 from the 3-point line. In the last two games, hes gone 80 minutes without a turnover.


.
.

CableKC
03-05-2009, 06:58 PM
I think the best direction for next year is to slice payroll and pick up some cheaper young guys with some upside and hope a few of them pan out. I might offer Jarret a two year deal or something like that. But I assume he'll want more than that.
If we had this conversation a few weeks back before the 2008-2009 trade deadline when we actually had some trading assets ( Marquis/Rasho's Expiring Contracts ), I'm guessing that we probably could have snagged a somewhat decent PG prospect.....but going into the 2009-2010 Offseason, we have very little ( if any ) Trading Assets that we could use to acquire a young PG via a trade. Any addition to our roster would come via FA.

What "cheap young guy with some upside" at the point is available via FA during the 2009-2010 Offseason?

Looking through the FA list for 2009-2010, I see very little PG options that can help us that wouldn't come cheap.

Taterhead
03-05-2009, 07:55 PM
If we had this conversation a few weeks back before the 2008-2009 trade deadline when we actually had some trading assets ( Marquis/Rasho's Expiring Contracts ), I'm guessing that we probably could have snagged a somewhat decent PG prospect.....but going into the 2009-2010 Offseason, we have very little ( if any ) Trading Assets that we could use to acquire a young PG via a trade. Any addition to our roster would come via FA.

What "cheap young guy with some upside" at the point is available via FA during the 2009-2010 Offseason?

Looking through the FA list for 2009-2010, I see very little PG options that can help us that wouldn't come cheap.

I would much rather them make a run at Sessions with the MLE. But beyond that I'm not really sure. We do need a back-up point, but Jack isn't a real PG anyways. If Rush improves as expected, and Dun returns healthy, then Jack will have to be your back up point to get any minutes. And I would actually rather have Diener as my back-up point than Jack. Jack just turns the ball over too much for my taste. I would be fine going with Diener and Ford and take a shot at a guy like Lester Hudson in the 2nd round. But that's me. This team isn't going to contend next year so why not save that money for 2011 when we'll have a chance to make a splash?

Oneal07
03-05-2009, 10:39 PM
Since I seen him starting the season, I'm like this guy stepped his game up

larry
03-05-2009, 11:32 PM
Jack is playing great.
The whole team is way better than what I expected.
I would say he deff. took his game to a new level.
Obviously not a Kobe or even Granger level, but for him.
I said it before, he should aspire to play like Billups.
He has the tools & if he ever could get there that would be great for him!

Kuq_e_Zi91
03-06-2009, 07:27 AM
I wonder if his inconsistency early in the season had anything to do with not being acclimated to a new system under JOB. We'd see him make silly turnovers and wonder what he was doing. Could this be because he just wasn't on the same page with his teammates?

He's been playing great lately, but most importantly he's been playing within himself and under control. You can tell he looks much more comfortable.

DocHolliday
03-06-2009, 12:11 PM
I can't even really believe this is even a thought.This team should be looking forward to 2011 and saving as much cap space for that summer as possible. Guys like Jack are a dime a dozen. JMO

I agree with this. This board is very "what have you done for me lately" with the Pacers and since Jack has been productive, he gets a resounding "Keep him" vote. I think when everyone comes back healthy Jack will be on the bench again, offering little more than other cheaper options could offer.

pristinecollector
03-06-2009, 09:58 PM
Jack is doing some spectacular things for this Pacers team. Not only has his play stepped up, he is one of the most approachable players on the team. He is always interacting with the fans before the game. Just an all around great player and nice guy. Just what we need here in Indy.

Coop
03-07-2009, 12:26 AM
I have held off on asking the following question because I honestly don't get to watch many games. Being a student at IU, the dorms don't get FSI on cable and my only resource for watching games is trying to catch them on justin.tv or some other online source. Even then, it seems I'm so busy that I might catch one game a week if I'm lucky. Having said that, I've noticed some similarities among numbers with Jack at his current age (25) and Chauncey Billups at the same age. I have probably watched less of Jack than over half of this board, so I could be completely off base with this idea, but does anyone else see similarities in the development of these two players?

At age 25, Billups was in Minnesota and was considered a SG in a PG's body. Most didn't feel he could fully acclimate to the PG position and he was shipped out to Detroit. It wasn't until his 2nd year in Detroit (27 yrs old) that he really lived up to his potential. Is it possible that we could see the same thing out of Jack? After he came over last offseason, we heard a lot about him not being capable of running the PG position full-time, similar to Billups. This is where I would have to ask those who have gotten to watch more of JJ this year to chime in. Has he shown the ability to do what others told us wasn't possible? If not, does it seem as if he at least has the potential to do so? Has he improved throughout the year with his ballhandling and decision making? Judging from stats alone, it seems as if he has since his number of turnovers have reduced per 48 minutes. I probably wouldn't have even thought of this comparison if it wasn't for the fact that it seems JJ has the knack to knock down big shots, which reminded me of Chauncey.

Again, I could be completely off base here just because I personally haven't seen enough of him, but it would seem to me that we should at least give him another year or two. If he doesn't improve at all from this point on, at least we will have solidified to backup PG position as opposed to coming up with a makeshift rotation at the 1 spot like we do nearly every other year.

Here are the stats of both Billups and Jack from around the 21-25 age range. Jack came in a year older, which is why he has one less year on the following tables. The main stats I was looking at were the last two years. They show a similar pattern and if Jack follows in Chauncey's footsteps, it would seem he could be on pace for a breakout year next year.

Jack:

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a347/bmcteg98/Untitled.jpg


Billups:

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a347/bmcteg98/Untitled2.jpg

PaceBalls
03-07-2009, 02:57 AM
If there is any way they can keep JJack, he needs to be our future starting PG long term. I think TJ should be coming off the bench if we keep him over the next couple years. TJ would be great energy off the bench ala Jason Terry but faster.
However, JJack needs to be the teams floor leader and general next year for us to really be a good team IMO.
I really hope they find a way to sign Jack long term here.

Kemo
03-07-2009, 03:23 AM
As much as I like TJ , and really would love to see him elevate his game to a new level , I am not so sure he is the best option for us at PG ..

He has all the tools to BE awesome .. and I am still pulling for him , but if Jack would work on his handles more, as well as working on his distribution (assists) , between now and the start of next season , I could definitely see Jack taking over as starting pg .. But I what I REALLY want to see is Diener step up into the PRIMARY backup PG role ..

I can't stress enough , how much I like Diener , and his game against the Kings last week , I think, SHOWS what he is capable of in that type of role playing 25 minutes ..
I think since Travis, has gotten healthy (injury-wise) , his shooting stroke is awesome, and his accuracy has been real good .. You can REALLY tell when he shoots the 3 , how he has alot more lift in his shot which attributes to his accuracy ..

A combination of Jack/Diener would be awesome ..IF they can continue to play as good as they have been lately and gain some consistancy .

I think that unless TJ really works to improve over the summer and early into next season , that we should be looking to package him up in a deal to get a much needed "defensive cog" for our team..

I hate saying that, cause I really DO like TJ , and WANT to see him succeed as an Indiana Pacer , but unless he can prove it between now , and the trade deadline next year , I see little reason for us to keep him ..

larry
03-07-2009, 07:00 AM
As much as I like TJ , and really would love to see him elevate his game to a new level , I am not so sure he is the best option for us at PG ..

He has all the tools to BE awesome .. and I am still pulling for him , but if Jack would work on his handles more, as well as working on his distribution (assists) , between now and the start of next season , I could definitely see Jack taking over as starting pg .. But I what I REALLY want to see is Diener step up into the PRIMARY backup PG role ..

I can't stress enough , how much I like Diener , and his game against the Kings last week , I think, SHOWS what he is capable of in that type of role playing 25 minutes ..
I think since Travis, has gotten healthy (injury-wise) , his shooting stroke is awesome, and his accuracy has been real good .. You can REALLY tell when he shoots the 3 , how he has alot more lift in his shot which attributes to his accuracy ..

A combination of Jack/Diener would be awesome ..IF they can continue to play as good as they have been lately and gain some consistancy .

I think that unless TJ really works to improve over the summer and early into next season , that we should be looking to package him up in a deal to get a much needed "defensive cog" for our team..

I hate saying that, cause I really DO like TJ , and WANT to see him succeed as an Indiana Pacer , but unless he can prove it between now , and the trade deadline next year , I see little reason for us to keep him ..

If you think the Pacers would be a better team w/ Travis as our main PG over TJ than you should never ever talk about basketball ever again.
TJ Ford's teams have never missed the playoffs & he hasn't played on the Lakers or any team like that. I hate how people on this board hate on TJ.
He is why Murphy is having his best year ever & to a degree why Danny was as well.
Danny would be good w/o TJ, but you can never have enough ball handlers that can get to the hole. What that does to the team on defense is more than you understand I guess.

larry
03-07-2009, 07:02 AM
I read your post again & I'm just amazed!! Jesus trade TJ just like the Raptors.
See what happens. He is untouchable in a trade barring an injury.
TJ pwns you!!!!

Kemo
03-07-2009, 07:07 AM
lol whatever dude ...

Anyone who can't see the WHOLE team plays better with Diener running the point for 20-25 mpg , is either blind, or in denial...

Note: Denial isn't just a river in Egypt ..

duke dynamite
03-07-2009, 10:42 AM
lol whatever dude ...

Anyone who can't see the WHOLE team plays better with Diener running the point for 20-25 mpg , is either blind, or in denial...

Note: Denial isn't just a river in Egypt ..
Kemo, you never cease to amaze me.

Diener is a guy you want running the floor, whether he comes off the bench or not. I'm not going to go as far as say he is a starter, but heck, last year he did a great job starting.

Kemo, you should never talk basketball...ever! You clearly know what you are talking about.

:P

Kemo
03-07-2009, 02:20 PM
lmao ..

ya I wouldn't say Diener is ready to be a starter (yet) lol notice how I put yet ? ;)
lol

I think his B-ball IQ and handles is the best on the team... IQ only rivaled by Dunleavy
The guy has eyes in the back of his head.. We seen this when he first come here , but his teamates at the time weren't ready for them no-look or unexpected passes out of nowhere .. It seems now our guys have gotten used to it , and it makes the team so much better.. and it's them amazing little things that I enjoy watching with Travis..


but ya , I really think Travis is PERFECT for about 20 minutes per game .. maybe a little bit more if he is playing well..

One thing I will say about Travis , is the kid has heart..
As in size , you can't teach a player to have heart , and a genuine love for the game..

and yes he ran the team very well.. the problem was he was in pain, and we were a team in shambles with all the injuries and everyone trying to gel with each other ..

I still say if Jack can improve his ball-handling/decision making and get his assists up, he would make a very nice pg... as someone else said in the mold of billups... but Jack has got to want to improve these things and execute...

Mr. Sobchak
03-07-2009, 02:24 PM
lmao ..

ya I wouldn't say Diener is ready to be a starter (yet) lol notice how I put yet ? ;)
lol

I think his B-ball IQ and handles is the best on the team... IQ only rivaled by Dunleavy
The guy has eyes in the back of his head.. We seen this when he first come here , but his teamates at the time weren't ready for them no-look or unexpected passes out of nowhere .. It seems now our guys have gotten used to it , and it makes the team so much better..


but ya , I really think Travis is PERFECT for about 20 minutes per game .. maybe a little bit more if he is playing well..

and yes he ran the team very well.. the problem was he was in pain, and we were a team in shambles with all the injuries and everyone trying to gel with each other ..

I still say if Jack can improve his ball-handling/decision making and get his assists up, he would make a very nice pg... as someone else said in the mold of billups... but Jack has got to want to improve these things and execute...



Travis is an alright change of pace guard but how can you justify playing him 20 minutes with the way he plays defense? Team defense starts at the point guard spot. On top of that the guy is just not a very good shooter despite what Bird tried to sell us..He shoots sub 40% for his career - although he is shooting better this year.

imawhat
03-07-2009, 02:39 PM
Jarrett is starting to finally look like the player I saw in Portland. The comparison to Billups is interesting, but I don't remember enough about Chauncey to say Jack could become the team's point guard. His improved play has come at shooting guard, the position that made most of us cringe when paired with Jack.

Anyway, the most impressive improvement to me is the lessening of boneheaded plays. There have been considerably less turnovers lately. He's also shown that he has a near lethal runner in the lane. That alone is enough to make him valuable on the team.

Also, I've seen very small glimpses of his defense from Portland creeping back into his game. He was a much better defender there. He has the potential to be a very physical defender, and I'm waiting for that to click.


re: Travis: it's clear to me that Travis is still the #1 option as an offensive point guard.

Anthem
03-07-2009, 04:16 PM
I remember Tinsley absolutely destroying Billups in Minnesota. I thought Detroit was crazy to give him the MLE.

Whoops.

larry
03-07-2009, 07:19 PM
Thanks for a good post IAMWHAT
I been saying he has a body & skill set like Billups. He doesnt really fit a PG or SG.
Still he can be good & use that to his advantage.
I'm glad that guy posted stats that backup the comparison.
The stats really shoot up for Billups after that.
JJ prob wont ever get there, but hey he should still be a Pacer.
I like his toughness & durability.

As for the TJ vs. Travis debate, hahahaha.
Why is it even a debate? Travis is cool but he has to play w/ slashers. He isn't getting to the ring.
He needs Hibbert in because even Steve Blake abuses him on D.
What am I denying KEMO?
The fact your quotes are original?
Maybe you & Duke can meet Travis at a cheap motel & give him another game ball, hahaha.
Travis can stay if hes 3rd option & can even play when he is hot from 3. The end

larry
03-07-2009, 07:48 PM
The Billups thing was me many threads ago. It wasn't meant to say JJ is as good.
Kemo do your homework
Travis has a basketball IQ rivaled by ONLY Duns?
So Travis knows more about playing then Danny?
I laugh at your posts the 1st time & for some reason nearly spit my drink out on the 2nd pass.
You realize you use all caps on words like GREAT & PERFECT when talking about Travis?
Iverson "We talking bout Travis!"
Youre right the other teams go on runs not due to Travis's D...
Its because the other 4 Pacers can't grab his awesome no look passes you see him throwing.

Hahaha, thanks for making my day!! Hahahahaha

imawhat
03-07-2009, 08:13 PM
As for the TJ vs. Travis debate, hahahaha.
Why is it even a debate? Travis is cool but he has to play w/ slashers. He isn't getting to the ring.
He needs Hibbert in because even Steve Blake abuses him on D.
What am I denying KEMO?
The fact your quotes are original?
Maybe you & Duke can meet Travis at a cheap motel & give him another game ball, hahaha.
Travis can stay if hes 3rd option & can even play when he is hot from 3. The end

Travis isn't as good at penetrating as TJ, but he's still very effective. And we've seen him finish at the rim in two consecutive games, which leads me to believe his foot is better.

Most importantly though is that his teammates still expect the ball from him and he's good at setting them up. TJ's assist numbers have dropped because he's dribbling the ball away and he no longer looks.

As far as shooting goes, his numbers are improved in less minutes, which is a rarity for his position. As I predicted, his 3% is up significantly (41% from 31%) because he made the same adjustment to his shooting stroke (stopped drifting on release) that Dunleavy made last year.

And I can't believe I'm going to say this, but his defense has also improved dramatically. He's the best off-the-ball point guard defender we have (excellent at ball denial) and he's no longer getting burned as easily (though he still below average at defense).

When our offense stalls, he comes in and gets it going again. This is why, imo, the Jack/Ford starting lineup has worked. More time for Travis.

larry
03-07-2009, 08:47 PM
so you like duns, granger, tj, & jack starting?
you would bring travis as your 1st wing/backcourt sub?
obviously i mean if we are at full health.

larry
03-07-2009, 08:55 PM
id bring in jack as a backing pg to tj.
we need more size. Id move dun/danny to the 2 & bring in rush for subbing.
travis would play sparingly.
i'll watch his d close vs the clips... we'll see
just as long as your pg role call is NOT
1. Travis
2. JJ
3. TJ

larry
03-07-2009, 08:56 PM
so you like duns, granger, tj, & jack starting?
you would bring travis as your 1st wing/backcourt sub?
obviously i mean if we are at full health.

duke dynamite
03-08-2009, 01:43 AM
Maybe you & Duke can meet Travis at a cheap motel & give him another game ball, hahaha.

That sounds like an awesome idea. I wish I were smart enough to come up with a plan that GREAT.

CENSORED. Wow, oops. I'd hate to get another threatening PM from you. I'd better keep my mouth shut.

idioteque
03-08-2009, 12:54 PM
Jack should stay a Pacer. However I think Jack and Ford are incredibly redundant (except TJ ain't a SG) and that we should try to trade Ford and draft a PG that is more of a facilitator. Jack is an excellent backup PG and he can play the 2 as well, which is important since right now I expect nothing from Dunleavy ever again. Maybe Dunleavy will pan out to be okay in the future but I am keeping my expectations low.

However it wouldn't surprise me if the team just kept TJ and let Jack go because of their respective contract situations. Really the only reason I would keep Jack over TJ is due to TJ's durability issues. But at this point it may be more financially expedient to keep TJ. But there is no need to have them both and I am really starting to think that next year it would be TJ OR Ford/Deiner/rookie PG in our rotation.

At the same time, I don't want Jack playing ahead of Rush forever. Jack however is a great insurance policy if Rush doesn't pan out, even though I think he will.

The more the Pacers offseason things to do list becomes apparent the more I think we're NOT going to draft a PF.

Anthem
03-08-2009, 02:25 PM
I'd really like to see us run Jack/Rush/Granger/Murphy/Hibbert for a while and see how that looks. I keep hearing people say Jack's not a facilitator, but I'm not sure he's any less of one than TJ.

Infinite MAN_force
03-08-2009, 03:06 PM
Jack should stay a Pacer. However I think Jack and Ford are incredibly redundant (except TJ ain't a SG) and that we should try to trade Ford and draft a PG that is more of a facilitator. Jack is an excellent backup PG and he can play the 2 as well, which is important since right now I expect nothing from Dunleavy ever again. Maybe Dunleavy will pan out to be okay in the future but I am keeping my expectations low.

However it wouldn't surprise me if the team just kept TJ and let Jack go because of their respective contract situations. Really the only reason I would keep Jack over TJ is due to TJ's durability issues. But at this point it may be more financially expedient to keep TJ. But there is no need to have them both and I am really starting to think that next year it would be TJ OR Ford/Deiner/rookie PG in our rotation.

At the same time, I don't want Jack playing ahead of Rush forever. Jack however is a great insurance policy if Rush doesn't pan out, even though I think he will.

The more the Pacers offseason things to do list becomes apparent the more I think we're NOT going to draft a PF.

Read my mind. I am willing to bet that the pacers draft Ty Lawson and trade TJ in the offseason... Lawson is small and quick like TJ but he plays more like a true PG. Ford's tendency to over dribble has to get on Obrien's nerves in an offense predicated on ball movement.

Jack is just a valuable player. Period. Ideally I don't think he is a starter, but he is the perfect fill in starter and makes a great bench player who can play two positions. Early in the year I was kind of down on him but he has really improved, especially with his decision making.

dannygranger
03-08-2009, 03:31 PM
alot of people are raving about how good Travis has been the last few games and he has, but the same people raving about him and wanting to sign him to a long contract are the same ones who will complain when he has a bad game. its an endless loop.

idioteque
03-08-2009, 06:45 PM
Read my mind. I am willing to bet that the pacers draft Ty Lawson and trade TJ in the offseason... Lawson is small and quick like TJ but he plays more like a true PG. Ford's tendency to over dribble has to get on Obrien's nerves in an offense predicated on ball movement.

Jack is just a valuable player. Period. Ideally I don't think he is a starter, but he is the perfect fill in starter and makes a great bench player who can play two positions. Early in the year I was kind of down on him but he has really improved, especially with his decision making.

Interesting idea, I could see us drafting Lawson as well.

To make a long story short our backcourt situation is WAY more confusing than most people are giving it credit for right now and may even receive more attention this year than the frontcourt.

owl
03-08-2009, 06:57 PM
I'd really like to see us run Jack/Rush/Granger/Murphy/Hibbert for a while and see how that looks. I keep hearing people say Jack's not a facilitator, but I'm not sure he's any less of one than TJ.

Jack may not be as flashy as TJ but he gets the job done. Jack won't dominate the ball
as much either. I believe it would be a serious mistake to let JJ go. How many 6'3"
PG's are there with decent defense. Plus I like his drive and passion for the game.

D-BONE
03-08-2009, 08:42 PM
I'd really like to see us run Jack/Rush/Granger/Murphy/Hibbert for a while and see how that looks. I keep hearing people say Jack's not a facilitator, but I'm not sure he's any less of one than TJ.

I like the first idea. I also think you hit the nail on the head with the second statement.

And combine that with the idea from a couple other recent posts-that Jack is valubale in terms of durability and ability to competently play two positons-and I think you have an imperative to try and move TJ and resign JJ.

The key is that, while JJ may not be a 1st string PG, TJ is not significantly better in terms of traditional PG qualities. All this said, if we keep Jack, I'd like to see him improve his D. At times it looks good, but those times are too few and far between right now.

MrSparko
03-08-2009, 08:48 PM
Maybe his worsening D is due to the fact that he's been asked to carry a bigger offensive load with the Pacers. Also he's often guarding taller shooting guards instead of PGs.

Or is it possibly because of the system, or his own lack of will on that end?

Anthem
03-08-2009, 09:35 PM
Also he's often guarding taller shooting guards instead of PGs.
Yep. That seems like a pretty big deal to me.

Guys are going right over top of him. Even if your footwork is great, if you don't have height you're going to get burned.

That's why I'm uncomfortable with a 5'11" point guard and a 6'3" shooting guard.

McKeyFan
03-08-2009, 10:23 PM
I'd really like to see us run Jack/Rush/Granger/Murphy/Hibbert for a while and see how that looks. I keep hearing people say Jack's not a facilitator, but I'm not sure he's any less of one than TJ.

Good defensive squad. But lacks someone who can create. Might work until the game gets serious in the last quarter and defenses begin to lock down.

Basically, we need TJ or Quis in the game to be able to make things happen.

I think our best squad is:

Jack/Rush/Quis/Danny/ and Troy/Foster/Hibbert depending on matchups.

Anthem
03-08-2009, 10:37 PM
Good defensive squad. But lacks someone who can create. Might work until the game gets serious in the last quarter and defenses begin to lock down.
What? That squad has 3 of our best players at creating a shot... Jack, Danny, and Hibbert. Jack and Danny are the best 4th-quarter scorers on the squad, and Hibs is our only low post threat!

I really think the 5-man group I put out would be our most effective squad on offense, and almost (maybe subbing Quis for Troy) on defense. If everybody was healthy (including Dun), that's the squad I'd close with right now.

Justin Tyme
03-09-2009, 03:22 PM
It came to my attention today that "supposedly" Bird said "he wants to keep Jack long term." I understand it was in the Indianapolis Star. Does anyone that reads the Indianapolis Star know about this supposed statement by Bird?

denyfizle
03-09-2009, 03:26 PM
Gotta love Jack... I always liked his competitiveness even during times when he wasn't much of a big factor.

http://www.examiner.com/x-3586-Indiana-Pacers-Examiner~y2009m3d8-You-dont-know-Jack

count55
03-09-2009, 03:40 PM
It came to my attention today that "supposedly" Bird said "he wants to keep Jack long term." I understand it was in the Indianapolis Star. Does anyone that reads the Indianapolis Star know about this supposed statement by Bird?

Indianapolis Star
Jeff Rabjohns

http://www.indystar.com/article/20090309/SPORTS04/903090347/1088/SPORTS04


Pacers want to retain Jarrett Jack
By Jeff Rabjohns
Posted: March 9, 2009

In the Pacers' 100-94 win over Northwest Division-leading Denver, he scored a team-high 28 points.

When the Pacers needed a score in the final minute to beat the Clippers 106-105 on the road, who provided it? Jack. Near the end of the third quarter when they had one more possession to nudge a little closer, who hit a big 3-pointer? Jack again.
(2 of 2)

That's all there is...there's a problem with their publish...I assume the link will work when fixed.

OakMoses
03-09-2009, 04:24 PM
I'd really like to see us run Jack/Rush/Granger/Murphy/Hibbert for a while and see how that looks. I keep hearing people say Jack's not a facilitator, but I'm not sure he's any less of one than TJ.

I don't know that it's a problem with Jack being a facilitator. The problem Jack seems to have as a PG are twofold. The first is that he often makes silly turnovers when trying to push the ball up the floor. When he's asked to do this, he often gets out of control and makes one of the TO's that drive many of us crazy. The second problem seems to be purely mental. When he's playing PG, he looks for his own offense less. He doesn't attack as much, and he doesn't play with as much confidence. The upside about these problems is that he could potentially be coached out of them. If O'Brien can accomplish that, Jack could become a good starting PG.

As for the Jack/Billups comparison, I've been saying it for a while now...
http://www.pacersdigest.com/apache2-default/showpost.php?p=657098&postcount=189

ToasterBusVIP
03-09-2009, 05:20 PM
Good defensive squad. But lacks someone who can create. Might work until the game gets serious in the last quarter and defenses begin to lock down.

Basically, we need TJ or Quis in the game to be able to make things happen.

I think our best squad is:

Jack/Rush/Quis/Danny/ and Troy/Foster/Hibbert depending on matchups.

Maybe...but that wouldn't be the case for long, I don't think. Rush has the potential as we've all seen to excellent and creating, he has some great moves to the basket. Hibbert has some real nice moves and he needs to get that hook-shot to be more consistent, but I forsee him being able to work for his own shot in the very near future. When you have two guys that can create their own shots, you can create enough havoc for the defense to help the guys who can't (spot up shooters).

count55
03-09-2009, 06:54 PM
OK...the Star can't seem to get their **** together, but RealGM's Wiretap has more story:

http://basketball.realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/57799/20090309/pacers_want_to_re_sign_jarrett_jack/#
No author listed...assume it's a RealGM synopsis of the Jeff Rabjohns article in the Star


Jarrett Jack has been a crucial part of the Pacers this season and the team would like to retain him this offseason when he becomes a restricted free agent.

Jack is making $2 million this season in the final year of his first contract governed by the rookie scale.

"I think any player would like to find a place they can call home because there's so much moving around in the league, you never get to stay stationary," Jack said.

"I definitely would love to stay here. This is my first time going through the free agent process. Hopefully it's over sooner than later."

"There are people in the league that can play both positions, but few can play both at the level Jarrett plays them," said Pacers coach Jim O'Brien.

"This is a professional basketball league, and you can't get any more professional than Jarrett Jack," Bird said while watching a recent team workout. "He's done everything that you're supposed to do as a basketball player.

"He plays tough, practices hard, plays hard, spends time after practice working his game. He's a great teammate. He's what this league should be about, and I think it's an honor for us to have him as an Indiana Pacer."

RealGM Note: Jack is ranked 89th in season FIC and has a Reina Value of +299%.

Their link is the same as the one below, which is still screwed up.

Anthem
03-09-2009, 08:49 PM
But how much competition will there really be for him? There aren't going to be a ton of teams throwing money at him, I'd think.

Will Galen
03-09-2009, 08:55 PM
The full article is up now.

http://www.indystar.com/article/20090309/SPORTS04/903090347/1088/SPORTS04
Pacers want to retain Jarrett Jack


http://cmsimg.indystar.com/apps/pbcsi.dll/persbilde?Avis=BG&ID=jrabjohns&MaxW=60&MaxH=60
By Jeff Rabjohns (jeff.rabjohns@indystar.com)
Posted: March 9, 2009

<!--TOTAL ELEMENTS IN ARRAY: 18
TOTAL CHARACTERS IN ARRAY: 3013
TOTAL CHARACTERS IN PAGES: 2013
LAST PAGE CONTAINS: 1000
--><script type="text/javascript" language="Javascript">var numDivs ="2";if (GDN.Cookie.Exists("GCIONSN") ) { var GPCookie = GDN.Cookie.Get('GCIONSN'); var GPvalueEncData= GDN.Base64.Decode(GPCookie); var GPvalueDecData= GPvalueEncData.match(/GPvalue:([\w\@\.\-\%\|]+)/i); if(PaginationArticleCookie != PaginationArticleUrl || GPvalueDecData == null || GPvalueDecData[1] == 'undefined' || typeof(GPvalueDecData[0]) == 'undefined') { var saxoNextPage = "903090347%7C2%7C2"; var saxoPreviousPage = "903090347%7C1%7C2"; } } else { var saxoNextPage = "903090347%7C2%7C2"; var saxoPreviousPage = "903090347%7C1%7C2"; } </script><!--Saxotech Paragraph Count: 11
-->LOS ANGELES -- Indiana Pacers president Larry Bird said during the team's West Coast trip he wants to keep Jarret Jack long term.

The fourth-year guard in the midst of his best season will be a restricted free agent at the end of the season, meaning the Pacers can match any offer.

As the Pacers' play has improved since Jan. 1 and they've continued to win without injured All-Star forward Danny Granger, Jack has been one of the driving forces. But Bird said Jack's significance includes what people don't see in games.

"This is a professional basketball league, and you can't get any more professional than Jarrett Jack," Bird said while watching a recent team workout. "He's done everything that you're supposed to do as a basketball player.

"He plays tough, practices hard, plays hard, spends time after practice working his game. He's a great teammate. He's what this league should be about, and I think it's an honor for us to have him as an Indiana Pacer."

Jack is averaging career highs in points (12.6) and assists (3.9). A career 10 points per game scorer, Jack has averaged 21.9 points in the nine games since Granger went down with a foot injury.

Acquired in the offseason in a draft night deal with Portland, the 6-3 Jack came into the league as a point guard. He has played both point guard and shooting guard, but has been most effective starting alongside point guard T.J. Ford.

"There are people in the league that can play both positions, but few can play both at the level Jarrett plays them," said Pacers coach Jim O'Brien.
The point guard who spearheaded Georgia Tech to a 2004 NCAA national runner-up finish, Jack has made a number of big plays recently.

In the Pacers' 100-94 win over Northwest Division-leading Denver, he scored a team-high 28 points.

When the Pacers needed a score in the final minute to beat the Clippers 106-105 on the road, who provided it? Jack. Near the end of the third quarter when they had one more possession to nudge a little closer, who hit a big 3-pointer? Jack again.

His leadership, though, is the topic broached most frequently.

"He's a superb leader," O'Brien said. "He practices hard and he also has the ability to keep it loose with the coaches and the players.

"Some people are goof offs. He's not. He's a man's man from the standpoint, he comes to work, wants to enjoy work, wants other people around him to enjoy work, but they work."

Jack is making $2 million this season in the final year of his first contract governed by the rookie scale, and what it costs to keep him likely depends on offers from other teams.

"I think any player would like to find a place they can call home because there's so much moving around in the league, you never get to stay stationary," Jack said.

"I definitely would love to stay here. This is my first time going through the free agent process. Hopefully it's over sooner than later."

Granger aiming for Tuesday
Danny Granger said after Saturday's game he thinks he should be able to play Tuesday against Utah at Conseco Fieldhouse.

count55
03-09-2009, 08:59 PM
But how much competition will there really be for him? There aren't going to be a ton of teams throwing money at him, I'd think.

Worst case scenario: somebody gets silly and throws the full MLE at him.

Realistically, I still think we'll end up getting him for 3/$12 or 4/$16.

Never underestimate the likelihood of somebody getting silly, though.

pwee31
03-09-2009, 09:54 PM
The full article is up now.

http://www.indystar.com/article/20090309/SPORTS04/903090347/1088/SPORTS04
Pacers want to retain Jarrett Jack


http://cmsimg.indystar.com/apps/pbcsi.dll/persbilde?Avis=BG&ID=jrabjohns&MaxW=60&MaxH=60
By Jeff Rabjohns (jeff.rabjohns@indystar.com)
Posted: March 9, 2009

<!--TOTAL ELEMENTS IN ARRAY: 18
TOTAL CHARACTERS IN ARRAY: 3013
TOTAL CHARACTERS IN PAGES: 2013
LAST PAGE CONTAINS: 1000
--><script type="text/javascript" language="Javascript">var numDivs ="2";if (GDN.Cookie.Exists("GCIONSN") ) { var GPCookie = GDN.Cookie.Get('GCIONSN'); var GPvalueEncData= GDN.Base64.Decode(GPCookie); var GPvalueDecData= GPvalueEncData.match(/GPvalue:([\w\@\.\-\%\|]+)/i); if(PaginationArticleCookie != PaginationArticleUrl || GPvalueDecData == null || GPvalueDecData[1] == 'undefined' || typeof(GPvalueDecData[0]) == 'undefined') { var saxoNextPage = "903090347%7C2%7C2"; var saxoPreviousPage = "903090347%7C1%7C2"; } } else { var saxoNextPage = "903090347%7C2%7C2"; var saxoPreviousPage = "903090347%7C1%7C2"; } </script><!--Saxotech Paragraph Count: 11
-->LOS ANGELES -- Indiana Pacers president Larry Bird said during the team's West Coast trip he wants to keep Jarret Jack long term.

The fourth-year guard in the midst of his best season will be a restricted free agent at the end of the season, meaning the Pacers can match any offer.

As the Pacers' play has improved since Jan. 1 and they've continued to win without injured All-Star forward Danny Granger, Jack has been one of the driving forces. But Bird said Jack's significance includes what people don't see in games.

"This is a professional basketball league, and you can't get any more professional than Jarrett Jack," Bird said while watching a recent team workout. "He's done everything that you're supposed to do as a basketball player.

"He plays tough, practices hard, plays hard, spends time after practice working his game. He's a great teammate. He's what this league should be about, and I think it's an honor for us to have him as an Indiana Pacer."

Jack is averaging career highs in points (12.6) and assists (3.9). A career 10 points per game scorer, Jack has averaged 21.9 points in the nine games since Granger went down with a foot injury.

Acquired in the offseason in a draft night deal with Portland, the 6-3 Jack came into the league as a point guard. He has played both point guard and shooting guard, but has been most effective starting alongside point guard T.J. Ford.

"There are people in the league that can play both positions, but few can play both at the level Jarrett plays them," said Pacers coach Jim O'Brien.
The point guard who spearheaded Georgia Tech to a 2004 NCAA national runner-up finish, Jack has made a number of big plays recently.

In the Pacers' 100-94 win over Northwest Division-leading Denver, he scored a team-high 28 points.

When the Pacers needed a score in the final minute to beat the Clippers 106-105 on the road, who provided it? Jack. Near the end of the third quarter when they had one more possession to nudge a little closer, who hit a big 3-pointer? Jack again.

His leadership, though, is the topic broached most frequently.

"He's a superb leader," O'Brien said. "He practices hard and he also has the ability to keep it loose with the coaches and the players.

"Some people are goof offs. He's not. He's a man's man from the standpoint, he comes to work, wants to enjoy work, wants other people around him to enjoy work, but they work."

Jack is making $2 million this season in the final year of his first contract governed by the rookie scale, and what it costs to keep him likely depends on offers from other teams.

"I think any player would like to find a place they can call home because there's so much moving around in the league, you never get to stay stationary," Jack said.

"I definitely would love to stay here. This is my first time going through the free agent process. Hopefully it's over sooner than later."

Granger aiming for Tuesday
Danny Granger said after Saturday's game he thinks he should be able to play Tuesday against Utah at Conseco Fieldhouse.

I saw on the bottomline of NBAtv that he's aiming towards the Hawks game? Who knows, I hope he comes back soon, and everyone else can stay healthy, so we can make this playoff one to remember

As for Jack. I couldn't stand his turnovers early in the year that cost us a few games, but he has really impressed me overall, and especially since the Granger injury.

Hopefully we keep him around. The guy knows the system, plays hard every night, is young and is talented... that's a keeper to me

vnzla81
03-10-2009, 05:41 AM
I like Jack but I think he is going to have an Austin Crochere tipe of contract, they guy did good in one season and the pacers gave him and stupid contract, now the pacers think that they have the next Jason Kidd and they are going to sign him for at least 7mil a year and 6 years, his numbers are good now because the other startes are hurt, that happens to everybody also counting the extra motivation to get a new contract next year(the same thing with Marquis)

count55
03-10-2009, 06:00 AM
I like Jack but I think he is going to have an Austin Crochere tipe of contract, they guy did good in one season and the pacers gave him and stupid contract, now the pacers think that they have the next Jason Kidd and they are going to sign him for at least 7mil a year and 6 years, his numbers are good now because the other startes are hurt, that happens to everybody also counting the extra motivation to get a new contract next year(the same thing with Marquis)

No, they're not.

vnzla81
03-10-2009, 07:30 AM
No, they're not.

you never know until a deal is done I would say 5mil a year for 5years and the 6 with a team option, now his value is higher because Larry said that he loves him.

count55
03-10-2009, 08:05 AM
you never know until a deal is done I would say 5mil a year for 5years and the 6 with a team option, now his value is higher because Larry said that he loves him.

$5 mil is possibility, but I strongly expect the Simons to limit any contracts to 4 years or less. Granger was an exception.

However, I consider the $7mm figure an impossibility. First, no other team would offer that high, and second, it would guarantee the Pacers would be in the luxury tax. It is about as likely as us giving Jamaal Tinsley an extension.

OakMoses
03-10-2009, 08:58 AM
A couple of things should be pointed out here.

1. Jarret Jack is not averaging a career high in assists this season as the article states. He averaged 5.3 for the Blazers 2 years ago when he was the starting PG.

2. Bird, Morway, and the Simons are not stupid. They don't think he's the next Jason Kidd. They're not going to pay him $7 million. I'd guess what they're doing is saying "Jarret, we want you to be here" so that he feels wanted. Then they'll let the the FA market determine his value. Hopefully, the FA market will be as bad for players as many are predicting, then we can get Jack for a decent price. My guess would be that they'll match anything up to about $5 million.