craigehlo

I remember pretty clearly watching Nash as a Sun and Mav in his first 3 years. His game looked NOTHING like Jack's and more like John Crotty's. He would always dribble the ball down the baseline, then under the hoop and usually get caught with nobody open to pass to. If there's anyone on this roster Nash in year 3 resembled it was Sergio, and that's a bit of a stretch.

Jack's turnovers remind me of Allen Iverson's turnovers (dibbles off the leg, out-of-control passes while driving to the hoop). Too bad his scoring and steals don't come close to making up like Iverson's do.

andalusian

Oh, no doubt about it. It is, however, to be expected from a young player that has the ball a lot in his hands. Not too different from Sergio taking ill-advised 3 pointers or breaking his defender only to brick a 2 ft floater or play matador defense or LaMarcus throwing one short jumper after another or Travis playing out of control and getting an offensive foul or Webster missing the ocean from 3...

Young players are going to give you these up and down performances. No other way around it (possible exception, Brandon, but even he has some up and down games).

Jack can drive you mad and he can make you love his hustle, fearless drives and ability to ice free throws. He is far from perfect, but at least he is trying...

BBert

Are you talking about Jack or Sergio? I don't think Jack's turnovers are the result of his "risk taking." More often than not it's because he is a bad ball handler and not a good passer, and because of his reckless drives to the basket.

If you want to talk about a risk-reward type of point guard, you are talking about players like Steve Nash or Sergio Rodriquez. These are the types of players who, when allowed to flow and get into their game, create positives that far, far outway their turnovers.

In essence I agree with the general sentiment that certain good players, who have the ball in their hands a lot, are going to get the kind of turnovers you can live with. I wish Nate could understand this concept. I swear the guy would bench Steve Nash for his boy Jack.

__________________
In KP I trust.

cpt.napalm

How many of Clyde's turnovers were stepping out of bounds on the side of the court. Jarrett has to have his 2 a night or it isn't a game. And at least one bobbled fast break. I would trust most 5th grade point guards to run the weave better than Jarrett.

Masbee

Turnover stats can be deceptive as Clyde and Mike point out.

I don't pay much attention when total turnovers, turnovers per game, or related stats (ie, #2 in NBA in turnovers) are used.

More useful are assist to turnover ratio's, turnover percentages, assist percentages and useage rates.

Or, just use PER, which adds up a players good stats, subtracts their bad stats (including turnovers) to come up with an overall number so players can be compared to each other as to overall productivity.

Using PER, you will see that players like Nash and Wade, despite rakcing up many turnovers outproduce a whole slew of players that rarely turn it over.

And PER clues you in to players that have high scoring averages, yet give a lot back due to turnovers, missed shots, etc.

Jack does annoy with his turnovers, many unforced. Does Jack overcome the negative of his turnovers to make a good contribution?

It seems not. His PER of 12.6 is below last season's 14.5, below the league average of 15.0.

He is tied with Sergio for most team Turnovers per 36 min at 3.2. But, because he get fewer assists than Sergio has a worse Assist to Turnover per 36 ratio: 1.6 for Jack, 2.2 for Sergio. Blake is 3.5. Roy is 3.1.

Jack's useage rate is not bad. At least he isn't a ball hog.

Joel, Sergio and Jack have the worst Turnover Percentages on the team. Blake's is ok and Roy's is terrific - 17th best in NBA.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/POR/2008.html

KingSpeed

Of course Jack's PER was higher last year. He started. And he's not gettin as many assists because when he comes into the game, he's not playing PG. When he has the ball in his hands, he's looking to score.

__________________

Masbee

PER is a minute (and pace) adjusted stat. This makes for better comparisons of bench players vs starters, players on different teams, and players in different seasons.

Look at Outlaw's PER. He doesn't start and his number is much higher than Jack's. Starting has nothing to do with PER score. Many bench players have above average PER scores.

In some ways getting a higher PER score from the bench is easier - playing inferior opponents, getting more opportunities to score. In some ways harder - draw more defensive attention, not playing with your best teammates.

wizmentor

Coach Wooden used to talk (according to Bill Walton) about
fouls of omission and fouls of comission (sp?). Same applies
to turnovers. If you're trying to accomplish something and
you turn the ball over, it's much different than careless
mistakes.

Since, it's hard to keep track of such things (unless you're
coaching the team), then it's probably better to use something
like PER as Masbee suggests.

__________________
"Bayless is going to be that guy where, you know, Nate goes 'Oh you put in your second unit to give your starters a rest? Well, watch this.' And he's going to throw in Bayless and he's going to point to that second unit point guard and he's going to say 'Eat Him Alive', and Jarryd probably will."

---Dave Deckard of BlazersEdge

Shaq: Hey Thorpe, I'm getting sized for a thumb ring
SportsNation David Thorpe: I guess your wife is back in your life. Congrats.