Jefferson just hit 3 clutch 3's, got a huge steal, and is singlehandedly keepin the US in the game vs. Lithuania.
What did you want him to do? Keep passing it until the buzzer sounded? Somebody had to shoot the ball. The fact of the matter is that Jefferson is one of the few guys on this team that has played with heart. Despite his poor play before, he's shown a lot to me.
If he would have hit the 3 to tie the game, I would have done a full 180 but as it stands I'll wait and see how he performs in the rest of the tourney.
That's how I feel about the situation. EG would have been a fine pick if he would have stayed out of trouble. He was what we needed at the time: a PF. I like Jefferson's game. He's not a franchise player ($78 Mil?). But he's good 2nd tier player. Very good FG%, decent 3pt%, low TO rate, and decent scorer. Between EG and RJ. Whose the smarter player? We'll that answer should be obvious.
Don't compare success in the Olympcs to success in the NBA. They are two completely different brands of basketball. Maybe you haven't noticed, but ALL of our NBA players are struggling in Athens (including one Tim Duncan) so I wouldn't take this time as an opportunity to selectively bash players on the US Olympic team. What's going on in Athens is a combination of the following: (1) The gap between the quality of NBA basketball and the rest of the world has closed exponentially over the last ten years. Anyone that's followed USA basketball in the last four years after the Sydney games could see this performance coming for more reasons than reason #1 (2) Today's NBA basketball players don't really know how to play the game of basketball largely because the NBA has for twenty years now show-cased, changed the rules to encourage a brand of basketball that is fun to watch, but that bends the rules of what the game intended. As pretty as it is, guards are not supposed to be able to drive to the hole at will and score the way basketball was intended to be. The NBA has periodically changed the rules to make it easier for guards to do this (no hand checking, no zone until recently, allowing players to carry the ball, allowing players to travel). So you take a group of players to Athens that excelled under the NBA's unbrella and find out what happens when they are expected to face real basketball without the NBA rules that allowed them to excel in the first place and you get what we are seeing this Olympics. International teams play a smothering brand of zone defense, minus the defensive three-second rule I might add, which is basically like Kryptonite to today's brand of NBA player. The guard's athleticism and isolation becomes useless as the lane is clogged taking away the drive to the hole. The post also becomes useless as a scoring option. To beat this type of zone takes thought and teamwork, not the individual play of the NBA. You have to be able to move well without the ball to fill the gaps in the zone in order to stretch the zone with ball movement. You have to be able to hit the outside shot, the easiest open shot to get against a zone defnese. The NBA players obviously are either unfamiliar with or shunned such strategies as they grew up and are paying for it without the blanket of the NBA's rules to protect them. Their best bet is to play good defense (which they can do with their athleticism if they have any will or desire at all to "win at all costs" like they like to tell the media), force turnovers, and outrun the opposition on the fast break. To the USA Team's credit, they've come a long way in the one week since the Athens games began. They certainly have the right coaching staff to tell them how to play this type of game in Larry Brown and Gregg Poppavich and yesterday's Lithuania game showed me the team might have gotten the message with the way they played even though they lost. The sad thing is even if the team has come around to the reality that NBA basketball will not succeed on the NBA stage, they still lack the shooting touch even if they are doing all the other things you need to do to beat international competition. So if you're going to pile on to Richard Jefferson, you may as well pile on to the vast majority of NBA players. The performance by this year's USA basketball team, gold or no gold, is going to have an effect on the NBA's all ready declining ratings because everything I've said above is clear to anyone with a minimal knowledge of the games of basketball (and I'm not talking about the NBA brand). It will be intersting to see if David Stern answers the call or accepts the ever declining fan base. The NBA will always have a fan base, but to get back to its pinnacle in the late eighites and early 90's, I think the league is going to have to start changing its ways immediately.
He's always seemed like an arrogant prick to me, even back at Arizona. It was verified during the celebrity game during the all-star festivities last year. He played liked it was the finals against the Lakers. Even the announcers wanted to remind him he was playing against Backstreet Boys and Malcom in the Middle.
it's just 1 game and those aren't even 3s in NBA. c'mon, he's not known as a 3pt shooter or clutch player, he's a solid role player who shouldn't signed for $78M, period.
No really? It's just one game? I thought one game was enough to pass judgment on him. That's what this thread was about. He's a good player, with or wihtout Jason Kidd. He has proven that before, and will prove it again. Is he worth 13 m a year? I don't know, but how many guys were worth the contracts they got this year. If the market value of Turkoglu is 8 million, I'll gladly give Jefferson significantly more than that.
RJ's true colors are still way better than EG's. and i'm probably the last rocket fan hoping EG can conquer whatever ails him.
when did he proved he's a good "NBA" player without Jason Kidd? it's a no-brainer he does NOT worth $13M/yr; if compare to another one over-paid player is how you judge their value then you must believe RJ is 3 times better than Cat Mobley right? again, Jefferson is a very good role player. a solid 3rd option i'd like to have on my team, that's it, no super-star material. 18.5pt/5.7reb/3.8asi/1.12stl/0.34blk i meant very solid, but not fantastic at anything. i'd rank him in the group of Corey Maggette, Mobley, Ginobili, Richard Hamilton, ... no all-star, no Max (or close to Max) contract.
When Kidd was injured. Jefferson had several monster games and averaged something like 26 points a game, and Martin stepped it up as well. If you'd seen them, you'd say the same thing. No. The market value for players changes significantly over time. According to the market set this offseason, 13 m is in line with the contracts that were handed out. Had Mobley been a UFA, I have no doubt he would get a hefty pay increase too.
Hard Rock, I'm not sure what you guys are debating. There are too many variables when talking about "value;" RJ specifically. Especially when we are talking about pretty good players (Kidd or not). I'm mean, I can understand debating about Cato (a few years back) or J. Howard's old 105 MIL contract. But not RJ's. He's good. Once they reach those "soild" or "good" levels it's a sure thing they will be "overpaid" in our eyes. Hell, MoT's 48MIL contract should seem like a bargain by now. In the end, all that matters are building a championship team. That means: Don't have any "bad" players that are "overpaid!" By the way, just wait until the end of 2005 when Mobley's contract is re-negotiated. He wont be asking for peanuts, either (more than his current 31MIL contract!).
Jefferson is nothing without Jason Kidd. RJ is just another above average slasher and Kidd is the only reason Jefferson scores so much. I bet if you put another athletic slasher such as Gerald Wallace, he'd mach RJ's stats.
Martin missed many of those 15 games Kidd missed, who'd you expect to score on that team then? RJ was their 3rd man who "stepped up" for the scoring duty and actually was their top scorer 11 times in those 15 games. guess what, they were 4-11 when RJ the top scorer. i meant, when you're on a bad team(Nets without Kidd and/or Martin) someone just have to score alot of points. S. Jackson/Sura looked like stars on that Hawks team last season (Sura avg. 15/8/5 in those games). for the season, the Nets (47-35), were 16-17 when RJ tops the high Pts. enough said. as long as the Max still $14M~$14.5M, RJ does NOT woth $13M. had Mobley been a UFA he'd got somethnig like $6M~$8M. probably $7M by the Hawks or Nuggets if lucky.
Which is the bigger mistake: Sign RJ for a $78M contract or Draft Griffin at 7th pick and then waive him. I say the former one.
