[情報] RJ<->S-Jax的負面評價

[tth81222 (踢踢ㄟ區)]

網址：http://ppt.cc/3PcO

Richard Jefferson for Stephen Jackson (negative) trade reaction post.
writed by Edg5 on Mar 15, 2012 8:18 PM CDT in Analysis

A more positive view on the trade will be posted in the morning. For now,
let's all feel bad about it and start panicking ;) Edg5.

Here's Negative Nancy raining on your parade.

So our old friend is back. As you know by now, the Spurs traded Richard
Jefferson to the Golden State Warriors for Stephen Jackson. Captain Jack
enjoyed a good couple of years with the Spurs, even winning a championship in
the process, before leaving for greener (and by that I mean more money)
pastures. After a successful run with the Indiana Pacers and the We Believe
warriors, Jackson has seen his career take multiple turns for the worse, once
his skills didn't warrant the headaches anymore.

After sulking his way out of bottom-dwellers like the Warriors, The
Bobcatsand the Bucks, Jackson is back with the San Antonio Spurs, to the
rejoicing of many. But is the player the Spurs are getting the one fans
remember from that magic 2003 championship run?

RJ vs S-Jax

First, let's compare Jackson to Richard Jefferson. I didn't dislike RJ as
much as some people, but I have to admit that from a versatility perspective,
Jackson is superior. What RJ brought to the table was 3-point shooting and,
while Jackson can't really provide that (career.337 3-point shooter), there
are other players in the roster that can and if Leonard can keep up his
shooting from the last few games (unlikely), it might not hurt the Spurs that
much. Jackson is a slightly better defender and can handle the rock if
needed, something that RJ was unable to do. Jefferson has rebounded slightly
better on average than Jackson the last 3 seasons, but the difference is not
significant. RJ was the consummate professional in San Antonio and a clear
example of a player that got over himself, as Pop would call it, knowing his
role and sticking to it, even if it meant lowering his public profile by
becoming a role player instead of a prolific scorer. Jax is as volatile as a
player can be, and has clashed with coaches and organizations about his
perceived worth, asking for an extension on a contract that still has two
years to go. Having said that, I trust Pop and the Spurs veterans to keep
Jackson in check, and playing for a contender might make him happy enough not
to sulk. Now that's out of the way, we have to forget about Jefferson when
thinking about Jackson. RJ is gone, so now we have to focus on how Jackson
fits instead of how big of an upgrade he might be over Richard.

How Jackson fits with this team.

So why am I not ecstatic about the move? First, as I said there's a question
of fit. Jackson has always been a high usage player, with his efficiency
varying year to year but not the amount of possessions he used. His career
Usage % of 24.5 is just a little lower than Tony Parker's 25.5. And Manu
Ginobili's 25.1. Jefferson was using a really low number of possessions for
the Spurs at 14.7. That means Jackson is probably going to take someone's
shots and it could be any of the Spurs' Hall of Fame backcourt. When Jackson
was playing for the Spurs in 2003, Tony had a usage % of 22.9, one of the
lowest of his career; Manu's was 22.1, the same as Jackson. I don't know
about you, but I think Manu and Tony should have the ball in their hands as
much as possible, so the possibility of Jackson taking it from them is not
ly appealing. It will be on Pop to come up with rotations that give
er the possessions they need. The one positive is that Jackson's
hat 2003 team was the lowest of his career, meaning he might dial
down on his ball hogging ways on a good team.

So we know Jackson likes to have the ball in his hands a lot, but what does
he do with it? Well, he shoots a lot, averaging a career 14.8 field goal
attempts per game, almost the same as Tony, who attempts 14.9 a game. For
comparison, Manu has not averaged over 14 shots once in his career. He also
passes the ball well, averaging 3.5 assists per 36 minutes for his career,
but also turns the ball over a fair amount averaging 2.8 turnovers per 36.
Again for comparison sake, Manu averages 5 assists and 2.7 TOs per 36 for his
career. We all know Manu is better than Jax, but I'm comparing their numbers
to show that the Spurs should keep Jackson on a short leash, being careful he
doesn't take too many possessions away from the starting backcourt.

The other problem with Jackson on offense is that he likes the long 2 pointer
a little too much. Last season in Charlotte, he was averaging 4.2 attempts
from 16-23 feet, making only 1.5 of them for a below average 36%. Jackson was
only assisted in 56.3% of those, a mark slightly higher than league average,
which means the rest were pull up jumpers. I've already mentioned that
Captain Jack is not a good 3-point shooter which wouldn't be a big problem if
he didn't shoot a lot of 3s but his career average of 4.9 3-point attempts
per 36 minutes puts him slightly below Manu. Worst yet, his last season with
the Bobcats and in his short stint with the Bucks, he averaged 5.5 attempts
per 36 minutes, which means that in the recent past he's been shooting more
but not better.

We pretty much covered offense so now all that's left is defense and
intangibles. It's hard to use stats to cover those, since the team a player
is in and his mindset can affect those numbers. When engaged, Jackson can be
a solid man defender and we have to assume that playing for a contender would
fire up Jackson after toiling away in anonymity for the last few seasons. A
rotation of Manu, Green, Jackson and Leonard looks good and versatile when it
comes to defense, but we shouldn't confuse Jackson for a lockdown defender.
The other issue with Jackson and defense is that he probably won't be able to
guard stretch 4s; he might have done it occasionally playing for Don Nelson,
but after spending the last couple of seasons alongside Gerald Wallace it
would be a huge adjustment for Jax to defend bigger players. Kawhi Leonard
should have a relatively easier time sliding over to the 4 when playing small
ball but he's still a rookie and hasn't had many reps at that position (RJ
usually guarded the other team's PF when playing small). Leonard should see
more playing time, though, and that might help the Spurs defense more than
anything Jackson does.

As for intangibles, I don't assigned that much value to making love to
pressure as some, and I definitely don't believe in the toughness factor. If
you manage to stay in the NBA, you are tough. I would take soft Pau Gasolover
tough Reggie Evans; skills are what matter, not toughness, and fortunately
Jax still has skills. Jackson's reputation in the clutch is also overrated;
I'd rather the ball be in Tony's, Manu's, Timmy's or even Neal's hands than
in Jackson's, but having another guy that can knock down important shots in
never a bad thing, I guess. As far as off court issues, Jackson has had his
troubles both with the law and with most of the organizations he's been a
part of, but he's always had good relationships with his teammates and he did
make a good impression within the Spurs organization, which eases my mind a
bit.

Finally, the biggest issue I initially had with this trade was not the first
round pick the Spurs had to give up, but Jackson's contract. Jax will be on
the books for this season and the next, which means the Spurs will be over
the cap in the off season. I never believed the Spurs were going to be able
to make a big free agent signing, but the flexibility would have been nice
when resigning Timmy and Green and trying to bring over Lorbek. After
thinking it over, I can see that the Spurs should be able to resign their
free agents if they decide to do so and bring someone for the full mid level
exception without going over the tax. Jackson expiring contract could also be
useful next season, when teams might be clearing cap space for Dwight Howard
or in case a panicking team decides to have a fire sale, but we'll worry
about that next season.

Conclusion

Overall, I'm not as happy about the trade as some and I worry about Jackson's
bad on-court habits and the spacing issues his lack of range might bring
about. That being said, it's possible for Jackson to surprise me and accept a
smaller role and play within the offense for the rest of the season; I'm just
not counting on it. The fact that his contract will be expiring next season
would make him easier to move should he not live up to our hopes. Trading a
player that fit so seamlessly with the rest of the roster for a gunner with
an attitude problem was definitely a bold, high-risk, high-reward move by
PATFO, but I trust them if they think it gives the Spurs a better chance to
compete this season. My fear is that while Jackson seems to be the same
player he was in 2003(albeit older), this Spurs team might not need (or know
how to use) the old Jackson, essentially turning him into S-Jax 1.0.

RJ vs S-Jax

        多功能性  3分(註)     防守   持球進攻   籃板
RJ                 勝                  無能     險勝
S-Jax     大勝   生涯0.337    略勝     大勝

作者提到RJ在SA從主力得分手轉型到功能性球員的成功，包括放低身段的心理層面，是相
當好的職業球員；而S-Jax曾因在合約還有兩年的情況下要求簽延長合約，而與球團發生
衝突，以一個球員來說相當不好。

註：作者認為可愛持續進步的三分可能可以補足RJ離去後的三分火力。

而Jax的高Usage%也是一個問題（生涯24.5），不論他的表現如何，他的Usage%都沒有什
麼太大的變化，RJ的Usage%只有14.7，代表會壓縮到TP跟鬼禿的持球時間（作者有舉03年
的數據，TP 22.9 鬼禿 22.1 Jax 22.1），而這件事要如何處理取決於Pop的調度，不過
03年Jax的Usage%是他生涯最低，可能是件好事。

生涯Per36值       助攻   失誤
Jax               3.5    2.8
鬼禿              5.0    2.7

每場出手次數  TP 14.9  Jax 14.8(生涯)  鬼禿 <14

另外一個問題是Jax在進攻時會有點太常投遠距離兩分球
（16-23呎出手，山貓時期：1.5/4.2per game， <36%命中率，56.3%被助攻率）
代表有約一半是自己帶球跳投，同時三分球比率增加卻沒有更具殺傷力
（山貓時期：4.9次出手per36   公鹿時期：5.5次出手per36）。

在防守上，Jax應該會比在爛隊時打得更積極，同時鬼禿、綠綠、Jax和可愛會是馬刺的
防守組，不過船長並不是大鎖等級，而且在對上4號球員的防守可能有困難，雖然在勇士
時期可能還可以，但在山貓時期因為有G蛙所以難說，還好有可愛更適合守4號球員，雖然
他還是個新秀而且經驗不夠，但給他多一點時間他會在防守上比Jax做的更好。

在無形的層次上，船長雖然稱不上硬漢，但他有技巧，這就夠了。船長在關鍵時刻的能力
有點被高估了，作者寧可把球給TP、鬼禿、TD，甚至斑馬，不過多一個能挺身而出的球員
不是壞事，我猜啦XD 而在場外，船長在法律上以及球隊裡都有惹過麻煩，不過他跟隊友
的關係一向很好，同時他在過去和馬刺球團的關係也很好，是件好事。

最後，最重要的事情是，關於這項交易，我注意的不是馬刺丟出去一個首輪簽，而是Jax
的合約。馬刺明年薪資會在上限以下，如此一來馬刺有機會重簽他們的自由球員（TD、
Green），又能用全額中產簽下一些人（Lorbek）而不會被課豪華稅，而到了明年船長的
到期合約又可以給追求魔獸的球隊交易價值，不過那是下一季的事情了。

結論

總而言之，作者擔心Jax在場上的壞習慣還有射程問題，但也期待船長能降低角色位置融
入團隊，把一個像RJ如此符合團隊的球員交易成像Jax這種有態度問題的優秀球員肯定一
場高風險、高報酬的賭博，而馬刺能否讓船長回到03年奪冠時的Jax1.0，是作者唯一擔心
的問題。

--

整體來說Jax在場上還是比RJ好
只是擔心他能不能重回馬刺的體系而已
不過感覺不難因為馬刺現在也小球化了...

--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 118.166.170.55
※ 編輯: tth81222        來自: 118.166.170.55       (03/18 14:34)
推 hc1118:老波會同時擺上斑馬+MANU+S-JAX嗎 讓我們拭目以待...
推 csy1911:推翻譯，也原作者提供另一角度的看法。
→ csy1911:但還是要說，原作者提出的攻擊點很弱...
→ csy1911:SJax持球時間長，那是因為他過去都是當主力得分點，是戰術
→ csy1911:需求，他也的確對得起那些持球時間。
→ csy1911:長距離兩分球...so what?! TP不也是嗎?
→ spurs2120:作者想表示的應該是這讓他命中率下降 XD
→ spurs2120:另外03年的時候S-Jax沒有持球長的問題，不過現在就不知
→ spurs2120:事實上命中率跟失誤一直都是他為人詬病的地方，照理說這
→ spurs2120:兩個缺陷都可以透過防守壓力減輕和進攻選擇改善來克服
→ spurs2120:問題就在於他是否能夠適應這樣的角色轉換
→ tth81222:我覺得POP應該會給他時間持球 畢竟03年跟現在的他不能比
→ tth81222:只是要看他的打法會不會對團隊進攻有所提升 防守可以預期
→ tth81222:不會像RJ被念的這麼慘應該是肯定的
推 alex40214:今天的比賽我只有看一點，但看到S-Jax防守Dirk的拚勁還
→ alex40214:有多次為了爭球倒地，就覺得很高興了，這些東西在RJ身上
→ alex40214:都看不到XD
→ sneak: 都看不到XD https://daxiv.com