[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

Knicks need a 2guard, what about Luke Jackson?
Author Thread
nyk4ever
Posts: 41010
Alba Posts: 12
Joined: 1/12/2005
Member: #848
USA
8/20/2006  11:48 AM
http://www.realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/41966/20060820/cavs_wont_pick_up_luke_jacksons_option/

The Morning Journal - With the impending signing of Drew Gooden and the addition of Scot Pollard, the Cavaliers have 16 players under contract. The team is also hoping to sign guard David Wesley, meaning that they will have to trim some players from their roster.

The most likely cuts will be newly acquired guard Eddie Basden and guard Stephen Graham, both of whom have unguaranteed deals.

However, the Cavaliers like Graham and would prefer to part with the likes of Ira Newble, Luke Jackson or Sasha Pavlovic, although team sources say no trades are in the works for any of these players.

The Morning News reports that the team not pick up Jackson's fourth-year option by Oct. 31, making him an unrestricted free agent at the season's end.


If the Cavs aren't going to keep him, I suggest Zeke should make a serious push for this guy. Yeah I know alot of you are going to look at his stats and say this guys sucks, but he was a VERY good player in college and with the Cavs he has had both trouble getting playing time and bouts with injury. Contrary to his stats the last 2 years, he is an excellent shooter, both from inside the arc and outside and he's a average to above-average defender. The Knicks have a SERIOUS hole at the 2spot in the lineup and I think Luke Jackson would be an excellent buy-low player, who can really help this team for the next 7-10 years.

I would trade Nate straightup for Luke.

[Edited by - nyk4ever on 08-20-2006 11:50 AM]
"OMG - did we just go on a two-trade-wining-streak?" -SupremeCommander
AUTOADVERT
nixluva
Posts: 56258
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/5/2004
Member: #758
USA
8/20/2006  12:15 PM
I'm not sure you can truly say that the Knicks have a "serious hole" at SG. We have like ten million guards. How does Luke Jackson help? Nothing against him. I think he's a fine player, but Right now we will likely see Francis and Jamal absorb most of the minutes at SG and then we still have Nate, QRich and Jalen who can cover that spot as well. We simply have too much talent at SG to bring in a guy who isn't gonna get a chance to play.

We aren't gonna have a problem scoring. We'll hit enough 3's to keep teams honest. The new offense is designed to create space for our players to attack the basket and its done by using motion, picks and passing. When the 3 is open we have guys who can make enough of them. I'm truly not worried about the offense.

As for trading Nate for Luke... Nah. Nate has proven that he's a serious threat and teams really can't stop him. He was only a rookie and he still had an impact on games. His energy is infectious and the defense picks up when he's on the floor as does the aggressiveness on offense. He's a guy that I think we should keep and allow to grow. He'll be ready to take over when Steph and Francis are fading or gone.
OasisBU
Posts: 24138
Alba Posts: 4
Joined: 6/18/2002
Member: #257
USA
8/20/2006  12:43 PM
I think the Knicks have a serious hole at the 2G.

First of all we are totally undersized at the position, creating a defensive liability and a matchup nightmare in general.

Second, we have nobody who can consistently hit shots from 15ft or the 3pt arch.

These are pretty important things to have from the 2G position. What we have are undersized totally inconsistent players.

"If at first you don't succeed, then maybe you just SUCK." Kenny Powers
nyk4ever
Posts: 41010
Alba Posts: 12
Joined: 1/12/2005
Member: #848
USA
8/20/2006  1:03 PM
Posted by nixluva:

I'm not sure you can truly say that the Knicks have a "serious hole" at SG. We have like ten million guards. How does Luke Jackson help? Nothing against him. I think he's a fine player, but Right now we will likely see Francis and Jamal absorb most of the minutes at SG and then we still have Nate, QRich and Jalen who can cover that spot as well. We simply have too much talent at SG to bring in a guy who isn't gonna get a chance to play.

We aren't gonna have a problem scoring. We'll hit enough 3's to keep teams honest. The new offense is designed to create space for our players to attack the basket and its done by using motion, picks and passing. When the 3 is open we have guys who can make enough of them. I'm truly not worried about the offense.

As for trading Nate for Luke... Nah. Nate has proven that he's a serious threat and teams really can't stop him. He was only a rookie and he still had an impact on games. His energy is infectious and the defense picks up when he's on the floor as does the aggressiveness on offense. He's a guy that I think we should keep and allow to grow. He'll be ready to take over when Steph and Francis are fading or gone.

For once in your posting on this forum would you please say something bad about a Knick. The Knicks have had a serious hole at the 2guard since Allan Houston went down with his injuries, it's well noted. Neither Jamal Crawford nor Steve Francis are 2guards, they are both pointguards and to add to that Steve Francis has absolutely ZERO role on this basketball team. The Knicks as it stands right now have 5 PGs on their roster, the glut has to go and it's time to bring in a real 2guard, one who can shoot the ball and play defense against other 2guards in this league and Jackson can definately do that. There isn't one player on the Knicks that other teams are afraid to leave open from downtown and that is a serious problem. Jackson can alleviate that.

I know your not worried about offense but that seems to be the only thing your care about. Believe it or not, offense is not the only aspect to playing basketball, theres also this thing called defense. While Jackson isn't a great defender, he holds his own while guarding other 2guards in the league and at 6'7 215 he's got excellent size on both ends of the floor.

For just one second would you stop driving the propoganda wagon. This team has serious flaws yet you have never once seemed taken the blindfold off and owned up to them.

[Edited by - nyk4ever on 08-20-2006 1:03 PM]
"OMG - did we just go on a two-trade-wining-streak?" -SupremeCommander
metra
Posts: 20743
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/11/2003
Member: #473
8/20/2006  1:30 PM
Top 10 SG's: http://realgm.com/src_feature/659/20060817/the_top_shooting_guards_of_the_nba/

Francis is #10. Considering that's after a season of sh!t, i'd say it's not bad. Chemistry wise he may be a problem.. but let's not exaggerate our needs. We've got all the players, we need to make it work. And if we really are trying to fit another person on this roster, i'd say it needs to be a big man bruiser who just gets boards and plays tough D. No one on our team does that or has extreme offensive talent to offset that (i'm still waiting for curry).
After the worst season of his career in almost every statistical category, it may be hard to believe that Francis still deserves a spot on this list. However, Francis is one of the most skilled basketball players to ever grace the NBA courts. At 6-foot-3 and 200 pounds, Francis has the body of a running back and with the speed and vertical leap to boast, he can get to the hoop at will, while not being a liability on the defensive end.

Few remember Francis gracing the highlight reel on a daily basis, nicknamed Stevie Franchise. Most will now say, “Steve Francis? A franchise player? Don’t make me laugh.” But it was no laughing matter; Francis was the heir to Hakeem Olajuwon’s crown in Houston before a giant emerged from behind the Great Wall of China to take over the reigns.

Nearing 30 years of age, fans of Francis will hope to see him either moved out of New York, where he has never looked very comfortable or perhaps – just maybe – see Francis return to his glory days in a Knicks uniform and drop 20 points-per-game, five rebounds-per-game and five assists-per-game at the shooting guard spot under the tutelage of Isiah Thomas. But the fact remains that a player of Francis’ calibre needs to be on this list.



[Edited by - metra on 08-20-2006 1:32 PM]
nixluva
Posts: 56258
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/5/2004
Member: #758
USA
8/20/2006  1:35 PM
OK so your answer to our problems is to bring in a guy who is likely to be cut from a team in favor of a guy who doesn't have a guarnteed contract? Exactly why should anyone think he's gonna be more effective than the Guards we already have? What has he done to make you confident that he can help this team more than the players we already have, who have already done far more than he has in his career?

We're as undersized as the Chicago Bulls are with Ben Gordon. Its a two way street. The bigger guard may have some advantage on one end and then be unable to guard our smaller quicker guards on the other end. Besides we already have defensive replacements who can come in if we find that we're being overmatched. I talk about offense cuz this is an OFFENSIVE team. We'll be winning more with our offense than with our D. Its just the way it is. Now that's not to ignore D. I love great D like anyone else. I'm just being realistic. We'll win using "timely" defense. We have the personnel to play good D in spurts, but not for a full 48. We can put a good defensive unit on the floor, but not for an entire game. We won't have to play wire to wire D. This team WILL be a tough offensive team and teams are gonna have trouble stopping our attack. The key is for us to get stops at the right time in order to secure the win. Until some of our young players who are better on D can fully develop and have a bigger role, this is how we're gonna have to play.
JayNYC
Posts: 20732
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 6/7/2004
Member: #682
USA
8/20/2006  1:40 PM
I don't know if I agree with the notion that the Knicks have a serious need for a 2 guard!

The fact's are very simple, Yes.. Steve Francis would be undersized (In theory- although he and Dwayne Wade are roughly the same size)... or Jamal Crawford might be too weak... But the truth of the matter is this they both can score with the best of them.. and Jamal Crawford's perimeter game is really underestimated (IMO).

Bringing in Luke Jackson, is not gonna be a move that upgrades this position. It"d be another lateral move that would not bring about significant changes in team dynamics.

Hey, i'm not opposed to getting a 2 guard that is tall, and can shoot lights out. Plays D.. As a fan, who would'nt want that caliber player on their team??? The reality is this though, unless we are talking about getting T-Mac or Ray Allen, any other move would not impact that position and frankly should not be considered as a first option for change.

What I believe we need, is an intimidator.. and a bruiser down low! We have too many finesse players.. we need the guys that are gonna do the grunt work. Grab Boards, Block shots.. and give NYK it's defensive aggresiveness back.. I'm tryna find somebody that is gonna let opposing teams know, it ain't gon be a lay up drill ya dig!

[Edited by - JayNYC on 08-20-2006 1:41 PM]
Inhale deep like the words of my breath/ I never sleep, cause sleep is the cousin of death-- Circa 1994 Nasty Nas: NY State of Mind
Marv
Posts: 35540
Alba Posts: 69
Joined: 9/2/2002
Member: #315
8/20/2006  2:00 PM
yeah luke was indeed great in college. but a lot guys don't translate to the pros. is luke one of them? you're gambling he's not, but so far he hasn't proven otherwise.

and re: trading nate for luke? over my dead body!! (hopefully not). i'm still of the opinion that this current knick roster sucks big time, but nate's potential is huge. he's still an earl boykins/ ben gordon/bobby jackson game-changer to me, the kind of guy who can win you a lot of games in the 4th quarter. i want to keep him.
misterearl
Posts: 38786
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/16/2004
Member: #799
USA
8/20/2006  2:37 PM
Marv if the current Knicks roster sucks big time... what are the players, in order of priority, who you want to move elsewhere?

1.

2.

3.

etc....
once a knick always a knick
rvhoss
Posts: 24943
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/2/2004
Member: #777
Switzerland
8/20/2006  2:46 PM
we're ok at the 2.
all kool aid all the time.
Marv
Posts: 35540
Alba Posts: 69
Joined: 9/2/2002
Member: #315
8/20/2006  2:51 PM
isiah's backed himself into a corner - i don't want to move guys for worse contracts. i want to let contracts expire.

the guys i'd like to keep are frye, nate, lee, balkman. i wanted to keep butler. i want to keep the big game for sentimental reasons. everyone else can go to be replaced by the high draft picks we could have/should have had.
misterearl
Posts: 38786
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/16/2004
Member: #799
USA
8/20/2006  3:12 PM
Marv - what about Jermaine O'Neal?

once a knick always a knick
misterearl
Posts: 38786
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/16/2004
Member: #799
USA
8/20/2006  3:15 PM
C'mon - many though Isiah was backed in a corner with Clarence Weatherspoon, Milos Vujanic and Howard Eisley.

There are more deals to come.

Which player do you want gone first?

once a knick always a knick
rvhoss
Posts: 24943
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/2/2004
Member: #777
Switzerland
8/20/2006  4:45 PM
i want the player the most out of shape come camp be gone.
all kool aid all the time.
nixluva
Posts: 56258
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/5/2004
Member: #758
USA
8/20/2006  5:45 PM
Well to me this is the BEST roster we've had in a long time. Where some see holes, I see dangerous offensive threats. Do you realize just how good we are at the guard position? VERY few teams have as many good guards as we do.
Just going off of what they've been able to do in the last 3 years you'd be looking at players that on any night will give you about:

Steph - 20/8/3
Francis - 19/6/6
Jamal - 16/4/3

This is a non issue to me. This team is so versatile that we can affford to bring a defensive role player off the bench and we'd still have loads of scoring. Some of us are still living in the past when it comes to this team. Just remember that we have some VERY talented and skilled young players who are going to come in more experienced and with a bigger role than they had last year. Guys like Curry should be better prepared than last year due to all the special attention he's gotten this offseason from the Knicks staff. Plus we added defensive role players. What else do you want? No the team isn't perfect but dang, its a LOT BETTER THAN SOME THINK. We just don't need a Luke Jackson or anyone like that.

I'd also remind you that last year Jamal REALLY improved his D as the year went on. Plus we still have QRIch, who surprised us with his improvement on D. I don't say too much negative about the team cuz I TRULY LIKE THIS TEAM.
I see a talented and versatile team. Most of them get along just fine and winning will only make that better. I LOVE the idea of Isiah as coach and I LOVE his philosophy for this team. His system makes perfect sense to me for this roster.
rvhoss
Posts: 24943
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/2/2004
Member: #777
Switzerland
8/20/2006  6:03 PM
all kool aid all the time.
Marv
Posts: 35540
Alba Posts: 69
Joined: 9/2/2002
Member: #315
8/20/2006  6:31 PM
these stats are meaningless.

as my man fish says - watch the games.

did you like what you saw out of them last year? do you really want to go to war with those 3?

it's no problem if you say yes. everybody's opinion is good and that's what we're all here for.

but i say a resounding no.
wsdm
Posts: 20803
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 8/16/2006
Member: #1167

8/20/2006  6:36 PM
Backcourt: If Marbury's playing hard and I think he will under Isiah nearly all of the time, I'll go to war with him. I'm neutral toward going to war with Crawford as 6th man. He looked great in the last month of last year. I'll go to war with Nate on my team any day! I wouldn't go to war in the WNBA with Francis, though!

[Edited by - wsdm on 08-20-2006 6:37 PM]
www.selltheknicks.com----No more DOLANOMICS!
rvhoss
Posts: 24943
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/2/2004
Member: #777
Switzerland
8/20/2006  6:44 PM
asolutely, last year was a fluke.
Posted by Marv:

these stats are meaningless.

as my man fish says - watch the games.

did you like what you saw out of them last year? do you really want to go to war with those 3?

it's no problem if you say yes. everybody's opinion is good and that's what we're all here for.

but i say a resounding no.

all kool aid all the time.
JohnWallace44
Posts: 25119
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 6/14/2005
Member: #910
USA
8/20/2006  11:23 PM
Luke Jackson? Where's he going to play?

There's not nearly enought minutes to go around already at the 2 spot.
Alan Hahn: Nate Robinson has been on a ridonkulous scoring tear lately (remember when he couldn't hit Jerome James with a Big Mac in early January?)
Knicks need a 2guard, what about Luke Jackson?

©2001-2025 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy