PDA

View Full Version : Predict Stephen Jackson's 04-05 Stats!



J-Wont
07-10-2004, 08:41 PM
I made this yesterday, now would be a good time to use it...
http://img74.photobucket.com/albums/v224/artestaholic/sjp.gif

zxc
07-10-2004, 08:56 PM
Those stats would be great. Probably be around that.. though probably a bit lower FG%. Gonna be interesting to see how him and Ron work together.

J-Wont
07-10-2004, 08:59 PM
Hmmm....I guess noone wants to predict anything :(
BTW - I have his predicted 2004-2005 stats - 35 min, 18.5 points, 5.1 rebounds, 3.6 assists. Very nice.

able
07-10-2004, 09:24 PM
Dream on, more like 11.1ppg @ 41.6% and 35% 3pt, 78% FT, 2.6 Rb and 2.4 Ast,adn finally: 5.4 to

bulletproof
07-10-2004, 09:31 PM
Dream on, more like 11.1ppg @ 41.6% and 35% 3pt, 78% FT, 2.6 Rb and 2.4 Ast,adn finally: 5.4 to



So you're saying he's not much of an upgrade over Reggie? Puh-leeeaze.

zxc
07-10-2004, 09:36 PM
With those numbers seems like he would be even worse then Reggie.

J-Wont
07-10-2004, 09:56 PM
Why hate on Stephen Jackson?
This stat padding crap is way overdone.
The fact is he put up fantastic stats, it's not his fault his teammates were so crappy. And if you take SJx off of Atlanta the team loses goes from being not very good to downright horrible.

able
07-10-2004, 10:11 PM
ok let's compare. but be reaonable, the P's are a few classes better then the Hawks, so it is more realistic to use his SanAn stats:

G GS MPG FG% 3P FT OFF DEF RPG APG SPG BPG TO PF PPG
80 58 28.2 .435 .320 .760 .80 2.80 3.60 2.3 1.56 .38 2.20 2.50 11.8
Reggie:
80 80 28.2 .438 .401 .885 .20 2.10 2.40 3.1 .81 .14 .85 1.20 10.0


All it tells me is that he took a LOT more shots the Reggie. All his stats are lower, if you insist, his Atl stats are no better:
80 78 36.8 .425 .340 .785 1.20 3.40 4.60 3.1 1.78 .25 2.79 2.70 18.1

Turnover - Ast almost 1 - 1!

Please don't make this guy out to be the second coming of anything but a bad contract, he'll do probably what we need him for, score anywhere in between 9 and 13 pts a game, behind Reggie.

servicable role-player with an extremely nice contract

indytoad
07-10-2004, 10:13 PM
Dream on, more like 11.1ppg @ 41.6% and 35% 3pt, 78% FT, 2.6 Rb and 2.4 Ast,adn finally: 5.4 to

That's about what he averaged in SA - with a few less turnovers - so this seems like the most likely scenario.

IndyToad
Looks just like Dr. Phil

zxc
07-10-2004, 10:23 PM
I don't think some of you being very fair. Yeah he is no Mcgrady or anything but he isn't a scrub. Guy has only been in the league 4 years and that year in San Antonio was his really first time contributing and playing big minutes on a quality team and he did very well. And last year was the first year he really played starter minutes the entire year. I think he will work out a bit better then that and show continued improvement over last year even though he isn't my ideal pick up.

Only reason I don't really like this all that much is because we are getting rid of Al for nothing. Yeah, he is making a little bit more then the MLE but I still think we coulda signed him out right for it. If we don't do anything with the MLE now which is pretty likely still kinda.. :unimpressed: But Jackson should be at the minimum a 15 ppg guy for us.

kybjones
07-10-2004, 10:23 PM
Anyone that thinks he's going to average 18 per game in Indy is out of their minds... he'll get 30 min, probably 11-13 points a game.

And I'll be covering my eyes when he's chucking up more ill-advised 3's.

bulletproof
07-10-2004, 10:28 PM
ok let's compare. but be reaonable, the P's are a few classes better then the Hawks, so it is more realistic to use his SanAn stats:

G GS MPG FG% 3P FT OFF DEF RPG APG SPG BPG TO PF PPG
80 58 28.2 .435 .320 .760 .80 2.80 3.60 2.3 1.56 .38 2.20 2.50 11.8
Reggie:
80 80 28.2 .438 .401 .885 .20 2.10 2.40 3.1 .81 .14 .85 1.20 10.0


All it tells me is that he took a LOT more shots the Reggie. All his stats are lower, if you insist, his Atl stats are no better:
80 78 36.8 .425 .340 .785 1.20 3.40 4.60 3.1 1.78 .25 2.79 2.70 18.1

Turnover - Ast almost 1 - 1!

Please don't make this guy out to be the second coming of anything but a bad contract, he'll do probably what we need him for, score anywhere in between 9 and 13 pts a game, behind Reggie.

servicable role-player with an extremely nice contract


Yet you were extremely high on J-Rich:

37.6*min...43.9 FG%...28.2 3P%...68.4 FT%...6.7 rpg...2.9 apg...2.5 TOs...1.1 stl...18.7 ppg

Talk about a 1:1 assist to turnover ratio!

Jax:

36.8 min...42.5 FG%...34.0 3P%...78.5 FT%...4.6 rpg...3.1 apg...2.8 TOs...1.8 stl...18.1 ppg

Arcadian
07-10-2004, 10:31 PM
The stats mean nothing. His improvement the second half was because SAR was traded and he got more shots. We play completely different from the Hawks. Towards the end there the Hawks were scoring (and getting scored on) in crazy amounts. They were Denver reincarnated. It isn't just that he played on a bad team its that he played on a bad team that just ran up and down the court.

I think Jackson will be a good fit but I will be happy and surprised with 15 per game.

Snickers
07-10-2004, 10:40 PM
Depends on whether he or Ron is the 2nd option.

able
07-10-2004, 10:41 PM
Bullet, comparing him to J-Rich who's 2 years in this league and bring so much more then shooting, AND is still working a lot of things out is not realistic, J-Rich will be twice as good in 2 years time, and probably command twice as much money :(

I have nothing against S. Jackson joining the Pacers, au contrair, but I have some serious thoughts about the money he's getting, and don't bring me this "the market says it is" crap because the market it what YOU want to fork out, not some idiot down the road.
The Pacers had the 5th highest payroll in this league and will either stay in that spot or climb, without using the MLE.

This guy is making equal/more money then Ron Artest! You now gonna tell me he's more talented then Ron?

He would've been a darned nice addition for 2/3's of the money he's getting and would be paid handsomely, what he is getting now can only be explained if this is what we do -eof- no more moves/signings and trades.

In that case we traded someone who wanted to go for what we could get that best filled our needs closest to the value we were losing.

He is indeed definitely a servicable roleplayer, but nothing more.

bulletproof
07-10-2004, 10:43 PM
The stats mean nothing. His improvement the second half was because SAR was traded and he got more shots. We play completely different from the Hawks. Towards the end there the Hawks were scoring (and getting scored on) in crazy amounts. They were Denver reincarnated. It isn't just that he played on a bad team its that he played on a bad team that just ran up and down the court.

I think Jackson will be a good fit but I will be happy and surprised with 15 per game.

Same thing could be said of GS.

Guess there will always be those wet blankets after any move. Oh well...

Arcadian
07-10-2004, 10:47 PM
The stats mean nothing. His improvement the second half was because SAR was traded and he got more shots. We play completely different from the Hawks. Towards the end there the Hawks were scoring (and getting scored on) in crazy amounts. They were Denver reincarnated. It isn't just that he played on a bad team its that he played on a bad team that just ran up and down the court.



I think Jackson will be a good fit but I will be happy and surprised with 15 per game.

Same thing could be said of GS.

Guess there will always be those wet blankets after any move. Oh well...


I never said anything about GS. I believe you are confusing me with Able.

bulletproof
07-10-2004, 11:11 PM
This guy is making equal/more money then Ron Artest! You now gonna tell me he's more talented then Ron?

Ron was a steal, able, a shrewd business move on Donnie's part.

J-Wont
07-10-2004, 11:21 PM
Ben Wallace didn't average 10/13/3 on the Magic. JO didn't average 20/10/3 on the Blazers. Ron didn't average 18/6/3/3 on the Bulls.
Players improve.
Stephen Jackson went from a nobody to an NBA 10th man to a major player on a championship team to a breakout semi-star all within 4 years. Thats very comparable to Ben Wallace. And do you know what made it possible for both men? Fantastic work ethics. And do you know what fantastic work ethics bring? Constant improvement.
I think Stephen Jackson is gonna become a star in Indiana, and I think his contract is gonna end up be a steal.

Young
07-10-2004, 11:25 PM
Ben Wallace didn't average 10/13/3 on the Magic. JO didn't average 20/10/3 on the Blazers. Ron didn't average 18/6/3/3 on the Bulls.
Players improve.
Stephen Jackson went from a nobody to an NBA 10th man to a major player on a championship team to a breakout semi-star all within 4 years. Thats very comparable to Ben Wallace. And do you know what made it possible for both men? Fantastic work ethics. And do you know what fantastic work ethics bring? Constant improvement.
I think Stephen Jackson is gonna become a star in Indiana, and I think his contract is gonna end up be a steal.

I hope your right.

I'm a big believer that if you work hard that it will pay off in the end so hopefully Jackson works hard.

But guys, I don't know that he will be a 15 point per game player. I think that the offense will be more balanced like it was with Brad. I think that Jackson and Ron will both average around 15 a game or so. But I hope i'm wrong and I hope both players keep up there high level of play.

Anthem
07-11-2004, 12:28 AM
I think he can get 16ppg easy.

ChicagoJ
07-11-2004, 01:19 AM
Anyone that thinks he's going to average 18 per game in Indy is out of their minds... he'll get 30 min, probably 11-13 points a game.

And I'll be covering my eyes when he's chucking up more ill-advised 3's.

but smiling when hes willing to take the clutch shot



My ***. That shot goes to JO. Just what we need, somebody else that thinks they're better offensively than they really are. :puke: I think Able's stats are about right on. 30 mpg, 11 ppg on 41% shooting, 2 assists, 3 rebs, 5 to's.

I predict he starts as many games next season as Pollard did last season. He's already getting the Pollard treatment. :rolleyes: I'm just waiting for somebody to say that Stephen Jackson will make us all forget about Reggie Miller.

I don't like this move at all. I can't believe this is the best we can get for Harrington.

:idea: Maybe in ninety-five days, we can trade Stephen Jackson for Mobley.

SoupIsGood
07-11-2004, 01:56 AM
Quit whining guys, Jackson is a quality player, he'll be fine for us. As for the money, he's only making a little over 7 a year.Thats not so bad.

Anthem
07-11-2004, 02:00 AM
You'd rather have Mobley than Jackson?

I don't like Mobley at all.

ChicagoJ
07-11-2004, 02:03 AM
You'd rather have Mobley than Jackson?

I don't like Mobley at all.

I don't like Jackson at all. But I guess I'm going to have to learn to. :(

NugzFan
07-11-2004, 03:02 AM
ill say 13-14 ppg, 5 rpg.

Kegboy
07-11-2004, 12:50 PM
As has been said, it depends on if he's the second option. Most everyone at the party felt that Reggie would still be starting (most everyone was not happy about that, though). Therefore, I don't see him possibly scoring more than 13 a game. I care a lot more about his shooting percentages and his assists, steals, and TO's than I do about how many points he scores. :unimpressed:

able
07-11-2004, 12:52 PM
Whoever starts, key will be if we can get 20+ from that position every night.

As it is all the stats Reggie puts up are still better then what Jackson puts up, so untill that changes I am sure Reggie will start.

Hicks
07-11-2004, 01:34 PM
As it is all the stats Reggie puts up are still better then what Jackson puts up,

18ppg 4rpg 3apg vs 10ppg 2rpg 3apg. Reggie is NOT better statistically.

able
07-11-2004, 01:38 PM
Hicks:

Reggie
G GS MPG FG% 3P FT OFF DEF RPG APG SPG BPG TO PF PPG
80 80 28.2 .438 .401 .885 .20 2.10 2.40 3.1 .81 .14 .85 1.20 10.0
Jacks
80 78 36.8 .425 .340 .785 1.20 3.4 4.60 3.1 1.78 .25 2.79 2.70 18.1

Sorry but these are large differences even

bulletproof
07-11-2004, 01:49 PM
able, as Kstat pointed out, Jackson has that killer instinct that has diminished in Reggie.

I'm going trust that Bird and Walsh knew what they were doing on this one. I gotta believe they were quite thorough with their research.

Hicks
07-11-2004, 01:49 PM
The only thing I see that Reggie's doing better at is FG and 3P%

Jackson should start.

bulletproof
07-11-2004, 01:54 PM
Exactly Hicks, and we really don't need a great 3-point shooter, we need a consistent outside shooter who can draw defenders out of the paint. Plus Jackson can take it to the hoop as well, something Reggie doesn't do much anymore.

able
07-11-2004, 01:57 PM
The only thing I see that Reggie's doing better at is FG and 3P%

Jackson should start.

Add to that same amount of Ast in less time, far less turnovers and a far better FT % and yes, you have one hell of an improvement.

Reggie is old, he will play less, but he will start, as he should with these stats, the newbie has to prove that he can be better first.
And JO wil be the go-to guy in clutch time, for the time being the newbie will have to carve his niche. Wanting to take the shot and making them are two different things.

According to the press the newbie has already declared to have no objection to coming of the bench behind Reggie so you can rest assured that this has already been discussed with him.

bulletproof
07-11-2004, 01:59 PM
I'll tell you what else excites me about this trade, we now have three guys who are more than capable of scoring 20+ points a night. Chances are, all three of them aren't going to be off at any given time.

Suaveness
07-11-2004, 02:23 PM
I'll tell you what else excites me about this trade, we now have three guys who are more than capable of scoring 20+ points a night. Chances are, all three of them aren't going to be off at any given time.

And the thing is, one of those players is a perimeter player. And that makes all the difference.

able
07-11-2004, 02:38 PM
In order for Jackson to make 20+ points on the percentages he's shooting he has to take a lot of shots, shots not taken by JO or Ron, do the maths first, then call the numbers.

Listen, once more I am ok with the trade, I am happy it it keeps Ron here and we do not tinker anymore with the rest of the team, I am happy we got Al out, and replaced him with a servicable SG, but that is about it.
We are playing a lot of money to a guy who is definitely not the second coming of TMac.

The guy had a great second half of the season when he was almost the only one left in Atlanta who could throw a ball up to begin with.
Yes his stats were padded the second half of the season, his SA stats are far more reasonable and comparable to what he will do here.
There is nothing to support the opinion that he will do 18+ ppg, absolutely nothing.

I calculated his shooting in the 1st half of the season (untill trade)
53 games, 3 DNP

FG % 40.6
3pt% 30.7
ppg 12.1

this is on the Atlanta Hawks, where his competition wasn't exactly the same as it will be on the Pacers, at more then 34 mpg.

Now, some more math:

75 shots per team average in a game

17.5 on average were taken by Jackson.

Now how do we distro the shots on the Pacers?

JO 20
Ron 17
Jackson 17
Tins 5
Reg 5
that leaves on average 9 shots for the rest of the team

now somewhat more realistic:

JO 20

Ron 15
Jackson 10
Reg 5
Tins 5

now we have 20 for the rest of the players.
@40% 30% that means that Jackson will score on average between 8 and 11 points, add a FT or two and you are exactly at the number i gave at the beginning of the thread.