Player-by-Player: Jarrett Jack
Minutes-- Last Year: 33.6 This Year: 27.2 Change: -6.4
Points-- Last Year: 12.0 This Year: 9.9 Change: -2.1
Field Goals Attempted-- Last Year: 8.9 This Year: 7.6 Change: -1.3
Field Goal Percentage-- Last Year: 45.4% This Year: 43.0% Change: -2.4%
Three-Pointers Attempted-- Last Year: 2.3 This Year: 2.3 Change: 0.0
Three-Point Percentage-- Last Year: 35.0% This Year: 34.2% Change: -0.8%
Free Throws Attempted-- Last Year: 3.5 This Year: 3.0 Change: -0.5
Free Throw Percentage-- Last Year: 87.1% This Year: 86.7% Change: -0.4%
Effective Field Goal Percentage-- Last Year: 49.9% This Year: 48.2% Change: -1.7%
Offensive Rebounds-- Last Year: 0.2 This Year: 0.5 Change: +0.3
Defensive Rebounds-- Last Year: 2.6 This Year: 3.3 Change: +0.7
Overall Rebounds-- Last Year: 2.8 This Year: 3.8 Change: +1.0
Assists-- Last Year: 5.7 This Year: 5.1 Change: -0.6
Steals-- Last Year: 1.2 This Year: 1.0 Change: -0.2
Blocks-- Last Year: 0.1 This Year: 0.0 Change: -0.1
Turnovers-- Last Year: 2.5 This Year: 2.9 Change: +0.4
Assist-to-Turnover Ratio-- Last Year: 2.28 This Year: 1.76 Change: -0.52
There are two things to know about Jarrett Jack this year. First, he did not have a good season overall. Second, he did not have nearly as bad of a season as most of his virulent detractors would paint…or more accurately to the extent he did have a disappointing season it did not have anywhere near the effect on the team that those detractors would claim. The criticism during the year was overstated to the point of being uncharitable. Had we cut Jarrett at the beginning of the season, how many wins would we have ended up with? My guess…right around 41, give or take. He played 20+ minutes, rain or shine, because there was nobody else at either guard spot to fill them. He did well some games, horribly some others…but in neither case did he warrant the unfortunate vitriol directed towards him. He was a back-up guard, and that’s it.
Among the most striking changes in Jarrett’s stats was his reduction in minutes. The starting role was open during training camp but Steve Blake took it from Jarrett and never relinquished it. This would be the third time in as many years the point guard position--and Jack’s role in it--had gone through a major overhaul, which may explain part of his difficulty. At the same time the NBA requires that you overcome those difficulties and produce anyway. The biggest question about Jarrett may be his ability to overcome his emotions. There’s no doubt he has heart when the leather meets the floor. His consistent willingness to drive shows that. It’s his overarching stability in question…his ability to fight through tough situations and confidence lapses and persevere. At least a couple times during the season he broke out with emotional outbursts on the floor, flagellating himself and apparently giving up. That can’t happen if you want to play in this league. To his credit these were short-lived and he ended up finishing the season strong, but then he’s always had ups and downs. He’ll need to develop emotional and statistical consistency if he wants to keep playing.
The good parts of Jarrett’s season basically overlapped the strengths he brought in. He’s always been most comfortable when he has license to score. With the ball in his hand and the rim in his sights he can produce. He was among the league leaders for three-point plays drawn from the bench. He hit his free throws well. His field goal percentage dropped from good to average for a guard, but you didn’t cringe when he looked to score. His points per game dropped about the same amount as his minutes, so that’s a neutral.
The most glaring negative, noted consistently throughout the year, was his increased turnovers (despite the decreased minutes). This was reflected particularly in his assist-to-turnover ratio, which went south dramatically. He never found a rhythm in the offense nor discovered the ability to run it. Neither did he prosper at the defensive end. He has always been a little slow to be guarding opposing points and too short for opposing twos, but this year he added a propensity to get lost in the defense. You don’t expect that from third-year players. The only thing he did somewhat better than years past was not getting obliterated by every pick set against him. Nonetheless, playing two positions may be too taxing for him at this stage when he has yet to settle into even one comfortably.
If Jarrett is to prosper he needs a large dose of stability. Last year when his job description was simple and he had veterans to play off of he performed well. This year when the game changed from night to night and there was nobody to steady the ship he got lost. If he remains in
Verdict:
Not quite sure about that season, Baby.
--Dave (blazersub@yahoo.com)
0 recs |
12 comments
Comments
Interesting stats
Jarrett’s scoring per minute and shooting percentages were roughly level with last year (slightly decreased, but a 1-2% variation in a single year is probably not statistically significant). However, his points per FG attempt actually improved. That tells me that, of his scoring attempt possessions (FG attempts plus fouls drawn), more of them were in the “fouls drawn” category.
That’s good and valuable—but it isn’t the primary asset we need out of that position.
His rebounding numbers actually improved, even though he played fewer minutes. That shows A) effort and B) willingness to step up where the team needs help. That’s very good to see. We did need help in that area.
Obviously, the turnovers were very bad. That’s exactly what we don’t need in that position. I think we saw some improvement as the season went along, though—by the end of the season, he wasn’t stepping out of bounds once a game.
Overall, it would not really be fair to say that he had a worse season than the year before. Based on turnovers, he wasted .5 possessions a game more than last year. Based on slightly reduced shooting percentage, he wasted perhaps another .1 possession on missed shots more than last year.
Balancing that, he got an additional 0.3 offensive rebounds. That is an additional 0.3 possessions a game that we wouldn’t have had otherwise. He got an additional 0.7 defensive rebounds. Presuming that teammates would have grabbed many of those if he hadn’t, we can probably assume an additional 0.1-0.2 possessions a game. So his rebounding improvement pretty much nets out, from a statistical standpoint, his turnovers and missed FGs.
But the problem is, with young players, you look for improvement. No one can look at Jarrett’s stats and see improvement this year. 3rd year guards are supposed to be improving. Other than rebounding, I can’t pinpoint a single thing that Jarrett did better this year. Perhaps his defense within a team defensive scheme was better. I don’t think his man defense was.
Jarrett brings a lot of intangibles, that will be missed. But if he survives this summer, he had better show real improvement in multiple areas next year, or he won’t survive the next summer. The NBA is tough.
Other people don't have as much practice at being wrong as I do -- HT, timbo
by jscot on Apr 24, 2008 12:30 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
It seems to me
That Jarrett has pretty much reached his ceiling. I don’t see him getting much quicker, and that’s his biggest liability on defense. If he could shoot the ball like Terry Porter did, he would probably stick on this roster.
Can I buy you a fish sandwich?
by silkybrown on Apr 24, 2008 12:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Jury still out
on whether or not Jarrett has reached his ceiling. He’s still young, of course. But he did little this year to prove you wrong.
I’ve defended Jarrett a lot on this site, because I think he has value, and potential to improve. He could end up being a decent role player on a good team, if he can A) improve on defense (doubtful) B) cut his turnovers (should be doable) and C) improve his shooting (should be doable). But he didn’t do anything this year that would cause my heart to be broken if he’s traded.
Other people don't have as much practice at being wrong as I do -- HT, timbo
by jscot on Apr 24, 2008 7:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm on the other side of the fence
I disagree with the assessment that Steve Blake took the Job from Jarrett. Jarrett played so bad in our first three games, Nate was pretty much forced to start Blake in his place. If Pritchard hadn’t gone out and gotten Steve Blake in the off-season, I fully believe we would have struggled to get much more than 30 wins this year. I’ll give the concession that we did play some good teams right off the bat. However, our guys had started practicing together on their own way before before any other team did, and we all hoped that would have given the Blazers a boost. Of all of our starters at the beginning of the season, it was Jarrett Jack that flat out got exposed by other teams as a point guard who can’t keep opposing guards in front of him, and a point guard that doesn’t do a good job taking care of the ball. Though Jarrett had some ups and downs, those two things just seemed to be a reoccuring theme for his season. I’ve said it a 100 times. Jarrett would have one good game for every two or three bad games he played. Many who are big Jarrett Jack fans fall in love with the one good game aspect, but sometimes forget that most of the time he isn’t playing up to that standard. That’s my opinon anyways.
Can I buy you a fish sandwich?
by silkybrown on Apr 24, 2008 12:45 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Jarrett
I like the guy and I hope he improves. I like him coming in off the bench. I have also prepared myself emotionally, in case he gets traded this summer. Right now he seems like a patch for this team and we need a permanent repair in the void he’s patching.
"We need a live rooster to take the curse off Jose's glove and nobody seems to know what to get Millie or Jimmy for their wedding present."
by tominhawaii on Apr 24, 2008 12:51 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
well
even with less minutes you would think his scoring would have at least stayed the same or improved a little since he came off the bench against the opponents 2nd team.
by Philthyanimal on Apr 24, 2008 10:00 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Jscot had it right, I think
You’d expect improvement. I’m not sure we saw much. He didn’t bomb but he didn’t inspire confidence either.
—Dave
by Dave on Apr 25, 2008 2:07 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
cute baby
and excellent caption. That about sums it up for me…
RUDY > MJ
by myemic23 on Apr 24, 2008 11:58 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Except his wrinkled nose
clearly says he needs a diaper change (is there a Jack metaphor in there somewhere?)
Aldridge said. "We feel like we can beat any team. We feel like we can beat the Spurs, Suns, Lakers, Mavericks, whoever any night right now, and we'll still be here when those teams get old and their guys retire. We're going to be here for a long time."
by lee3022 on Apr 25, 2008 9:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I've thought a lot about this
And I finally decided that Jack is gonna have a great bounce back year next season. He’ll be getting his lucky jersey number back, and thus his mojo. I just feel that Jack is gonna come back better than ever, either as a Blazer or a Net (because we traded for Harris, see).
Jack did not improve like a young dude should, and became turnover prone when I don’t recall him being so bad before. He was very frustrating at times, and awesome at others. After much introspective thinking, I’ve decided that I like Jack and what he brings: vocal leadership, toughness, effort, strength, and the drive to constantly work to improve. It didn’t show this past season, and he obviously gets down on himself easily, but I think he has sumthin’ that could be good if given time.
Hmm… will be very interesting to see what happens to Mister Jack this offseason.
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Apr 25, 2008 1:35 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Statistical "value" of Jack
I thought Brian Hendrickson’s expanded statistics in the Columbian were interesting. On the “value” scale Jack and Blake scored 7.55 and 7.58, a virtual tie. (Sergio scored a dismal 2.71.) At the same time, Jack was second in 4th Quater minutes played, logging 709 to Travis’s 777 (Roy had 650 with the highest average at 9.56 minutes.)
So Nate chose between two mediocre guards and preferred Jack in crunch time. Not my choice, but not as wildly irrational as some might say.
I still hope the Blazers run more next year, and I think Jack is the weakest guard at that task. When that is added to his propensity for maddening turnovers; having his drive to the basket blocked by someone’s elbow; or throwing either weak or impossible to catch passes, I’d say he’s got to go.
If we do land Rudy, we need some space at the 2-guard (for whatever minutes B-Roy rests and/or plays PG). We have to get rid of some of our “combo” guards.
Of course, if Nate wants to play a plodding offense or small ball, he may still want Jack in the lineup. I hope not.
by vcubed on Apr 25, 2008 5:16 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

by 
























