Ballings7 wrote:SinJackal
I don't think it was "good" either, I said "good enough" - meaning how we played was enough to get the win.
Yes, "we" played good enough to in, no thanks to Jackson.
Jackson had a few poor shots, but the rest were fine attempts whether he made or missed them...
And quite frankly, that was my problem with going from Jefferson to Jackson to begin with. Jefferson makes his open shots more often than Jackson. Using Jackson the same way we did RJ will yield inferior results, because he is not as good of a spot up shooter. You're going to see more 1/5 night then you will 3/4s from Jackson. Again, the guy is shooting 28% from three this year, .33.7% last year, and 33.8% for his career. Jefferson was shooting 42% from three this year, 44% last year, and 37.1% for his career.
It doesn't matter if he took open shots. I didn't say they were bad shots, so don't act like I did. The fact is, he won't hit them as much as RJ, and the OTHER shots he took, you know, the ones RJ didn't force up? Jackson bricked most of those. So this "extra dimension" Jackson brings, guess how much that helped? Oh wait, it didn't. And yet, he doesn't even replace RJ's efficient open shooting. You know, the very thing I said fit better than what Jackson brings? Anybody can force up shots and get an extra bucket every other game while jacking up 3 more shots per game. RJ could've easily done that. Going an extra 0/3 one night then 1/3 the next night, rinse repeat. That was the difference between RJ and Jackson this year before the respective trade, in terms of putting the ball in the basket. RJ was also rebounding better and turning the ball over less.
he was a constant presence off the bench on both ends of the floor... specifically, he had a big strip on a Landry offensive rebound in the middle of the lane in the 4th too which lead to a fast break... he also had a good pass leading on the break to Green but Green missed the easy lay-up (who missed almost everything tonight but that late game jumper).
In other words, his only good defensive play of the night that you're spotlighting as being a great help to the Spurs, resulted in no basket on the fast break, gotcha.
Like everyone has said and I have said, there's more to the game which is a factor, than scoring and stat sheets.
I'm not sure why you keep saying that, because you don't seem to be able to tell what's useful and what isn't. You just think different = better because you personally like the other guy more regardless of what he brings to the table. You undersell Jefferson's contributes and overstate Jackson's. That's all you're doing. There's more to the game than having big names and flashier plays. In the end, a crappy jumper is worth the same as a dunk.
ackson overall had a positive impact on the game, if you're denying that, then you're just ignorant, chap - by the way, Richard Jefferson's playing right now
Jackson had an overall negative impact on the game. If you're denying that, then you're just ignorant.
See how easy that is? Crappy argument used by people who can't support their point with any facts.
It was reported Splitter and Ginobili didn't make the trip to NOLA, so probably won't play in Phoenix.
Speaking of ignorance, the Spurs' next game is in San Antonio. The Spurs don't play their home games in Phoenix.
