View Poll Results: Do you want nets to get Jim Jackson?

uptown4784 · 01-13-2005, 05:58 AM

Yes
or
no

uptown4784 · 01-13-2005, 07:48 AM

How about Raja Bell? He think he can help our bench a lot. I dont really like best in Nets vs Pistons game. He was shooting ball to much

pinetar · 01-13-2005, 02:03 PM

Yes...conditionally.

On the floor, he's productive and certainly would improve the Nets current rotation. We would see less two and three point guard lineups (ugh!).

He has a reputation as a difficult locker room personality, which may be a factor in his moving around from team to team. But who knows, maybe he's improved in this area.

I would want to give up only expendable assets for him, such as second round picks, a trade exception, or players such as Dreier or Vaughn. But only if it does not interfere with the ability to add a big man.

**schub** · 01-13-2005, 08:21 PM

If he can be had without giving up more than a 2nd round pick or one of the marginal players.

I guess Mercer isn't marginal, but I see a Mercer for Jackson swap as an upgrade.

I don't think Thorn intends to give up more than that either, and that could be what keeps the Nets from getting him, since other teams are in the mix.

Still, D'Allessandro said on the radio halftime show tonight that the Nets could be pretty close to getting him.

**Petey** · 01-13-2005, 08:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by schub!
If he can be had without giving up more than a 2nd round pick or one of the marginal players.

I guess Mercer isn't marginal, but I see a Mercer for Jackson swap as an upgrade.

I don't think Thorn intends to give up more than that either, and that could be what keeps the Nets from getting him, since other teams are in the mix.

Still, D'Allessandro said on the radio halftime show tonight that the Nets could be pretty close to getting him.

At this point I would gladdy part with the Clippers 2nd round pick and Mercer for him, in part to just dump Mercer's contract which expires next year.

-Petey

**schub** · 01-13-2005, 08:57 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Petey!

At this point I would gladdy part with the Clippers 2nd round pick and Mercer for him, in part to just dump Mercer's contract which expires next year.

-Petey

Jackson has another year too:
http://www.hoopshype.com/salaries/new_orleans.htm

for an extra $1M.

RJ, VC and JJ would be a very solid 2/3 rotation next year though.

**Petey** · 01-13-2005, 09:15 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by schub!

Jackson has another year too:
http://www.hoopshype.com/salaries/new_orleans.htm

for an extra $1M.

RJ, VC and JJ would be a very solid 2/3 rotation next year though.

Oh really, well we would have to take some filler to make a Mercer and Jackson swap work huh?

I don't want Mercer or Buford here if we were to acquire Jackson.

-Petey

**schub** · 01-13-2005, 09:21 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Petey!

Oh really, well we would have to take some filler to make a Mercer and Jackson swap work huh?

When you do the (Mercer for Jackson) trade on the trade checker, it gives you this:

Quote:

Due to New Jersey and New Orleans being over the cap, the 15% trade rule is invoked. New Jersey and New Orleans had to be no more than 115% plus $100,000 of the salary given out unless trade exceptions were used for the trade to be accepted, which did happen here.

This trade satisfies the provisions of the Collective Bargaining Agreement.

So I guess it can be done with a portion of one of the exceptions.

Still, in all the press about a possible Jackson deal, there has been no mention of Mercer at all.

**Petey** · 01-13-2005, 09:29 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by schub!

When you do the (Mercer for Jackson) trade on the trade checker, it gives you this:

So I guess it can be done with a portion of one of the exceptions.

Still, in all the press about a possible Jackson deal, there has been no mention of Mercer at all.

I don't think we can package an exception with a player, and I'm sure they would not trade us Mercer for Jackson straight up...

It's more like my wishfull thinking, to just dump Mercer.

-Petey

**schub** · 01-13-2005, 09:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Petey!

I don't think we can package an exception with a player, and I'm sure they would not trade us Mercer for Jackson straight up...

It's more like my wishfull thinking, to just dump Mercer.

-Petey

Hey, it was my wishful thinking first!

But I guess a part of the exception can be packaged with Mercer, if the trade checker validated it. I've heard so much conflicting info on this issue, that I'm not sure what the deal is.

**SeaNet** · 01-13-2005, 11:54 PM

If Thorn thinks its the right move, that's fine, but he's not what we need. And I thought he was 35, and not likely to be a part of the future. I'd rather play Kan Dickens and see if there's anything there, because we need shooters desperately (and have for 3+ seasons now), until Zoran comes back and then force feed Zoran minutes. We've got perimeter people (admittedly some of whom are on IR). What we need is big people. And we need a younger big person. Its fine if we get Cliffy for a the smaller trade exemption and nothing, but he's not any kind of long-term answer. Whatever else we do, other than acquiring a mobile rebounding, defensively oriented power forward who can finish at the hoop is window dressing. Its great if Rod and Ed think that its going to help us down the road, but until the big man issue is resolved, it isn't going to make that much of a difference.

uptown4784 · 01-14-2005, 07:37 AM

Well if we get JJ we can probably use him until his contract finish. I think nets should not sign buford next year and keep JJ. We can use JJ coming off bench to give some rest to Vince and RJ

**schub** · 01-14-2005, 07:57 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by SeaNet!
If Thorn thinks its the right move, that's fine, but he's not what we need. And I thought he was 35, and not likely to be a part of the future. I'd rather play Kan Dickens and see if there's anything there, because we need shooters desperately (and have for 3+ seasons now), until Zoran comes back and then force feed Zoran minutes. We've got perimeter people (admittedly some of whom are on IR). What we need is big people. And we need a younger big person. Its fine if we get Cliffy for a the smaller trade exemption and nothing, but he's not any kind of long-term answer. Whatever else we do, other than acquiring a mobile rebounding, defensively oriented power forward who can finish at the hoop is window dressing. Its great if Rod and Ed think that its going to help us down the road, but until the big man issue is resolved, it isn't going to make that much of a difference.

I'd like to see Dickens get more of a shot too, before his 10-day runs out. He must not be showing much in practice if he can't get any minutes in games in which they basically use a 7 man rotation.

furnace · 01-14-2005, 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by pinetar!

He has a reputation as a difficult locker room personality, which may be a factor in his moving around from team to team. But who knows, maybe he's improved in this area.

From what I heard when the trade happened, he was supposedly a locker room leader down in Houston...

NYCbballFan · 01-14-2005, 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by schub!

I'd like to see Dickens get more of a shot too, before his 10-day runs out. He must not be showing much in practice if he can't get any minutes in games in which they basically use a 7 man rotation.

And start 2 SGs and the next guy off the bench is a 6 foot no-longer-quick PG with his own bad hamstring. A Raja Bell, Trenton Hassell, Bruce Bowen hustle type would be useful right now.

View Poll Results: Do you want nets to get Jim Jackson?

Thread Tools Display Modes

Thread Tools

Display Modes