Expectations: Jarrett Jack

by Dave on Aug 23, 2007 12:06 AM PDT in News Comment 93 comments

This is going to be the only topic this morning because it needs a nice, long discussion. I happen to think this is one of the most intriguing, and maybe subtly important, issues facing the team in the next couple of years. What can we expect of Jarrett Jack?

At 12 points, 45% shooting (plus 35% from distance and 87% from the free throw line), 5.3 assists per game, and a 2.2 assist/turnover ratio last year Jarrett did a lot of things right. In fact his season was remarkable considering he was more or less thrust into the starting role. Granted with Brandon Roy and Zach Randolph on the floor the Blazers' point guard wasn't the hardest job in the universe last year, but his competence shouldn't be downplayed. Even adequacy is an achievement under those circumstances and Jarrett was certainly that. Plus there's no reason to think that he won't continue to develop. His offense is already ahead of where I expected it to be. At times he looked prescient out there. We've mentioned the importance of a third scorer several times this summer. Jarrett could actually be a legitimate candidate to fill that position. Given enough minutes it wouldn't surprise me at all to see those 12 points turn into 15-16 and his assists go to 6-7. At that point even people outside of Portland would be talking about him as one of the up-and-coming guards in the league. With that durable, big body he could be the Blazers' starting point guard for years to come.

Three areas are going to need substantial improvement if Jarrett is going to see those minutes, however. First he needs to step up on defense, or at least move his feet quicker. He's got a great build but he needs to learn how to use it defensively. He doesn't have to be all-world but he at least has to channel his man appropriately. Second he's got to get better leading the break. He was maligned mercilessly last year for the Blazers' failure to get up and down. Frankly part of it was playing with guys like Zach, Joel P., and Ime. But part of it was Jarrett too. He didn't seem capable of delivering the ball where it needed to be. That won't cut it this year. Finally he has to learn to contribute more than just scoring. His best qualities revolve around shooting the ball. When he doesn't get shots he's not the same (as we saw towards the end of last season). Flat out he needs to concentrate on setting the offense better. With a glut of inexperienced people and an offense that's almost guaranteed to be more varied than last year's in the halfcourt this is no easy task.

The elephant in the closet for Jarrett is how the Steve Blake acquisition is going to affect him. Some folks, observing his grit on the floor, think it will spur him to work harder. He's saying that's what it will do, but he almost has to say that. Other folks remember the late-season Jarrett who got down on himself and faded. There's no way Steve Blake equates to an unconditional vote of confidence for Jarrett and I'm sure he can't help but feel a little disappointed. This is a big part of why the topic is so intriguing. I don't think anybody knows what we'll see.

One thing is for sure: if he is going to be a good-to-great player in this league he needs to step up and continue improving. He doesn't need to show off, press, or try and play outside himself but he does need to come out with fire in his eyes. In many ways I love Damon Stoudamire but he's an example of how easy it is to make excuses your whole career for why you weren't better than you ended up. Bonzi Wells is an even worse example. The only way to avoid that road is not to start. Don't blame it on the team, the coach, the GM, or other players. Don't mutter to the papers, don't poison the locker room, don't even cry to your mama if you can help it. Just exert your will, keep your head up, do what you're supposed to, and get better.

If Jarrett can manage that I really think he'll continue to see decent minutes even with the team's affection for Blake. Deep in their hearts I still think they believe Steve is a shorter-term answer and see Jarrett (provided he remains a Blazer) as a long-term possibility. If he does start spiraling downward, however, he could be in trouble. His main calling cards so far have been dependability and competence. Steve Blake duplicates those qualities exactly, albeit in a different style. It's pretty likely that Nate will choose one of the two as the competent guy he relies on most and ride that horse until it bucks him. If Jarrett doesn't grab it early he could spend a very long time this season trying to get back to a major-minutes role.

I like Jarrett a lot. I hope he goes the "chin up/lots of heart" direction. I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

--Dave (blazersub@yahoo.com)

0 recs | Comment 93 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I hope..

Jarrett can improve how he runs the fast break. I think we all agree that our point guard is going to need to be able to get out and run a break well with our current roster. I like the way Jarrett finishes on the break(he has that nice reverse move where he sort of uses the rim as protection), but he really struggle to set up his teamates with easy buckets. That was really the only aspect of Jarrett's game that bothered me. I hope he really does keep a good attitude because I think he can easily play 10-15 min as the backup 2, with sergio/blake at the point. As well as 2nd sting pg minutes when Blake sits(assuming blake is the starter), that could be another 10-20 minutes. So I think he can easily get his hands on 20-30 minutes a night and more if he is playing well or earns a starting spot. I also like Jack a lot and want to wish him the best of luck.

by myemic23 on Aug 23, 2007 1:40 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I'll echo that

My feelings exactly.

by jamon51 on Aug 23, 2007 1:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

By the way

Read Fatty's "get ready" diary for an interesting Jarrett Jack discussion.

by jamon51 on Aug 23, 2007 2:00 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

i think you hit the nail not the thumb

agree, especially with his role as the backup 2

by rburg on Aug 23, 2007 7:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Jack Break Down

Nice job. I don't post here alot, but recently I have been emphasizing the fast break need for the team as it develops this year.

I am not down on Jack. And as later posters mention and demonstrate with solid evidence, Jack is on track to be a solid starting point guard if he can continue to develop. I am hoping that his defense improves and that he displays command on the break. He need not be all world to be the Blazers guard of the future. But given what he brings, he is a player who needs to maximize his talent to succeed as starting PG on what I hope will be a championship roster.

Blake will be with us at least two years. In that time, as recent roster overhauls show, alot of personnel moved can happen. Given what I think will be a more settled full roster, the question is whether Sergio or Jack wins out as guard of the future. If Sergio's game gels, he could be great. But I would bet on Jack sticking, whether as a solid contributor, backing up and filling in at PG or as a mature starter who has grown within this new core nucleus.

'77

by LaoTzu on Aug 23, 2007 10:36 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Jack and Billips

Jack reminds me of the Pistons' Billips. Both are big, strong point guards. Billips has managed to make the advantages of his build, especially the ability to back down and post up smaller guards, outweigh the disadvantages--i.e., a relative lack of quickness. Like Billips, Jack is a hard-working, intelligent guy, so maybe with maturity he'll learn to play the same way.

I think it's certainly too early to give up on Jarrett. He'll never be as shifty or flashy as Sergio, but he may end up being the better point guard. Plus, he's big enough to back up Roy at the two. The addition of a dependable starter in Blake has bought the Blazers time to see how these guys shake out. Yes, that move had to disappoint Jack, but it was vital for Oden & Aldridge's development that the Blazers have a starting point guard that already knows how to run an offense.

As for Green, I don't know what his role might be, other than to pester those ultra-quick guards who neither Jack, Sergio, nor Blake can keep in front of them. I'd expect one of these four point guards to be gone by the end of this season--especially since the Finnish kid is waiting in the wings.

by hurryup09 on Aug 23, 2007 6:45 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Fast break

I agree that Jack has to become better on the fast break. Maybe he'll improve with practice. There certainly should be many more opportunities to run this season, with Oden & Aldridge teaming up to block (or disrupt) shots, then tossing outlet passes and outrunning their men down the court.

by hurryup09 on Aug 23, 2007 6:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Spelling

Oops--I meant Billups.

by hurryup09 on Aug 23, 2007 7:22 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't know...

I would like Jack to succeed, but I'm not sure I see it happening. He seems to have some limitations that I hope he can push past, but I'm not sure he will. He hasn't been a good defender, he's not a great shooter (not terrible, either), and he hasn't effectively run the fast break. He also (and this is a point of great contention, but I'm sticking with it) seems to get down on himself too easily.

Here's what I think will happen:

Steve Blake will beat out Jack for the starting spot, because A) he's a better defender, B) he's a better shooter, and C) he's mentally stronger.
Jack will start to be used as a combo guard, as you suggested, backing up the PG and SG spots.
The combo guard role won't go too smoothly, since he's pretty undersized playing shooting guard (like Juan Dixon) who can't guard 2s and isn't a great outside threat, which is what the team really needs.
Jack will get traded by next year's training camp to make room for Martell (if he improves) or Rudy Fernandez as the new backup shooting guard, and Sergio as the backup point guard (if he can overcome HIS limitations and learn how to run a half-court offense and defend).

...that is, unless Jack shows up to camp greatly improved on defense and has learned how to facilitate a more up-tempo offense effectively. Let's hope he has.

by HarryManback on Aug 23, 2007 8:38 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

How did you determine...

...that Blake is a better shooter???

career numbers:

FG: jack =.449 blake = .403
3pt: blake = .370 jack = .324
FT: jack = .845 blake = .772

2006/07 number:

FG: jack = .454 blake = .411
3pt: jack = .350 blake = .322
FT: jack = .871 blake = .672

Jack was better in 5 out of 6 of those categories. Furthermore, Jack improved last year in all 3 categories, while Blake was worse last year in 2 of 3.

In other words, there is no evidence that blake is the better shooter...mainly because he isn't.

by moldorf on Aug 23, 2007 9:09 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sure

If you want to look at numbers, it would appear that Jack is a better shooter. But if you throw out the numbers and only look at my opinion, things look a little different:

Blake: Pretty good
Jack: Not quite as good
Sergio: Man! Did you see that?? I thought he was going to shoot but he just threw a lob to Travis Outlaw for an uncontested dunk! That was worth the price of admission!
Harry Manback: Pretty sweet (at least the NBA 2k7 version of Harry Manback that I created--almost never misses a shot)

You have to admit, those opinions are hard to argue with.

by HarryManback on Aug 23, 2007 9:35 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

This is the funniest

and best response I've seen in a long time. Thanks for the laugh.

And don't forget that Harry Manback really knows how to get his questions answered!

--Dave

by Dave on Aug 23, 2007 9:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Marry Manback

Did you notice that Casey said "Marry Manback" knows how to get his questions answered? I'm totally offended.

by HarryManback on Aug 23, 2007 10:12 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I noticed

but I decided to correct it for you. You are party of the family, after all.

--Dave

by Dave on Aug 23, 2007 10:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I was thinking the same thing.

I had to reread it twice, because I couldn't believe it the first time I read it. Then I remembered it was Harry.

(I still laugh when I think about his pocket review of the Knicks roster.)

by timg56 on Aug 23, 2007 12:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

LOL....I'll Admit It

I wouldn't challenge those opinions.

and for a fact, I'd never want to be in the same time zone as discovering if you are "pretty sweet"

but then, I'm not the kind of guy that would think of any manback as sweet!...especially a harry one

by moldorf on Aug 23, 2007 10:01 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Awesome

Harry, and the great thing is I actually agree with those opinions and do think they are hard to argue with, they're what my gut tells me, to hell with the numbers.

Seriously, I think that the numbers are slightly deceptive because they are the full season numbers for 06/07 including his stint with da Bucks which brings all of these stats down, that said if you look just at Denver's stats his is still slightly down from Jack's numbers on shooting percentages. I think Jack is probably the better combo guard between the two, but if you look purely at the point guard realm I think Blake will make more sense.

Blake is a very capable ball distributor, if we've got the guys on the team that we think we do, that will be extremely important, I also think that if Blake isn't playing off guard (something he did quite a bit with Denver due to Iverson's presence) his 3 point shooting will pick up again, I think he'll only take these shots when he's open because that will be his role, distribute the ball or take the wide open shot. On the topic of ball distribution I think there isn't much of a competition between the two. If we look at Blake's stats while he was with Denver, he had 6.6 assists per game, with an assist to turnover ratio of 3.2. I think the assists per game would also pick up if he had the sort of minutes with us that he had with Denver (because I think he'd rarely be playing off guard).

by drawingjeremy on Aug 23, 2007 10:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I also agree with those opinions.

Obviously that post wasn't 100% serious, but I do think that in this case the numbers don't necessarily tell the whole story. Jack and Blake are a little different in their styles and have been put in different situations, as you point out. Jack is primarily a ball-handler-penetrator, whereas Blake is more of a distributor and, importantly, a kick-out jump shooter.

When I say he's a better shooter, maybe that's not so accurate. But the fact that he is more of a kick-out option is important. Driving to the hoop is great, but when you have Roy doing the same thing and Aldridge and Oden on the block, it's probably not as much of a team need as being able to distribute the ball where it needs to go and make yourself available (and be able to hit) the open jumper when the double team comes.

Again, I don't have any numbers to back up any of this. But that's just the way I roll.

by HarryManback on Aug 23, 2007 12:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I Understand About...

..rolling in a certain direction; I do it myself.

I'm rolling in one here. I think the blake signing was a good one. Portland is thin at SG, and with only Blake and desmond mason legitimately available on the FA market, going with a player that allows the other PG to backup the SG was a good idea.

And if you add both the half-court and transition offenses together, blake appears to be a better bet for consistently initiating the offense, primarily because of jack's past problems in transition.

But I think Jack is actually a better shooter. And the stats bear that out. He's more consistent in my view, while Blake can get on some real hot streaks, but that's offset by some real cold streaks. Using statistics for shooting percentages is helpful because I don't see every game and sometimes my memory and impression don't exactly match apparent reality. Of course then I tend to think there's a problem with reality.

by moldorf on Aug 23, 2007 12:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I, and my gut

are rolling right along side you... that sounds wrong considering your name Mr. Manback.

by drawingjeremy on Aug 23, 2007 1:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Agree with Dave

I will be chuckling about that one for a while.

by tssbro on Aug 23, 2007 10:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Might I also say...

that this thread is what I find curious about Jack. I am not a stat guy for the most part and I get the part about Jack getting down on himself and Blake being mentally tougher at this stage of their careers. I would agree with that.

What is it about Jack that inspires the opinions that don't jive with the stats?

I will read the rest of the posts now and see if you guys have already answered my question.

by tssbro on Aug 23, 2007 10:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

NBA PG is a difficult position..

..to learn. Calling Jarret's performance last year adequate is an accurate statement.

compare Jarret's 2nd year numbers to other pg's

jack: 12pts 5.3ast 2.37to 2.6reb .454fg .871ft

nash: 9.1pts 3.4ast 1.3to 2.1reb .459fg .860ft
(nash wan't full time starter; but it wasn't till his 5th season that his numbers rose)

parker: 15.5pts 5.3ast 2.1to 2.6reb .464fg .755ft

bibby: 14.5pts 8.1ast 3to 3.7reb .445fg .780ft

billups: 13.9pts 3.8ast 2.2to 2.1reb .386fg .913ft

well, that's enough....I'm not a fast typer

Billups is interesting because that year's numbers were his best, by far, of his first 4 seasons. He missed over 100 games in his 2nd and 3rd year. In his 5th season he had numbers that were remarkably similar to jack's 2nd year. And hin his 6th season, his numbers spiked up substantially.

As a matter of fact, when you 'research' a little, you see that a lot of PG's struggled a bit in their first 2 or 3 seasons. Then you'll see that in one season, usually in year 3-5, NBA pg's numbers take a substantial leap forward.

Jack will have to take that step forward. He doesn't do a lot of spectacular things like his peers do, so he'll have to "settle" for being solid. But if he does take the leap forward that most of his more experienced peers have, he could be significant part of the blazer's future core.

It shouldn't be overlooked, that he became an emotional leader of the team last year...that has value. And he also seems to be very durable, at least to this point.

Other's have mentioned his deficiencies, and they can't be overlooked either.

And maybe that's why Blake was signed. However, I think there's as much evidence to say blake's signing was management making a statement on Sergio as it was on Jack. Maybe, KP thinks having 2 solid PG's on the roster is a good thing, especially if one can play SG as well.

If Jack does improve this coming season, he becomes very valuable to portland. I think he's going to be an integral part of the guard rotation so he'll certainly have the opportunity to improve. And perhaps, penciling in Blake as the starter as many have is premature.

by moldorf on Aug 23, 2007 8:52 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Great post

I'm not a big stats fan, but comparing Jack's 2nd year numbers to those of other point guards is definitely instructive. You frequently hear that the point takes longer to learn than other positions, and we need to keep that in mind.

A minor quibble with Harry M's post: sure Jack is a bit undersized to guard big 2-guards. But he's no Juan Dixon. Dixon is listed at 6-3 and 164 lb. By contrast, Jack is listed at 6-3 and 197. Dixon is a real liablity defensively, because big guards can post him at will, forcing double teams. At least Jack is strong enough to hold his position.

by hurryup09 on Aug 23, 2007 9:07 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well, Stats can help...

...determine if a statement has any validity.

It was said above that blake was a better shooter then jack. He may be, but not in NBA games...and that's rather important.

As to Jack being "vulnerable" defensively against NBA SG's, it's possible. However, effectively posting up a shorter guard will be a lot more productive when the low post defenders are zach randolph, raef lafrentz, and travis outlaw, then when the defenders are greg oden, lamarcus aldridge, joel pryzbilla, and channing frye.

by moldorf on Aug 23, 2007 9:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Right again.

It's usually when a team's big shotblocker leaves the game that guards try to post up smaller guards. That won't happen much with the Blazers because when Oden's out, either Aldridge or Frye will generally still be in there.

Even at that, I don't know that I'd want a 164 lb Juan Dixon-type playing the two. I loved his offense when he had it going. But he was SO undersized that it was an instant mismatch every time his man got the ball. You don't want to put that kind of pressure on your shotblockers.

by hurryup09 on Aug 23, 2007 11:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Excellent point

about help defense. This should give some hope to some undersized PG and SG's that we are looking at. One of my concerns with T. Green for instance is his size. However, it becomes much less of a vulnerability when you have anywhere from 1 to 3 excellent help shot blockers on the floor with you. A great point and something to consider.

October, October, October October, Octo...... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odin)

by Idog1976 on Aug 25, 2007 1:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

transition

As a season ticket holder last year, the worst part by far was watching the Blazers' transition offense. It is not an exaggeration to say that a 2-on-1 break led by Jarrett was more likely to end in a turnover than a basket, and that the Blazers were probably the only team for which this was true. His typical routine was to dribble all the way up the court - not very quickly - and then end up under the basket. The defender had plenty of time to get on him and smother him when Jarrett picked up his dribble. Unable to move and out of position to shoot, he would desperately toss the ball backwards and hope some teammate had suddenly arrived to chase down the ball.

This strategy was a laughable failure since the Blazer forwards were the slowest pair in the NBA. Ime Udoka was the slowest starting SF in the league last year and probably the slowest 6'5" player overall as well. And I believe we agree that Zach was not quick in transition.

Most successful fast breaks involve a pass occurring at least by shortly after the lead player crosses mid-court. Jarrett very rarely passed until he reached the free throw line.

His other stats for the year were quite acceptable. I don't think reasonable people could have expected more points or assists. He might well develop into a regular starter in the NBA. The PG position is clearly an open competition and it will be entertaining to see it play out. But the unsettled position will prevent the team from becoming top-notch for the next few years. I don't expect the Blazers to be the Suns, but you should should score 90% of the time on 2-on-1 opportunities.

by Morchella on Aug 23, 2007 9:03 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Looking down the roster...

I find that I have strong feelings about most of the players. Not to say that my opinions are correct, just that I definitely have them.

I don't have strong feelings about Jack. I like him, but am not enamored of him. I think he's good and can be very good but don't know that he's ever going to be true starter good.

I will say this: looking back over past championship teams I find that it is usually good steady point guards that win rings rather than flashy point guards.

by ken on Aug 23, 2007 9:04 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Excellent point

Kenny!

Once again - you hit the nail right on the head!

xoxoxoxox

Hank

by Hank on Aug 23, 2007 9:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

We can expect Jack to get beaten out by Blake.

Then we can expect him to be upset and depressed that he has been demoted and is playing half his minutes out of position. Basically he will have been put back where he was his rookie year. I would then expect some sort of trade this year, but his value will not be as high as it was last year. You don't sign a free agent and draft a point guard if you have confidence in your starting point guard.

Through Jack's career I expect him to either be the starter on a lottery team or be a back-up on a playoff team. He's a little slow footed on defense to be able to keep with the quicker point guards, and he's too short to play the 2. He's a decent straight forward passer, but he's not really a creator in the true sense. Psychologically he's not suited for a leadership role because he's too up and down. The only that might change anything is the concept that he hasn't been healthy his entire NBA career, and maybe that will make a difference and prove me wrong.

by EnglandDan on Aug 23, 2007 9:23 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Great Assessment

I think you are dead on. I've always seen Jack as being a valuable back-up on a good-great team, it helps that he can play the off-guard position. I think there are some obstacles that will be too big to hurdle because of where his natural talents do and don't lie. I don't think he'll get faster and I only think that he'll get moderately better on the break. I don't think he has the court vision of a commander which I think is the hardest thing to learn for a point guard, but he does have some physical toughness that when exploited would allow him to come into the game and play a very important role at certain key points on most any team. In my opinion the only way Jack stays with us long-term is if he likes the idea of playing a back-up role at the 1 and some 2. If that works for him, he'll have an option to stay for good, if that doesn't work for him he'll be moved (and that does not mean that Blake will ultimately be the starting point guard, I think he will be for the bulk of this season, but I see Blake also having to take a back seat once the true leader arrives or steps up).

by drawingjeremy on Aug 23, 2007 11:00 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I like Jack

I think he's an NBA starting point guard and has a better chance of being the starting PG on a championship than Steve Blake.

That said, I've got to agree that his mental toughness is in question and it will be interesting to see what happens if/when he's beaten out by Blake.

by jksnake99 on Aug 23, 2007 9:29 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

boy mr.dan

you're really hitting it out of the park today. excellent post as usual.is'nt a shame how quick's chat has gone all way down to the gutter.

by fatty on Aug 23, 2007 9:32 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

After that Quick chat Quick told Oregonlive

"no more fans". I think that speaks volumes.

by EnglandDan on Aug 23, 2007 11:07 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

the goofs

actually ruined that did'nt they.boy did we have some good times on that chatroom.see what happens when the bandwagons jump on board.they ruin it for everyone else.and from all of us diehards from quick's chat you can book it.what a bunch of sorry losers lord daniel.thanks for letting us know.

by fatty on Aug 23, 2007 11:35 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

What's this all about?

What Quick Chat are you talking about?

by jamon51 on Aug 23, 2007 12:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Oregonlive.com

Chat with Jason Quick, K. Pritchard, once the God Greg Oden Himself, even a horrible last summer chat with Peter Vescey. Every Thursday (not in the summer) in the afternoon. Destroyed after the #1 pick was announced. Like firestorms in Dresden destroyed. Waste of time now.

But check out Courtside on 750 KXL on Thursday Nights at 6pm - good homer stuff there. The Mikes and Wheels do a real fine job. You can download podcasts on blazers.com.

Ball Don't Lie

by bothteamsplayedhard on Aug 23, 2007 12:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Oh I've listened to the Quick chat

But I'm wondering what specific one they're talking about. Sounds like Jason got blasted by a fan or something.

by jamon51 on Aug 24, 2007 3:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Used to be my Favorite

Thursday afternoon stop. Now I don't even bother. Quick chat will live forever in my memory, and Dave will hopefully keep giving us all of the wonderful recaps - and we won't have to bear all of the "silly" fans offensive, childish, racist comments.

Ball Don't Lie

by bothteamsplayedhard on Aug 23, 2007 12:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Why don't you just listen to it?

I never thought the chat room added much to the experience anyway. Maybe I started listening to them too late...

by HarryManback on Aug 23, 2007 12:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Dude-

the chat was half the fun for sometime!! See fatty type in real time!!!

But really - it was the Quick-CHAT, not the Quick-LISTEN. Chat, and you could ask questions. Listen, and it just kind of left a component out of it.

Ball Don't Lie

by bothteamsplayedhard on Aug 23, 2007 12:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

About Jack's Defense

There are a lot of comments here about Jack's defense being bad.

I agree that he needs to improve his defensive footwork.

But I also think some of the judgement is being done in a bit of a vacuum.

Watching last year's playoffs I noticed that steve nash and tony parker took turns beating each other off the dribble...they consistently drove around each other. In the next series, parker and deron williams engaged in the same dance. Jason Kidd and TJ Ford had their fun in the east.

Effectively guarding a good NBA PG may be next to impossible. There aren't any 25 year old Gary Payton's around. Blaming Jack for allowing parker or nash to drive by, is fine, as long as you blame parker and nash for allowing paul and williams to drive by.

by moldorf on Aug 23, 2007 9:39 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Penetrating guards

I've also noticed that quick point guards penetrate at will even against top teams. But once they get in there, they get swallowed up by multiple shotblockers. A great example was the Pistons when they had Prince and both Wallaces; everywhere a penetrator looked, there were long arms.

So the key seems to be to have those multiple shot-blockers (which the Blazers now have) and guards who are able to steer the penetrators where the shotblockers want them. Hopefully we'll see that from the Blazers' guards this season.

Oh, and one more thing: you need for your shotblockers to be selective in which shots they go after. If they try to block every shot, they'll get in foul trouble and put their team in the penalty. Sometimes it's enough to stand there with those long arms in the air and watch the penetrating player cough it up or charge. Tim Duncan is good at that (as well as at working the refs so that he gets the call!).

by hurryup09 on Aug 23, 2007 12:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

You can't stop them getting by you,

but you can make them go by you in only one direction that the rest of the defense has been primed to expect. It's the same way you can't stop a post player getting off a shot, but you can certainly effect which shot it is.

by EnglandDan on Aug 23, 2007 12:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

How difficult is it to learn to lead a fast break?

I see Jack getting better with more opportunities and a bit more freedom from the coach.

Didn't our TP play in the post in college? Even with that background he still figured out how to lead a break. Jack's smart too he'll figure it out.

Jack's solid and that's exactly what the big 3 needs around them.

by jayjaylbh on Aug 23, 2007 9:42 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

On fast breaking ...

There are two sides to every fast break. I'm sure Jarrett could have run it more effectively, but let's look at who was running with him: Travis Butterfingers Outlaw, Ime Slower-than-Snot-and-Can't -Jump Udoka, Martell No-Confidence Webster, and Zach Even-Slower-than-Ime Randolph. Steve Nash might end up under the basket with nowhere to go if he was running with guys who don't know how to space the floor too ... Furthermore, we didn't have any good outlet passers, which means the defense always had time to catch up to the play.

Jarrett obviously needs to work on this aspect of his game, but I think our fast break will be better this year just by looking at who's going to be on the floor. LaMarcus is WAY more athletic, James Jones has a lot of experience from Phoenix, and Outlaw and Webster hopefully know a little more about themselves this year. Only time will tell, though ...

by bfan on Aug 23, 2007 9:57 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Possibilities

Interesting comments above. I expect one of the following scenarios to play out, don't know which one.

Possibility #1. Jack makes himself a strong candidate for starting PG long-term. Has to upgrade both his defense and running game. He doesn't have to become great at either, but he has to be substantively better at both. If he does, he probably becomes The Man at PG. I don't expect this, but it could happen -- I'll give it a 10-15% chance. This would be great news, IMO, if it does happen.

Why I'm not optimistic: decision-making. His production was pretty good on a bad team last year. But his decision-making on the break makes it seem like what we saw last year was about as good as it is going to get -- a guy who is productive and can make good decisions in a half-court offense, on a team whose future includes more running than last year.

Why there might be optimism: Last year was his first relatively healthy season. For what was, in effect, a rookie year, he did pretty well.

Possibility #2. He shines as a combo guard backing up both Blake and Roy. Functions adequately in either role, providing scoring and leadership off the bench. Has to be >content< with being third guard in essentially a three-man rotation. I see a 75% chance of him functioning well in this role, and a 25% chance of him being content.

He has the skills for it, and is capable of developing adequate defensive skills for both positions. He is certainly capable of being good enough offensively to make up for some defensive shortcomings, especially since Messers. Oden, Aldridge, Pryzbilla, and Outlaw can erase a few defensive errors for him.

Possibility #3. Trade by the trading deadline. (This may follow a period of increased playing time to showcase him.) A trade is much more likely if either Green or Sergio shows real promise of at least being an effective backup at PG.

A trade is less likely if we are somewhere in the 7-10 spot in the conference with a decent shot at the playoffs, and they don't want to mess up team chemistry -- but if he's discontented, that won't matter. I give this about a 50% chance of happening.

Possibility #4. Trade before season. I still think there is a 10% chance of this happening. We have three virtual untouchables (unless Cleveland wants to move Lebron), and three KP untouchables (Frye, Blake, Outlaw -- three guys I just don't believe KP will trade right now unless the offer is crazy good.) Jarrett is the only really attractive asset we have beyond that, and packaged with one of our projects and/or a guy like Pryz might bring us a nice piece of the puzzle.

I suspect Nate wants to keep Pryz for at least the first month or two of the season to see how quickly Oden develops. So he is unlikely to be moved before the season, and given that, I'm not sure we have enough tradeable value to get someone good enough to justify letting Jarrett go. He's too good to give away, but not good enough to get a starter quality SF, which is probably our biggest hole.

So there may be a trade before the season, but it's not really likely.

My most likely scenario is that A) Oden shines, and Pryz becomes tradeable B) Green shines in Idaho C) Jarrett plays well as a combo guard and D) Jarrett, Pryz, and probably Martell are moved before the trading deadline for a starting SF.

by jscot on Aug 23, 2007 10:07 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Expectations

Jack will improve with his improved team if he gets minutes. His numbers will again be solid if he gets minutes. He must get better at running the break but, seriously, could he get worse with this new team?

As has been stated, his defensive troubles are real but they are better addressed with Oden and Aldridge hangin' round the rim instead of Zach the defensive observer and Joel huggin' round the rim. He must at least slow down and direct the quick guys who will still blow by him. He's got more help now.

If he gets stuck playing combo leftover minutes he'll do poorly.

He won't be an all star anytime soon or maybe ever but neither will the majority of the team.

Teams, even championship ones, don't send their 5 starters to the all star game. Has this ever happened?

I like the idea of building the best team possible but I also like seeing young players who are already good get better before they are kicked to the curb.

This young squad will only grow and I don't mind Jack growing with the rest. Is there a big hurry?

by fatwansaboni on Aug 23, 2007 10:15 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Order of importance

Ultimately what is important is who is going to win you the most games. Many of the key factors are not going to show up in stats, so you need to determine what the prioritize are in you starting PG. Mine are listed below.

1/ Stop dribble penetration
2/ Run the offense
3/ Initiate the fast break
4/ Hit the 3 consistantly enough to prevent your defender from doubling down on our bigs

I actually think the best thing for Jack is if we run a 3 G rotation, he would get experience at the 1 and 2, he has the upper body strength to defend most the 2's. The only problem with this is it takes minutes away from Webster.

by lonevoiceofreason on Aug 23, 2007 10:56 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

read this

barbosa was the starter for phoenix before Nash came. Barbosas a pretty good player now. My brother thinks Blake plays lite Nash(very poor mans) Jack could be a scorer like Barbosa. That's all, we'll see. Blake's a better fit for Roy regardless.

M. E.

by midget on Aug 23, 2007 11:45 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

i know there's some sergio fans here...

but jack's way cuter. let him start. gavel pounds in confirmation.

by belectica on Aug 23, 2007 11:51 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

hello

welcome to you belecita.

by fatty on Aug 23, 2007 12:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Careful... fatty's still looking

for his two hotties.

by timg56 on Aug 23, 2007 12:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

a critical year

for Jack more than anyone else. I don't think that this is the year that Outlaw/Webster/Sergio/whoever has to step up or be traded, but I do think that if Jack wants a lasting place on this team, he has to take it now, before the steadiness of Blake and the potential of the other three guards pushes him out. I think he can be a better fit for this team than Blake--a middle-class man's Deron Williams, maybe, and like someone said above we don't need an All-Star backing up the Big Three, we just need someone who is very capable. I think he either grits his teeth and takes the starting spot back, or there are strong odds he's packaged with Pryz and a throw-in by the trade deadline, especially if we're in the mix for a playoff spot with Blake as the starter. I'm rooting for him (he gives a better interview than Sergio), but he's one of our biggest question marks next year, in my opinion.

by abdelnaby on Aug 23, 2007 12:21 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I like both Jack & Blake

I've never quite understood why so many fans here range from relative Jack bashing to lukewarm acceptance. The guy is maybe a quarter notch below Paul and Williams and has had just two years in the league. As moldorf has exhibited, he compares well with other starting PG's in his second year stats. The players he reminds me of are Billups and our own Terry Porter. Who here wouldn't take one of those two running our team in a couple years? On a personal level, it doesn't hurt that I have a bit of an affinity for Georgia Tech players. I had a brother who graduated from Tech and a niece whose there now.

The only problem I have with Jarrett Jack is that he plays the same position as Steve Blake and I happen to be a huge Blake fan as well. I want to see both succeed. My hope is that they both do, with Jack filling the combo guard role for the next couple of years. My gut tells me that he is going to be a very good player, only that it may not be here.

by timg56 on Aug 23, 2007 12:31 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Here here

Many teams would be happy to have Jack as a starter at PG. He right now is average as a second year player. I am happy to live with that. Furthermore management has shown that they are going to place all their eggs in one basket drafting other potential at PG. Sure nobody will be an allstar at the PG position for the Blazers this year, but we have solid depth 2 deep (Blake, Jack) and great potential 3 deep (Sergio, Green, and Kaponen) at PG.

I think Jack will continue to improve. I doubt that GP was shutting opposing PGs down in his 2nd season, so why should htat be expected from Jack. It's just nice to see that in all the comments Jack has fairly lofty expectations (because average isn't enough). I've not seen one comparison of Jack to Derek Fisher, but rather to highly competent PGs that most any team would love to have. Jack will be good maybe great but probaly never spectacular. That's okay by me.

by NWfan on Aug 23, 2007 1:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

not just fast break

deficiency, but really bad ball-handling. when someone plays tight defense on Jack, Jack has to turn his back to the basket because he isn't a good enough ball-handler not to. this, of course, is a problem if you are trying to run an offense. a real problem. watch some games for this and you'll see what i'm talking about. on the other hand, sergio almost never has to turn his back to the basket to keep his dribble, as he has better handles and can usually turn tight defense into quick penetrations and easy lay-ups for someone. as a result the defense backs off sergio, but just gets tighter and tighter on jack.

by sergioFTW on Aug 23, 2007 12:46 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I was wondering if/when you'd chime in

well put my friend. I am not saying Sergio is ready, but this is a very important issue. I know the Sergio naysayers will say that Sergio commits far too many turnovers, but that we know that his assist to turnover ratio is very, very good for a veteran, and phenomenal for someone's rookie year.

Bottom line is that the things that Sergio is lacking I see as more likely to improve on than the weaknesses in Jack's game and where our team is headed.

To be clear I think Jack will make it, just not as a starting point guard on a championship team. I'd be very happy for him to be pleased with a long-term backup role on our squad.

For now, Blake will win the starting position, and he will be a much better influence on Sergio than Jack is able to be.

by drawingjeremy on Aug 23, 2007 1:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Probably

because Sergio had so much more practice dribbling. Usually about 20 seconds per possesion.

by crakarjack on Aug 23, 2007 1:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Assist to Turnover ratio

JJ needs to get his assist to turnover ration north of 3 in order to compete for the starting job. Scoring is not really the issue. The issue is having someone handle the ball, who will not turn it over. Early in the year if he continues to progress in this catagory he will fight for mintues. If it goes south so will his playing time.

Nash the preminment PG in the NBA had an assist to turnover ratio of 4 and in the playoffs even higher.

Chris Paul another good PG had an a/t of arround 3.75.

Blake may have lower percentages, but he did have a/t of a little over 3 last year.

On another note, this is why the ZBO trade was so good. 3.16 TO per game last year. Ouch!

by khryse on Aug 23, 2007 1:02 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

i'm not sure where

you got your nash statistic. From what i'm looking at his A/TO was 3.08. Asking Jack to be much better than that is ridiculous.

by ssa400 on Aug 23, 2007 1:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Last year there was much talk about if Jack

and Zach's fates were intertwined, I think Dave brought this up, it was a point I certainly agreed with whole heartedly, not necessarily that they'd either stay to together or be traded together, but that Jack's style of play should work well with a more refined Zach Randolph style offense where as many of the other pieces on our team would seem to function better with a different style of point guard. This is not Jack's fault, it does not mean that we can't like him all the same, but is the style of play he's developing a good marriage for where we see our big three (and surrounding pieces) headed in the coming years? If it is a good marriage how, and in what capacity? Do you see Jack as growing into the ideal counterpart to the players we are betting the farm on? Do you ultimately see him needing to accept a back-up role in 2-3 years if he stays (as I do) due to the style of play which our big 3 will most flourish in?

by drawingjeremy on Aug 23, 2007 1:24 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I think Jack could be fine with our offense.

Requirements with this group will basically be to defend the point, bring the ball up court, hand it off to one of the big three, and then hit open shots or drive if there's no play and the clock is winding down. Blake does that stuff just as well as Jack. I'd be happy with either while we wait and see if the young folks develop. What I don't get is having Blake AND Jack. The only conclusion I can come to is that KP had a plan to unload Jack (probably for a small forward) which was dragging on and he thought he better get Blake while he could. Then the trade broke down and KP is left with rather a muddle of a roster.

by EnglandDan on Aug 23, 2007 2:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

If the idea is to wait and see while the other

young point guards develop, I agree, especially with the not making sense to have both Blake and Jack. However if the young folks you speak of are not specific to our young point guards (Sergio, Koponen, and or Green) and the idea is for either Jack or Blake to be The Man in a few years from now I really think it could be the difference between a mid-level playoff team and a contender. Basically I'm all for us seeing how things shake out in the point guard position, I just don't think we should put all of our eggs in the Jack or Blake basket as the starting point guard of our championship team basket. Though Jack's skill set is strong, and though it would be adequate I think that our players would achieve more with a different style of starting point guard. I also don't think that guy will be Blake, he'll be getting a little too old, and though I think his style of play will be better for the team we are building I certainly don't think he will become a top notch point, frankly, if one of their ceilings is higher, it's probably Jack, I just think his style isn't an ideal match for the starters we'll have in 3-5 years.

I definitely agree there was likely a plan for Jack to be traded, and either that plan fell apart for it's own reasons, or KP decided to put the brakes on it because they were hoping for more from Sergio during summer league, so having both became a safety measure even if it wasn't intended that way.

by drawingjeremy on Aug 23, 2007 2:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I was being specific about point guards.

We are basically as one mind on this issue.

by EnglandDan on Aug 23, 2007 3:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't agree....

...about the plan for a trade that fell through.

People assume that the Blake signing was a management comment on Jarret Jack. I don't think that's the case at all.

If management is making any comments about exisiting players by signing Blake, it's actually on 2 players.

For one, it's a lack of confidence that Sergio can be either a backup PG, or in the case of injury, the starter.

For another, it's a lack of confidence that Martell can be the backup SG, especially on the defensive end.

Portland only had 2 dependable guards before they signed blake. That's a prescription for the lottery. Now, at least they have 3.

by moldorf on Aug 24, 2007 4:58 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not sure why everyone is so down on Jack

I can understand finding inane faults in his game if we were replacing him with an obviously better PG. I guess alot of people here like Blake (I personally think he'll be a disapointment, much like Pryzbilla was), and people are really digging deep to find reasons why they prefer Blake.

If you look at it objectively, you can almost only come to the conclsion that Jack is the better PG.

Age: He's only 23 years old. He's only going to get better.

Numbers: A second year player who put up 12/5 is not easy to come by. Those numbers are only going to get better.

Comfort level: He's spent a whole season playing with 2 of our big 3. That experience is invaluable. When Blake played here, our second best player was probably Pryzbilla, that's how bad things were. Jack knows how to work with Roy, and where Aldridge likes the ball, etc.

As an aside, some people make the claim that Blake's a more heady player. That may be the case, but i'm not sure how one coems to that conclusion. I think the word "veteran" is thrown around far too much. Just because he's been a journeyman in the league doesn't make him a valuable vet. Especially when the skill level of most of hte players on the team are far greater than his.

I'm not sure if anyone read Barret's blog a while back, i don't remember seeing anyone quote him. According to Bayno:

"Bayno says Jarrett is looking very, very good, and says he's as healthy and as physically fit as he has ever seen him. Jack played his rookie year with a bad ankle, had it cut on last summer, and then worked on getting it stronger last season. Now, he's at full strength. Bayno says he's quicker, jumping better, and just "looks different" on the court. He also said Jarrett is really working on pushing tempo, and running the fast break. Bayno also said that during their morning workouts yesterday, Jarrett moved through the lane and dunked left handed, something Bill said he's never seen him do."

He's obviously working hard, he deserves the starting nod. It should be Blake that should be backing up both the 1 and the 2 not Jack.

by ssa400 on Aug 23, 2007 1:36 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Blake does what coaches love.

Blake doesn't make mistakes. Now he doesn't do anything particularly great either, but as a coach you like to feel like you have control over what is going on (particularly if you are Nate McMillan). As a coach you know Blake is going to behave exactly like the x or o on your diagram. Now the best point guards are able to recognize when they can do something better than the coach's diagram, which has some risks to it but lead to greater rewards.

If you evaluate players based on the number of mistakes they make Blake is a great player. if you evaluate players based on the number of great plays they make, Blake is an extremely poor player.

by EnglandDan on Aug 23, 2007 2:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Watching Steve Blake for 4 years at

Maryland, I found that he is fully capable of making great plays. He was a little like Sergio in that he often got the ball to the right spot when no one thought it possible, particularly the guy on the receiving end. He was also a fairly decent defender, something Gary Williams stresses.

Coming out of school, I felt the biggest area he needed to improve was his jump shot. He was decent, but he needed to get a lot more consistent to succeed in the NBA. From what I can tell, he seems to slowly be doing that.

by timg56 on Aug 23, 2007 4:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Bayno

I don't know what "inane faults" you're referring to. The Jarrett Jack game we've seen to date has definite limitations. But I hadn't heard those Bayno quotes; that's very encouraging. I'd assumed Jack was at full strength last season. If he's more mobile now, that could be a big plus, both on offense and defense.

It was always clear that Jack was intelligent & hard working. And guys like that often continue to improve throughout their careers while others stagnate. Call it the tortise & the hare syndrome. All the competition may only help Jack--and the Blazers--in the long run. Which of course is what KP and Nate have been saying all along.

by hurryup09 on Aug 23, 2007 2:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

inane faults

I'm just referring to faults that he has that can mostly be attributed to really having 1 full year under his belt. He's progressed far nicer than his draft counter part, webster. I think Blake is the definition of average point guard. I just think by next year, if Jack starts from day 1, he'll simply be much better by Blake by mid-year.

Blake is not going to get any better. We still aren't a lock as a playoff team, we still need to develop our talent. Hence, Jack needs to be developed. Wasting his minutes on Blake simply does not make sense. If Jack regresses next year, then we can look to trade him, and use Blake as a stop gap. I really like Blake as the backup pg over Sergio. I just don't want him to start on this team at the cost of Jack's development. Players who have shown progress usually make a pretty nice jump their 3rd year. To screw with that in order to get Blakes 6 pts and 5 assists just doesn't seem worth it.

by ssa400 on Aug 23, 2007 4:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Jack's development isn't the only issue

Agreed that Jack needs minutes in order to develop. But Oden and Aldridge need reliable point guard play in order for their own games to develop. They need to get the ball in the right places at the right times from Day 1. In my opinion, that's the balancing act that KP and Nate are dealing with.

Another point: unlike the majority of posters, I think Jack will actually benefit from having Blake on the team. I believe he's mature enough to analyze Blake's play and learn from it. As I recall, the two guards got along very well the first time around. That's a definite plus.

I recall Telfair talking about how Greg Anthony treated him badly as a rookie, and how that made him determined to be a friendly competitor to Jack and Blake. And sure enough, the three got along well during their year together.

I think that set a precedent for Jack & Blake--and hopefully Sergio and Green. Hopefully, these 4 point guards will push each other to get better. They're all still young and know that if they don't catch on in Portland there will be other opportunities. Most likely, one of them will be elsewhere by mid-season.

by hurryup09 on Aug 24, 2007 9:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Nash stat

Yeah I was looking at something else.

by khryse on Aug 23, 2007 2:01 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Blake tells all...

I like JJ and Blake, but let's face it, Steve Blake is a mediocre journeyman NBA point guard.

As much as I want to see Jack blossom into an excellant starting point guard the mere fact that they brought Blake in tells more than any non-stat (Man)backed opinion or, for that matter, stat backed opinion.

If Blake earns the starting job (which I expect him to do) then it's time to start watching the ashes from the Rose Garden chimney to try an devine who the real blazer point guard is going to be in the years to come because it ain't going to be Mr. Jack.

But if Jack starts there's still hope for him and we can all hope Bayno is right.

by jon on Aug 23, 2007 3:43 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

show me Jack

Unless Jack shows some attitude adjustment, I think Blake is the starter. Jack may have better stats, but Blake seems to ALWAYS be in the game, even if he is on the bench. Blake is the team player. You can not hang your head everytime you flub a play...you too Webster. At the point, you have to exude confidence in yourself and team every second you are on the court. The point guard is the leader on the floor (some exceptions). They must proudly lead throughout the game regardless if they are having a bad night, or for that matter, start each game. I think Jack could be pretty good if he can lead every night. Running the break, defense, etc. will improve with practice. Show me the confidence.

by clonigro on Aug 23, 2007 4:39 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

JJ

will be cool with his position because I think Nate will have either Jack or Blake starting and the other finishing. A three guard rotation could be very productive if they usually run the offence through the opposing team's weakest guard on the floor defensively. Two swing guards usually on the floor with Sergio coming in for a change of pace. Sounds like it might work.

by Kampeska on Aug 23, 2007 5:04 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Jack's best is yet to come

As a 3rd year man we should continue to see the improvement Jackj made last year. NBA PGs typically continue to progress for 6-8 years.

I followed Jack's Georgia Tech career closely and he was the difference between a championship-level team and a mediocre team.

Bill Bayno's courtside segment recently indicated that injury and rehab robbed Jack the 1st two years and that he is now healthy and much quicker and confident. That should show up in pre-season.

Nate believes in Jack. He invested much extra time with him last year. Nate also loves Blake. The two are not mutually exclusive.

In the 2 back court positions we get 96 minutes per game. Roy will get 36 of those. That leaves 60 minutes with 20 going each going to 2 players and 10 each going to 2 players. Since the objective is to develop players and learn to play team defense (we gave up 98 points per game last year) the minutes can flex and spread leaving some time for Sergio and Green while developing Jack and Blake.

Finally, we should be done trading until Nate gets enough time to evaluate and develop. So I trust Jack will remain a Blazer near term.

by lee3022 on Aug 23, 2007 5:15 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Jack's best is yet to come

He adds to our depth

There are 82 games to play this season. JJack will be a Great part of our Team getting through the grind. Three guard rotation or starting, competition will tell (starting Monday, be there or be square). It is an exciting Team to be on. I believe JJack wants to be a part of it. His opportunities should abound. What will be, will be. I believe we will see a better NBA player than last year's. We need the depth and flexibility that we have and I think it is an advantage, to the Team's progress.

What I am tying to say, is I think JJack is a Young, Strong and Tough NBA guard, more fit, ready then ever, part of our Team, that will be a great help through a long grind of the regular season. We need every one of our players and their flexibility to prepare and sustain a drive to a winning season. Our depth is a power we can use, through a long season, to achieve our goal.

From the 3 Capes of the Coast

by BlueBooYay on Aug 23, 2007 7:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

ps

I like Blake, alot. I enjoy watching him play basketball at the point. May the "Best Man" win.

From the 3 Capes of the Coast

by BlueBooYay on Aug 23, 2007 8:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

pps

And sacrifice.
Is this in the Professional player's vocabulary?
Help each other, as a Team, be better, than an individual could ever be.

From the 3 Capes of the Coast

by BlueBooYay on Aug 23, 2007 8:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Adaptability

I could easily agree with most of what has been said. I think the one point missed is Jarret's adaptability as a player. It's true that he did find a way to be effective in last years chaotic development. I think we have yet to see Jack's ability to produce in a fast break offense, because last year is wasn't just deemphasized, it was nearly prohibited.

by mjm6783 on Aug 23, 2007 7:02 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

That is my general feeling also

If you want a player who can dominate in one area then Jarrett's not your guy. But if you want somebody who has a good chance to do well at most everything he's the man.

--Dave

by Dave on Aug 23, 2007 10:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I know this possum has been run over

On more than one occasion. That said, I would really like nothing better than to see this roster, as it stands right now, given the chance to play itself out. At least until the all-star
break. Given some balanced playing time, I am sure that the "Cream" of this particular crop will rise to the top and managements decisions will become much easier to make.

by coastrider on Aug 24, 2007 12:30 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

JJ's my boy

And I'm going on record right now to say that he dominates Steve Blake and wins the starting job and Blake won't start a game.

Formerly known as Junit3123

by Jason3123 on Aug 24, 2007 11:50 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Ink Blots

The thing that seems to bother me about Jack is where he is psychologically and emotionally. He seemed to be making good progress, but then would hit these stretches when he would get down on himself and be almost useless.

A PG needs to be confident all the time. I cut him some slack because he is young. But the time to start doing or dying is approaching. No more, confidence building late night chat sessions with the coach. Just Do It Jack.

by Krang on Aug 24, 2007 2:46 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I agree...

but isnt it almost a little nice to see a player get down on themselves(visualizing Darius staring into space as Nate rides him for taking a lazy jumper rather than going to the rack). all in all though, I agree with you, our point guard needs to have and show confidence on the court, and this is his year to prove himself.

by myemic23 on Aug 25, 2007 12:13 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

BLAKES DEFENSE?

Let's get this straight: Blake's defense is average at best. He has long arms and gets in passing lanes, otherwise he's a huge liability. I was embarassed for him when he wore a blazer uniform and was routinely burned by Andre Miller (with Denver at that time)again and again on blow-by dribble drives. Jack on the other hand took Gilbert's 50 pt prediction to heart and put forth one of the best defensive efforts ever in a blazer uniform against one of the most lethal offensive players in the league. These are only isolated examples, and being a Blazer's fan I root for all of our players. I am also honest with with my squad and don't believe Blake has a defensive edge over Jack by any means.

by Lou9700 on Aug 25, 2007 12:32 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Great contrast

Jack is definitly emotional and like any strength it can also be a weakness if it isn't channeled in the right direction. Today's NBA needs more guys like Jack that put it out there instead of going through the motions until the playoffs start.
It doesn't appear that he will be the strong, steady type that Roy and Aldridge seem to fit; but he may be the guy to fire those guys up when they need it.

by tssbro on Aug 25, 2007 12:36 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Sorry

This comment was supposed to be linked to Myemic's contrast of Jack to Darius.

by tssbro on Aug 25, 2007 12:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Didn't see...

...much improvement from Jack last year. I was ready for him to prove himself as a starting PG in the NBA. The position was handed to him last year. This year it won't be....he'll actually have to earn it...

by nlj on Aug 25, 2007 1:55 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Ups and Downs

It is fair to say that Jack had some ups and downs last year but I find it hard to see how he didn't improve from his rookie season?

by tssbro on Aug 26, 2007 9:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

uh....

....didn't see much improvement THROUGHOUT THE COURSE OF LAST SEASON is how I meant it. He started OK, went into a major funk and sorta came out of it toward the end...now his job as starter is in question....compared to his rookie season his free throw shooting DID seem to improve.

by nlj on Aug 27, 2007 11:22 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs