| . |
 |
We have discussed missing Kenny Hustle, Jrue, Wood, and Randell, but I would like to add that Frank Jackson. For all that we are missing right now, I miss Frank Jackson. I would gladly take his $12/hr contract over what we are paying Bledsoe and what we paid JJ. He had chemistry with players, and wasn?t some malcontent. I think he is going to be in the Pistons long term future.
If you Jimmer it, they will come.
Contributor
If a player doesn’t suck wherever he goes, we should’ve kept him. Is that that how that math works?
I don’t know math, all I know is he looks like a man with a new lease on life in Detroit, meanwhile in New Orleans we are running an island of misfit toys. Perhaps the answer wasn’t moving on from Frank, perhaps the answer was just having a ******** system.
Contributor
We did have a new system. He needed to go to a new location.
It happens all the time in sports. New surroundings. New place. Some guys step it up and become the player they were meant to in another team and no iteration of reality could’ve achieved that where they were.
I’d argue he could have stayed here and brought us as much success as Bledsoe has/hasn’t, and at a fraction of the price, while allowing us to have more flexibility with the roster. Such is Pelslife.
I miss NAW having 2 good ankles and Josh having 2 good thumbs.
Hell, we've had ''we should've kept'' takes onguys who have sucked where they ended up.Originally Posted by Eman5805
If some people on this site had their way we'd have 56 guys under contract. Score 20 points once and you have a lifetime deal.
Basketball.
I like seeing guys doing well when we let them go because it reminds me that our front office is stupid, and they make lots of bad moves, so why defend them?
Frank is still young, and has a hell of a lot of talent. This team couldn’t find a spot for him on this roster, much like they can’t find mins for young players behind Adams and Bledsoe. Sometimes you just have to accept that the front office isn’t smart enough to get out of their own way.
Last edited by UNO Gracias; 04-18-2021 at 04:49 PM.
I liked Frank, but he was never going to do it here. Sometimes you need a change of scenery. Frank had a rough time here with injuries and his lack of confidence showed
Same here. I was a big fan of him and Cheick Diallo as our 2nd round gems the time they were Pelicans.
Ehh
I love how people think anybody who scores a few points in a few games is a good player. If you guys were Dallas fans, you would probably have been lamenting the loss of James Johnson after his first few games here.
Almost anybody who gets opportunity in the NBA can score points in an NBA game - especially for bad teams. If that is your criteria for guys the Pelicans "let get away" then you will be frustrated eternally. I remember when fans were upset about letting Xavier Henry get away after he had a handful of good games with the Lakers. And yet, it seems like people never learn. Any time a guy is let go and goes and scores some points for a bad team, fans will think we lost a good one. Then, the guy will turn into nothing, fans will forget and complain about the next guy. The cycle never ends
@mcnamara247
My lament has nothing to do with him performing well over a long period of time, it’s how he is doing it. He is doing it off the bench. At a time when the Pels are struggling to find impact from their guards off the bench, when Hart, Bledsoe, and Ball are probably not in this teams future because they don’t fit and will cost too much, we are watching a bench player (that we let go) show that he is what we need (both on a $ and position basis).
Who knows, maybe one day we will develop a player, or maybe not be a farm team for real NBA teams.
LMAO. First our front office was moronic for holding onto Frank Jackson for as long as they did, and now they are moronic because they let him go. Just can't win.
farm team...we have lewis,,HAW,,marshall and jax...take your pick who will go else where and be at least a good rotational player......now if they go in a trade for a star, im fine with that...
I didn’t call them moronic for letting him go. Hell, I thought he wasn’t used enough. Glad to see him doing well.LMAO. First our front office was moronic for holding onto Frank Jackson for as long as they did, and now they are moronic because they let him go. Just can't win.
There's a flip side to that coin: weary, wise-guy analysts who think almost everybody sucks and dismiss any enthusiasm for back ups or young players and their chance to develop as the prattling of naive fans addled by hometown bias. I can remember when some folks on this board were openly contemptuous of Julius Randle, asserted he would never be anything more than a volume scorer on a bad team, a black hole who the Pels were fortunate to be rid of, the kind of player fans liked because they just didn't know any better...
And Randle is still a volume scorer who has never shown the ability to be an efficient, content 3rd option who helps in ways other than scoring. Nothing has changed. He just has found a team that allowed him to be the #1 guy. Wake me when he becomes anything different
Why should he HAVE to show the ability to be an efficient, content 3rd option who helps in ways other than scoring, if he's showing the ability to be the #1 guy? That's like saying Jaxson Hayes hasn't shown the ability to shut down point guards.
He doesnt have to do anything in a vacuum. But that is what he would have had to become here to have value to the team. We already have high usage forwards who dont defend. Dont need a 3rd
So, I dont lament losing Randle or Wood, because those are not the types of guys I would want to add to Zion and Ingram. Nor do I miss Frank Jackson, who yes, can score points down 20 playing on Detroit while the opponent is sleepwalking.
Interesting. So for you Randle is the same guy he always was, notwithstanding the fact that he's now a 46/40/80 guy on about 18 attempts a game--not really a super high volume. He's also good for 10 boards and 6 assists a game and plays big minutes for a team ranked third in defensive efficiency. Maybe you're saying the Knicks are a top 5 defensive team in spite of him, but at a minimum it seems to show that, whatever his defensive deficiencies, they are not so severe as to be fatal to good team defense.
I agree that at a pairing of Randle and Zion is not an obvious choice on first viewing. Their playing styles seemed highly duplicative as did their weaknesses. But consider how point Zion would pair with a Randle that shoots 40% from range--better than Ingram or Ball. Can you honestly say the Pels were better served spending $20 million on Darius Miller and J.J. Redick than on a 24-year-old Randle? Not to mention he's a solid locker room and exactly the kind of authoritative vet presence Griffin's always winging about.
Personally, I'd have loved to have seen a how an Ingram/Randle/Zion trio would have evolved, especially if paired with a cheap, tough defensive pivot like Noel and Plumlee and a smart point guard. At a minimum you could sell high on the one that didn't fit if need be.
I saw him do the same thing once AD sat out and we were stinking. Let me go pull up his stats from then.
brb
Post ASB that year -- 24.6 ppg, 50 from field, 35 from 3 about 18 shots a game
Same guy. Just allowed to do it. Like, sure he got more skilled maybe. But basically the same guy.
You know, I do respect your POV, but it's hard for me see Derrick Favors (or Adams for that matter) as a better option right now, today, then Randle would be. Further, wouldn't his value as an asset be greater than DF or SA. Imagine the possibilities if we had him to trade at the end of this season.
I know this is all really a moot issue, but in does speak to the missteps of this front office in year one of their governance.
I agree with this 100%
There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote