PDA

View Full Version : JERMAINE is VITAL



diamonddave00
03-17-2005, 11:45 AM
People enough with the we are a better team without Jermaine O'Neal crap. Yes , they are 4-2 without him . Since Dale Davis came back. But look at who the 4 wins are against Jazz(twice) , Blazers and Warriors 3 teams all 20 games + under .500....

The loses were to the Cavs and Lakers only teams over .500 and the Lakers by only a 32-30 record. They should beat the Lakers ,Friday based on fact Lakers play the Heat , Thursday night and are a bad road team.

For the Pacers to have any success in the playoffs JERMAINE MUST PLAY. Without him the Pacers are reduced to a perimeter team. In addition we will have 2 Shaq like foul shooters in the game late with Dale and Jeff on the court.

Jermaine's effort 18+ ppg and 10+ rebounds last season vs the Pistons last season in the finals, showed our need for an inside scorer in the playoffs. Look at all the droughts we went thru in the East finals when our guards could not score and JO was doubled inside.

With Dale and Jeff inside the guards vs the Pacers ,can body up on Reggie and AJ even more. I really like Stephen Jackson , but Jax is just as likely to go 3 for 16 as Artest was. Without an inside scorer this team has little to no chance of beating good nba teams let alone the NBA elite teams.

Say all you want about Jermaine dominating the ball on offense all season , if he hadn't come thru with almost 25 ppg this team would already be done , for the season.

You can list EVERY GAME this season they have won without Jermaine and only 1 has come against a team with a better than >500 record the Celtics oops 2 opening night vs the Cavs in double overtime.

This team only has a chance to win a playoff series IF Jermaine is playing.

beast23
03-17-2005, 12:57 PM
I think if you re-read the posts, I believe you will find one comment about the team possibly being better for the rest of this season without JO. And that statement was "iffy", having a question mark following the statement.

I believe what most are saying is that they find the offense is more enjoyable to watch without JO in the paint. That has nothing to do with whether the team is better or worse without JO. Just that the aesthetics of its offense are more pleasing.

I would tend to agree with that statement, and said so during JO's first stint on the IL.

I think that most would agree that the presence of Dale partially compensates for the loss of JO, and the team is finding other ways to score. But I also believe that most can't wait until JO is able to return, whether this season or next, and see both JO and Dale in the frontcourt together. Put Artest in with them and I think the Pacers might even have the top defensive frontcourt in the league.

But when JO does return, I certainly hope that Carlisle keeps the offense a little "looser" than what it has been run when JO was playing.

Bball
03-17-2005, 01:03 PM
My point is that some things are being learned by fans, coaches, management, and players. JO being out forces some re-thinking on the part of all these people. JO returning isn't going to make us an immediate contender. And now that he is injured it has even less of an upside in my book.

Let's let these players get back to playing as a 'team' instead of as the guys that throw Jermaine the ball. Let's make them have to move without the ball and cut and screen. Let's let JO sit on the bench and watch DD's work ethic and effort on other parts of the game and see the effect it has on fans and players alike.

IMHO as soon as JO returns Carlisle is immediately going back to the safety blanket of throwing it into JO every trip and giving him major minutes. The players are going to stall. The team will become more predictable. I'd rather this team let JO heal both upstairs and his shoulder and let the team see (what I believe to be) the light and error of their ways.

Until JO starts making the players around him better and having more of an impact on the all around game he needn't be mentioned with the likes of Duncan or Shaq or any of the upper echelon in the NBA. Until he starts making his teammates better and making better decisons with the ball, as well as with other aspects of the game (including mental) then he is more overrated than not. The potential is there, that is what is frustrating, but I believe it is time to quit pretending he's already 'there'.

I think this season is a 'loss' as far as our title hopes are concerned. If we can do something to help JO reach more of his potential, and improve the team along the way for next year, that would be the making something out of this dismal season.

-Bball

able
03-17-2005, 01:04 PM
The "throw the ball into JO" movement, or lack thereof is only stagnant for one reason and one reason only: once he gets the ball EVERYBODY ELSE stops moving and start looking what JO will find to A. get them the ball (somewhere between the timeline and the 3 pt line) or B. to beat his trippleteam defense and score.

Jo has at more then one time shown that he is a good passer, the times Jeff or Polly drop the ball or miss an easy lay-up from such a pass is ridiculous and it's time to stop blaming JO.

JO's Ast rate is on he low side for those reasons and none other.
The one game jeff was "hot" and Jax hit a decent percentage was when he had 5 or 6 Ast. (and 30 odd points)

Bball
03-17-2005, 01:08 PM
The "throw the ball into JO" movement, or lack thereof is only stagnant for one reason and one reason only: once he gets the ball EVERYBODY ELSE stops moving and start looking what JO will find to A. get them the ball (somewhere between the timeline and the 3 pt line) or B. to beat his trippleteam defense and score.

Jo has at more then one time shown that he is a good passer, the times Jeff or Polly drop the ball or miss an easy lay-up from such a pass is ridiculous and it's time to stop blaming JO.

JO's Ast rate is on he low side for those reasons and none other.
The one game jeff was "hot" and Jax hit a decent percentage was when he had 5 or 6 Ast. (and 30 odd points)

Chicken or the egg? Which came first: Players standing and watching after JO gets the ball or JO not making quicker/better decision with the ball and getting it back out to his teammates?

-Bball

ChicagoJ
03-17-2005, 01:22 PM
We had the same arguments with Travis.

But Travis was allegedly a PG responsible for initiating the offense.

This, clearly, is a by-product of the gameplan. Reggie dumps the ball into JO every time and people complain. Ron doesn't, but then again he gets in trouble for being rebellious or in Rick's words, "Conduct Detrimental to Winning" and people complain.

Unlike many of you, while I'd like to see more movement because that would make it easier for JO to pass out of the post, I don't really have a problem with the Pacers running the ball through him every play because that is our highest percentage play anyway. Part of the problem, IMO, is that JO's teammates know it, and they seem to take it for granted that he's going to do something good with the ball and they quit moving.

On the other hand, when Travis had the ball, everybody knew he *couldn't* find the open man and he was just going to drive and have his layup attempt blocked anyway so they didn't feel like wasting thier effort getting open.

Jermaniac
03-17-2005, 01:29 PM
People who belive we are better with out JO will get a very nice suprise when we play the Pistons in the play offs and that shot from the outside wont fall and we have to throw the ball down to Austin Croshere and Jeff Foster and ask them to be our low post scorers.

Bball
03-17-2005, 02:15 PM
People who belive we are better with out JO will get a very nice suprise when we play the Pistons in the play offs and that shot from the outside wont fall and we have to throw the ball down to Austin Croshere and Jeff Foster and ask them to be our low post scorers.

...As opposed to seeing JO eat it when he gets frustrated and pushes the issue harder and harder instead of making Detroit pay for the emphassis on him as our guys cut and screen away from the ball and JO toss it back out.

I don't want to say we are better without JO longterm. I don't think that's anyone is saying that at this point.

I'm saying everyone needs to see what we are, where we are, etc. without JO so that 'everyone' can be better utilized in the future and IMHO JO will be a better (more complete) player for it.

Let's not forget, JO is injured. I'm not sure there is any benefit to rushing him back this season... His return doesn't suddenly make us a contender this season.

-Bball

PacerMan
03-17-2005, 03:27 PM
same goes for Tinsley, especially if it is a stress fracture. There is no point in keeping him reinjuring it for the rest of the season and then needing the whole offseason off his feet for it to heal.
A borderline fast enough pg on a gimpy foot is not going to be a good thing, especially in the playoffs, and yes I DO think he's still better gimpy than anyone else we have.
Tins has shown plenty of guts playing with injury before, if he's going out to shoot and then saying he can't go, you know that thing has got to be sore. It would kill most of us to chase Iverson around on 2 healthy feet.........
Let it heal now. let him work all offseason to be in the kind of shape (and 100%) healed that this team will need next year in their drive to the championship.
I'll never say give up on a season,,,,,,,, but this year is cursed. And I don't want damaged stars coming back too soon (when they won't save us anyway) and risking next year to play now.
Kenny Lowe was a very good player for Purdue who lost 2+ seasons to reoccuring shoulder separations followed finally by surgery to correct the condition. First he lost one season when he separated it, then lost another when it happened again and he had the surgery. I want Jamaal and Jermaine back badly. But only healthy.
Next year is going to be big.

Will Galen
03-17-2005, 04:48 PM
Theres another reason for not dumping it in to JO every play. It wears him down and he gets hurt. I don't think it's something to worry about though. Our offense will be more diversified next year simply because we will have more weapons.