PDA

View Full Version : Jack vs. Daniels



Shade
03-12-2009, 06:09 PM
The Pacers are unlikely to retain both Jarrett and Quis after this season due to luxury tax considerations. Which one should they retain?

Spirit
03-12-2009, 06:37 PM
Jack by a hair

Erik
03-12-2009, 06:38 PM
It's pretty tough for me to decide. Quis is one of my favorite players but I'll go with Jack because he keeps our PG situation deeper.

duke dynamite
03-12-2009, 06:39 PM
Jack Daniels is good.

Bball
03-12-2009, 06:41 PM
Johnnie vs Walker

-------------------
Sorry... that's all I can think of when I read the title of this thread.

count55
03-12-2009, 06:49 PM
I chose Jack because he's younger, probably cheaper, more durable, and I just like him better.

It would be easy to go either way.

duke dynamite
03-12-2009, 06:58 PM
I'll keep Jack.

Infinite MAN_force
03-12-2009, 07:08 PM
Jack by a mile.

Nothing against quis, its just... people forget. I am willing to bet it wont be long before hes an overpaid injury prone player who STILL cant shoot from the perimeter to save his life. People like him because of the contract right now.

MyFavMartin
03-12-2009, 07:44 PM
If we pick up Daniels' option, it's only for a year. So it's potential tradebait. And he's a good player.

But I don't think the Pacers will have that option.

They will sign Jack to a reasonable deal.

BlueNGold
03-12-2009, 07:49 PM
Quis. I understand the financial situation, but it's not my money and I don't like that small-ball stuff where Jack is the SG or SF. Also, I think Quis is more talented.

I actually don't like either of them, but I dislike Quis less....and I think Diener is just as good as Jack overall and much better running the offense. Losing Jack when you have Diener on the bench is like losing nothing. Neither are going to beat good teams.

BlueNGold
03-12-2009, 07:50 PM
If we pick up Daniels' option, it's only for a year. So it's potential tradebait. And he's a good player.

But I don't think the Pacers will have that option.

They will sign Jack to a reasonable deal.

I agree with this. I do think it's unlikely they retain Quis simply because of the money.

ilive4sports
03-12-2009, 08:30 PM
Jack Daniels is good.
Agreed, especially this season:alcohol:

I'd take Jack because he can fill in at both PG and SG where we all know Marquis can't really run PG. Plus i rather the depth we would have at PG by keeping Jack rather than the depth by keeping Daniels.

Einstein
03-12-2009, 09:00 PM
Do I have to consider estimated price and available budget?

MillerTime
03-12-2009, 09:12 PM
Jack for sure. You have to look at the price tag on each player. Daniels will cost about $7 Million and Jack could cost about $4 million. Saying to ignore the price tag is nonsense. if that were the case, I would re-sign both for the vet min

MyFavMartin
03-12-2009, 09:27 PM
I don't think Daniels will be valuable as an expiring contract because a lot of teams already have contracts that expire next next summer (2010). It might help to have a contract that size to package with some veterans/others to get a marquis name.... Someone like McGrady... but I don't see the Pacers adding to payroll or taking a risk with an injury-prone prima donna.

Haggard
03-12-2009, 09:38 PM
Jack, no doubt, for the reasons most people have already mentioned.
We are deeper at the wings and Jack can help out at SG should the need arise.

Anthem
03-12-2009, 09:46 PM
Jack. He's cheaper, and PGs are more valuable than swingmen who can't shoot.

Even though I like Quis a lot for a swingman who can't shoot.

Justin Tyme
03-12-2009, 09:56 PM
Jack.

I wanted him b4 the Pacers got him, and I'd rather have him than Daniels. Jack will be cheaper, doesn't have a history of injury problems, he can play both PG & SG, he's a tough player, can shoot the 3, and I like bald heads better than braids.

Shade
03-12-2009, 10:01 PM
Y'know, if we hadn't re-signed Foster, we could have probably kept both of these guys.

Kinda reminds me of when we re-signed Foster and Bender at the cost of Brad Miller.

Pacersfan46
03-12-2009, 10:06 PM
Y'know, if we hadn't re-signed Foster, we could have probably kept both of these guys.

Kinda reminds me of when we re-signed Foster and Bender at the cost of Brad Miller.

Always pointing out the bad stuff, ya negative nancy! Granted, it's true ..... but that's not the point!

Anyway, I'd keep Jack. Quis is okay and all, but I want to see Rush get playing time to see what we've really got if he can get comfortable in a role. Between that, and Quis's inability to shoot and he sometimes makes a decision that leaves me baffled.

Too easy for me personally. Jack 11 times out of 10.

-- Steve --

Major Cold
03-12-2009, 10:12 PM
If Daniels plays like this next year, and Dunleavy is not going to contribute, I would rather have Quis. We need perimeter defense and Quis can be used on more players than Jack. I say we let the option go and try to sign him for less. Then throught the vet minimum at Luther Head, merely for interesting thread titles next year.

dohman
03-12-2009, 10:54 PM
We need a backup PG more than we need a SG. Jack can play both, you do the math.

CableKC
03-12-2009, 10:56 PM
Where's the 'Trade Ford and keep both Jack and Marquis' option?

duke dynamite
03-12-2009, 10:59 PM
Where's the 'Trade Ford and keep both Jack and Marquis' option?
Well, we have to pay whoever we get forr Ford...

Kid Minneapolis
03-12-2009, 11:21 PM
Jack Daniels on the Pacers... looks like a missed promotional opportunity. :)

Will Galen
03-13-2009, 02:19 AM
I chose Jack because he's younger, probably cheaper, more durable, and I just like him better.

It would be easy to go either way.

I couldn't decide, but your reasoning just makes to much sense. Jack's younger, cheaper, and more durable. So I'm for keeping Jack too.

grace
03-13-2009, 07:24 AM
Johnnie vs Walker

-------------------
Sorry... that's all I can think of when I read the title of this thread.

I wondered how long it would be before someone went there. :cheers:

grace
03-13-2009, 07:31 AM
Y'know, if we hadn't re-signed Foster, we could have probably kept both of these guys.

Kinda reminds me of when we re-signed Foster and Bender at the cost of Brad Miller.

http://devilgraphics.com/jack-daniels/D780~Jack-Daniel-s-Black-Label-Posters.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://steelkaleidoscopes.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/08/21/fosters.gif

Hicks
03-13-2009, 07:32 AM
A good PG is more valuable than a good SG/SF.

BlueNGold
03-15-2009, 09:45 PM
A good PG is more valuable than a good SG/SF.

Very true.

Now...who is this good PG? Doesn't a good PG create opportunities for other players to score? Doesn't a good PG give you a sense of comfort when he has the ball...that he will do the right thing with it and deliver it to the right spot?

I am vastly outnumbered on this poll, so I must be wrong...but I really cannot stand how Jack runs this team...if that's what you want to call it. It reminds me of the feeling I got with Anthony Johnson...but with Anthony I always thought the opponent would steal the ball. With Jack, I just expect him to give it away. Maybe the stats say otherwise...because this is just a gut reaction.

idioteque
03-15-2009, 10:48 PM
Y'know, if we hadn't re-signed Foster, we could have probably kept both of these guys.

Kinda reminds me of when we re-signed Foster and Bender at the cost of Brad Miller.

Good observation, these are the kinds of mistakes that people usually overlook.

plutarch
03-15-2009, 11:08 PM
I am vastly outnumbered on this poll, so I must be wrong...but I really cannot stand how Jack runs this team...if that's what you want to call it. It reminds me of the feeling I got with Anthony Johnson...but with Anthony I always thought the opponent would steal the ball. With Jack, I just expect him to give it away. Maybe the stats say otherwise...because this is just a gut reaction.

i dont know if you watched the team this year that much but he doesnt run the point all that often, he usually plays sg

as with daniels, jack is better off the bench
neither one is a true starter, so why pay 7 mil on daniels when you know that when everyone is healthy he comes off the bench, wouldnt you rather have a guy like jack, who will make less than that by all estimates, off the bench
if we give jack about 4 mil a year, with what he gives you on the court, i would think that it is a good deal

Brad8888
03-17-2009, 06:29 PM
Marquis. Not even close. He impacts the game in more positive ways on both ends of the floor due to not making nearly as many mental mistakes, is a far better penetrator, and plays perimeter defense at a much higher level than Jack. Arguably nearly our most important player within the OB system due to his ability to fit into either the OB favored small ball with his quickness or other more traditional strategies that rely on penetration and perimeter help defenses. All bets would be off with a different coach, however, who may / may not be more prone toward utilizing more structure on offense and defense.

BlueNGold
03-17-2009, 07:32 PM
i dont know if you watched the team this year that much but he doesnt run the point all that often, he usually plays sg

as with daniels, jack is better off the bench
neither one is a true starter, so why pay 7 mil on daniels when you know that when everyone is healthy he comes off the bench, wouldnt you rather have a guy like jack, who will make less than that by all estimates, off the bench
if we give jack about 4 mil a year, with what he gives you on the court, i would think that it is a good deal

I'm not the one claiming Jack is a PG. I realize he plays at the 2 and, yes, I try not to watch. Consider the drop off from Reggie Miller to Jarrett Jack. Egads. Jarrett Jack, our starting SG...:rolleyes:

I think Quis' stock has risen since Dunleavy's injury. Also, as long as Murphy and Granger are available to launch 3's Quis is a player who fits on the court pretty well. He's longer and a better defender than the overrated and undersized Jack too....and we obviously need better defenders.

...and we have TJ and Diener to play PG. Both are better PG's. Both handle the ball better. I would trust Diener over either TJ and Jack with the ball.

...and we have Quis and Rush to play SG...both are better defenders. Both are long enough to contend with normal sized NBA SG's. Both are capable of creating a solid consistent rotation because they can almost always match up....while shorty can get abused.

Jack reminds me of Anthony Johnson. I always thought the opponent would steal the ball from AJ. With Jack, I always think he will simply give it to them. No confidence!