http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2003/writers/marty_burns/09/24/jackson/index.html Sometimes, good things DON'T come to those who wait. A close look will reveal a nasty five letter word..."Fegan"
Fegan was my response in another post, as well. Q -- assuming Rox need and $ demands were equal, which player do you go after, SJax or JJax?
Agreed. The only advantage I give to JJ is he's probably a better post up player. But the Rox wouldn't need alot of that from a SF anyway. Or at least not enough to offset the youth and defense of SJax.
I strongly disagree. Jim Jackson is a better shooter and better all around player. Not to mention he's proven to be clutch in the playoffs and when games are on the line and Stephen Jackson looked pretty bad last year in alot of playoff games. I really think Stephen Jackson is entirely over-rated. He's a great athlete but he's stupid, turn over prone and streaky with his shot. I really don't understand how the people who complain about how bone-headed Francis and Mobley are want Stephen Jackson. Jim Jackson has proven to be effective on what? 10 teams? Stephen Jackson had one or two mediocre years playing as a third, fourth or maybe even fifth option behind Tim Duncan, David Robinson, Tony Parker and Emanuel Ginobilli. There is no doubt there is potential there, but will he reach his potential? The jury is still out. Can you tell i'm not a Stephen Jackson fan?
