PDA

View Full Version : Official "Is the team better with or without JO?" Thread



Los Angeles
04-10-2006, 09:17 PM
Me? I wouldn't go that far, but I'm ready to hear both sides of the argument after tonight's game.

I think if I were to re-watch all of the games from the last month (not just the losing games) You'll find something interesting. When JO comes onto the court, we seem to lose more than we gain. When he goes out, and at least 2 of Foster, Cro or Pollard are on the court, we seem to play better.

Agree?

Disagree?

Let's hear your reasons.

Moses
04-10-2006, 09:21 PM
Disagree.

How does adding a perenial all-star and the only post scoring threat on our team cause trouble? If anything, it's because Rick is taking out the hot hand when he puts JO in. I don't think JO has found a role yet in this offense. He's had a stretch of rough games..but if you honestly think a front court of Foster and Croshere is better, you need to get off of it. Both of those guys are great hustle players but JO adds another dimension to this team. I'm not going to let a stretch of bad games he's had since coming back change my mind. I want to see him in a few more games before I make that decision.

Jermaniac
04-10-2006, 09:29 PM
Me? I wouldn't go that far, but I'm ready to hear both sides of the argument after tonight's game.

I think if I were to re-watch all of the games from the last month (not just the losing games) You'll find something interesting. When JO comes onto the court, we seem to lose more than we gain. When he goes out, and at least 2 of Foster, Cro or Pollard are on the court, we seem to play better.

Agree?

Disagree?

Let's hear your reasons.Apparently you havent been watching the games.

Bulls game big lead, JO goes to the bench lead disapears. Knicks game few days ago 8 point lead, JO comes back in down 2.

Way to pick on him when he has his worst game. Get the hate out of your heart playboy.

Ragnar
04-10-2006, 09:29 PM
Before Rick got here J.O. averaged 18 rebounds per game in the playoffs. When Rick got here we all knew our defensive rebouning would go down because that is not in his game plan. Jermaine is not the problem here Rick is.

I will add the disclaimer that Rick is a good coach but he is not the right coach for THIS TEAM.

P.S. does anyone think Rick was told to leave Jamaal in even if he does something that Rick did not like (like two fouls in a row) and thats why Jamaal was playing tonight amd of course why we won. Just a thought.

#31
04-10-2006, 09:31 PM
I disagree, but it starts to look to me like everytime he is playing and dont take more than 10 FG attempts, the Pacers win? Works really strange... Maybe the P´s need to make him a Dale Davis/Ben Wallace kinda player? More Defense/Rebounds and on offense not to force shots, but let the offense come to him. But HE MUST BE THERE!!

J_2_Da_IzzO
04-10-2006, 09:31 PM
This is one of the worst threads ever. How stupid can you be?

Los Angeles
04-10-2006, 09:31 PM
Apparently you havent been watching the games.

Bulls game big lead, JO goes to the bench lead disapears. Knicks game few days ago 8 point lead, JO comes back in down 2.

Way to pick on him when he has his worst game. Get the hate out of your heart playboy.

:unimpress

I was AT the bulls game.

Pacersfan.
04-10-2006, 09:33 PM
Scot, Cro, and Jeff seem to be more willing to do the "little" things.

Moses
04-10-2006, 09:33 PM
I don't mean to be a jerk but you really can't expect this argument to hold any water...Like seriously.

JO may be over-rated and overpaid according to some here, but when he is out on the court, it is a huge positive in alot of different aspects of our game. Nobody on this team can block besides him. Nobody else has any post moves with the exception of Harrison who is still learning. I would love a front court of JO and Harrison because it actually leaves us with a center who can score near JO. I love Foster but it seems as though he and JO don't really compliment eachother at all. It was very apparent in the PIstons game. Pollard and Foster, on the other hand, compliment eachother extremely well. Not sure if that means we need to move JO to center for a while and start Croshere at PF, but I really like Pollard and Foster together with JO and Austin being together on the court. It just seems to work out better that way.

sweabs
04-10-2006, 09:34 PM
I'd really like to hear some outsider's opinions on this as well (fans from other teams).

I think I've stated on numerous occassions where I fall on this topic.

J_2_Da_IzzO
04-10-2006, 09:34 PM
Scot, Cro, and Jeff seem to be more willing to do the "little" things.

But they are also willing to let players stroll through for layups.

Jermaniac
04-10-2006, 09:36 PM
:unimpress

I was AT the bulls game.Maybe you went to the bathroom when the Bulls started cutting our lead when JO wasnt playing. I dont know.

Los Angeles
04-10-2006, 09:38 PM
Maybe you went to the bathroom when the Bulls started cutting our lead when JO wasnt playing. I dont know.
Maybe you'd rather talk about the Pacers W/L with JO in the lineup vs when he is out?

Moses
04-10-2006, 09:39 PM
Maybe you'd rather talk about the Pacers W/L with JO in the lineup vs when he is out?
Are you really trying to say that JO is to blame for this crappy *** team we have? :laugh:

Jermaniac
04-10-2006, 09:40 PM
Whatever floats your boat. I can argue for days.

Los Angeles
04-10-2006, 09:41 PM
Are you really trying to say that JO is to blame for this crappy *** team we have? :laugh:
No, I'm trying to have a discussion. Unfortunately, I seem to have chosen the wrong thread title for that.

J_2_Da_IzzO
04-10-2006, 09:42 PM
How can you fairly assess if this team is better with or without JO by the win loss record. 2 very big factors effect that and thats:

(1) Him returning from a lengthy injury.
(2) Him also having to adjust to a different system.

Oh yeah and a third is adjusting with a new teammate.

Lord Helmet
04-10-2006, 09:46 PM
Jermaniac, I don't think LA is necessarily saying he thinks that the team is better without JO, in fact I don't even think he's made a statement of his opinion in this thread.

Anyway, I don't think the team is better without him, I just think they play harder with him out, knowing they need to pick it up. We just need to play more scrappy with him in.

#31
04-10-2006, 09:46 PM
It would be more interesting if you/someone started an "Official "Is this team better with changed JO or regular JO" thread" instead..

D-BONE
04-10-2006, 09:50 PM
I disagree, but it starts to look to me like everytime he is playing and dont take more than 10 FG attempts, the Pacers win? Works really strange... Maybe the Pīs need to make him a Dale Davis/Ben Wallace kinda player? More Defense/Rebounds and on offense not to force shots, but let the offense come to him. But HE MUST BE THERE!!

I won't go so far as to say he absolutely must be here. If the decision is that he remains, I like your idea though. He'd have to amp up his rebounding intensity and box outs a tad, but I think he would be good at it.

DeS
04-10-2006, 09:54 PM
Bad thing is that JO got only 5 rebounds again (Crosher and Foster outrebounded him twice). Good thing is - the oponents still doubling him even if he can't hit. As for bad shooting, imo oponents are fouling him to prevent him getting into the rythm (and they succeeded today).
As for better play without JO. Imo it looks better, because with JO the game isn't that free-flowing. Imho JO is more effective playing iso sets else team just loses some seconds when he dribbles and passes out. His low rebounding doesn't help either.
Still JO is the threat and yet another option if other offensive options fail.

Los Angeles
04-10-2006, 09:54 PM
How can you fairly assess if this team is better with or without JO by the win loss record. 2 very big factors effect that and thats:

(1) Him returning from a lengthy injury.
(2) Him also having to adjust to a different system.

Oh yeah and a third is adjusting with a new teammate.
It doesnt' make sense. We were losing before Peja came in. JO was healthy, and the only player we lost was Artest. And we were losing a lot of games. JO went out at the same time that Peja came in.

The remaining players had no problem picking up a new system AND adjusting to Peja's presence.

There's WAY too many factors here, which is why I thought it would be a good idea to start a thread that layed out all of the facts, stats and intangibles.

And for those of you who think this is crazy, I have to bring this up:

When O'Neal went down, it was reported that he himself wondered why the team played better without him. Why can't I question what Jermaine himself has already questioned? Why can't we at least talk about it?

Unclebuck
04-10-2006, 10:00 PM
When Rick got here we all knew our defensive rebouning would go down because that is not in his game plan.


That is simply not true at all. Rick is very big on defensive rebounding. It is offensive rebounding that he sacrifices in favor of transitiopn defense.


We are a better team with J.O.

BlueNGold
04-10-2006, 10:07 PM
The team is only worse with JO, if he is misused. JO should only play PF and should be stroking it from the outside and driving to the bucket more often to get fouls and 3pt plays.

Now, his great post up moves are enticing and should be used at times...but primarily as a decoy. Over-using his post up game does at least two things detrimental to the team's success:

1) it does not make best use of the other players skills on the floor, and does not create the type of ball movement the team needs for higher percentage shots.

2) it results in JO taking a pounding, getting triple teamed, him getting ticked and getting technicals, the other team preparing for a fast break where there is no shot blocker on the other end, etc.

#31
04-10-2006, 10:09 PM
The team is only worse with JO, if he is misused. JO should only play PF and should be stroking it from the outside and driving to the bucket more often to get fouls and 3pt plays.

Now, his great post up moves are enticing and should be used at times...but primarily as a decoy. Over-using his post up game does at least two things detrimental to the team's success:

1) it does not make best use of the other players skills on the floor, and does not create the type of ball movement the team needs for higher percentage shots.

2) it results in JO taking a pounding, getting triple teamed, him getting ticked and getting technicals, the other team preparing for a fast break where there is no shot blocker on the other end, etc.

Yup! Agree.

Shade
04-10-2006, 10:22 PM
Not a chance. We were slumping just as badly before JO came back.

SoupIsGood
04-10-2006, 10:29 PM
I really like JO, but I'm getting kind of tired of him. He never, ever blocks out, and it disgusts me.

Jermaniac
04-10-2006, 10:33 PM
And David Harrison is your favorite player. LOLING

pizza guy
04-10-2006, 10:37 PM
Bad thing is that JO got only 5 rebounds again (Crosher and Foster outrebounded him twice). Good thing is - the oponents still doubling him even if he can't hit. As for bad shooting, imo oponents are fouling him to prevent him getting into the rythm (and they succeeded today).
As for better play without JO. Imo it looks better, because with JO the game isn't that free-flowing. Imho JO is more effective playing iso sets else team just loses some seconds when he dribbles and passes out. His low rebounding doesn't help either.
Still JO is the threat and yet another option if other offensive options fail.

Couldn't DISagree more. JO needs to be a fast-moving-get-to-the-rim PF, not a pound-it-into-the-floor-and-shoot-a-15-foot-fadeaway C for him to have success. While he is capable of making cool post-ups moves and what not, his body needs him to be a quick PF almost like Stoudamire, not the Tim Duncan Carlisle wants. If he would be that JO, this team would be MUCH better with him; but if he's the improperly used JO that we've seen break down from the beating of triple-teams and C's then we might as well scrap him.

Much of why JO doesn't seem to fit sometimes is to be blamed on Rick because he's tried to make JO something he isn't. That needs changed.

SoupIsGood
04-10-2006, 10:42 PM
And David Harrison is your favorite player. LOLING

David blocks out, use your head man. JO just doesn't try.

Hicks
04-10-2006, 10:45 PM
Before Rick got here J.O. averaged 18 rebounds per game in the playoffs. When Rick got here we all knew our defensive rebouning would go down because that is not in his game plan. Jermaine is not the problem here Rick is.

You've got it backwards. OFFENSIVE rebounds are what are not in Rick's game plan. He's all about DEFENSIVE rebounds. We can't have the OR's because we need to get back, everytime, always, forever, amen.

Jermaniac
04-10-2006, 10:50 PM
David blocks out, use your head man. JO just doesn't try.
Yeah Jermaine O'Neal doesnt try. Thats a good one.

David Harrison what he have like 4 rebounds per game in 30 minutes in the summer league. The Summer league. BEAST

SoupIsGood
04-10-2006, 10:51 PM
Yeah Jermaine O'Neal doesnt try. Thats a good one.

David Harrison what he have like 4 rebounds per game in 30 minutes in the summer league. The Summer league. BEAST

JO doesn't try to block out, and you can't deny that. He just doesn't do it.

Jermaniac
04-10-2006, 10:56 PM
JO doesn't try to block out, and you can't deny that. Yes I can. You dont average 10 rpg 4-5 years in a row by not boxing out. Get him a PG that can defend so he doesnt have to worry about blocking everydamn shot cause they are walking into the paint, and he will get even more boards.

Shade
04-10-2006, 10:57 PM
Couldn't DISagree more. JO needs to be a fast-moving-get-to-the-rim PF, not a pound-it-into-the-floor-and-shoot-a-15-foot-fadeaway C for him to have success. While he is capable of making cool post-ups moves and what not, his body needs him to be a quick PF almost like Stoudamire, not the Tim Duncan Carlisle wants. If he would be that JO, this team would be MUCH better with him; but if he's the improperly used JO that we've seen break down from the beating of triple-teams and C's then we might as well scrap him.

Much of why JO doesn't seem to fit sometimes is to be blamed on Rick because he's tried to make JO something he isn't. That needs changed.

I agree 1 million %. JO was at his best when he just outquicked his defender and took it to the hole more. These post up, turnaround jumpers have got to stop. I also blame Rick for misusing him.

In one of the games against the Pistons this season, JO started taking it to Sheed late in the post, and guess what? SHEED COULDN'T STOP HIM.

Jermaniac
04-10-2006, 10:58 PM
When everybody in the damn gym knows that you are getting the ball everytime your team comes down the court, you cant just use one move to get by your defender.

SoupIsGood
04-10-2006, 11:00 PM
Yes I can. You dont average 10 rpg 4-5 years in a row by not boxing out.

Hah, this is probably exactly why he doesn't bother with it. He still gets his numbers anyway, so why bother with boxing out, right?

OK, maybe not that. Too harsh. I don't think JO is obsessed with numbers. He just thinks what he's doing is working, when it really just gets us killed on the boards.

Ragnar
04-10-2006, 11:40 PM
That is simply not true at all. Rick is very big on defensive rebounding. It is offensive rebounding that he sacrifices in favor of transitiopn defense.


We are a better team with J.O.

Sorry UB you are correct my wife came down as I was posting that and wanted to watch 24.

ssmall
04-11-2006, 02:30 AM
I think there are too many oficial posts for every topic on theese boards.

PacerNthaDesert
04-11-2006, 02:58 AM
1. Is the team better without JO? No way, although its a fair question IMO.

2. Is JO vastly overrated? Yes, but still a solid All-Star reserve.(Not starter level ability)

3. Is JO healthy right now? I don't think he's even 80% to be honest. The JO I know is a 20 and 10 guy every night, not making 1 FG. Give him credit, atleast he's battling.


This whole season has been a mess, it's easy to point the finger in a lot of directions. I hope we put a playoff run together and get some stability back, otherwise it will be a bloody off-season. :(

Bball
04-11-2006, 03:02 AM
I think there are too many oficial posts for every topic on theese boards.


This is off topic to this thread... You need to start a new "Official-Are there too many 'official' posts here?" thread.

















:devil:

-Bball

Bball
04-11-2006, 03:08 AM
Historically, the team has played some very good basketball without JO taking the court.

More than enough to justify it NOT being a case of players picking up slack for a wounded comrade. That is hard to sustain for a complete game, much less several games.

Without JO the team became a rebounding monster. They were keeping the opposing defense busy and off-balance. Bad shots were fewer. Passing and cutting were crisper. The sun was brighter. The beers were colder. The popcorn was fresher. The children sang in unison and 11/19 was but a distant memory.

-Bball

Los Angeles
04-11-2006, 03:11 AM
You had me at "cold beer".

Bball
04-11-2006, 03:32 AM
You had me at "cold beer".

True, the beers being colder might've been coincidence but some of that other stuff has merit.

-Bball

DeS
04-11-2006, 07:40 AM
Couldn't DISagree more. JO needs to be a fast-moving-get-to-the-rim PF, not a pound-it-into-the-floor-and-shoot-a-15-foot-fadeaway C for him to have success. While he is capable of making cool post-ups moves and what not, his body needs him to be a quick PF almost like Stoudamire, not the Tim Duncan Carlisle wants. If he would be that JO, this team would be MUCH better with him; but if he's the improperly used JO that we've seen break down from the beating of triple-teams and C's then we might as well scrap him.
I have no problem for JO to become that JO. But this JO in this system isn't that JO in another system. I think, for whatever (may it be the system or something else) reason JO isn't playing along with motion offense now and he is not effective within it. Imo this is why it seems that team plays better without him. Imo better use of him is when we need to change the offensive style from time to time (not to let the oponent defence adjust to one playing style). In this way JO complements the team as without him and Harrison the team is more "one-sided".

Roaming Gnome
04-11-2006, 07:43 AM
I know that some of you (Bball especially) have been beating the drum for shipping out J.O. IMHO, this is totally screwed up logic. I guess I have not heard a decent reason why everything is his fault. I just hear the same crap over and over about either his contract or "poor leadership". His contract is what it is. Big men in the NBA are expensive. Look at guys like Camby or Kenyon Martin, I know their contracts are not as heavy as J.O.'s but for what you get in exchange for their ability, it just goes to show Big men are expensive. Some of you older fans remember when that stiff Bryant "Big Country" Reeves broke the bank in Vancouver making us ante up a sizable contract for Rik Smits. It was what set the market at the time for centers and bigs, how is J.O. any different? I didn't hear moaning and groaning about his max deal when he got it, the popular opinion that I remember was locking J.O. up before he even made a trip to San Antonio, because if I remember correctly, S.A. was going to open up the checkbook and we didn't want that!

As for the poor leader, I guess I just don't get it...I know that he is flamboyant, loves to show off, and gets on the officials way too much, but so did Patrick Ewing, Karl Malone, and many other superstars of the day. Do you think anyone of the greats that I mentioned above would have fared any better with this cast of knuckle heads we got on this team, the Ron Artest drama, and the dynamics between the backcourt and the coach? Hell, we got a damn GM and CEO that can't figure this out, so how is it a players fault???

Even if I were to entertain the notion that J.O. is the problem, what do you want in return? I know everyone says K.G., but does he really make us any better? Minn. is struggling with trying to get K.G. to just be another cog in the offense. Anyway, as discussed at the forum party...K.G. is going to also cost you a valuable player as a throw in along with J.O. if O'neal is the meat of the deal. Minnesota will probably want Granger with J.O., why wouldn't they...they are dealing from a "want" postion and not a "need" position. So, who do you want for him? Do you want to surender a big for a small, or how about a bunch of role players?

I also see what happened to Sacramento after the Webber deal. They looked pretty good with Webber hurt and on the bench, yet as soon as he came back...their team play suffered. Someone got the bright idea to ship out Webber and they would get that team play again. IT DIDN'T WORK, DID IT? They got a bunch of ok to decent role players from Philly. Looks like the same plan a lot of you want for the Pacers. Peja couldn't carry the Kings and a bunch of role players, so why do some of you think that a re-signed Peja can carry the Pacers and a bunch of role players?

Black Sox
04-11-2006, 08:20 AM
This situation with JO coming back is similar to when C. Webb can back for the Kings. They started to tank after his return. The fact is the players are not use to having JO on the court and it does mess with chemistry.

Are the pacers better without JO for the long term? NO

Are they better without him now? Maybe.

BillS
04-11-2006, 08:31 AM
(*in a still, small voice*) I liked what I saw from JO in the second half last night - when he wasn't effective offensively he passed very well out of the post and kept the offense moving. Why would we not keep that JO?

MagicRat
04-11-2006, 08:49 AM
After doing much thinking on the subject, I've come to the conclusion that there is something that JO must do. One move to reconnect to the Pacers past glory, show he's ready and willing to do the dirty work necessary, show he's willing to make sacrifices for the team by doing something he's refused to do in the past, show some leadership and draw the team together, even if it is only symbolic.

He's got to shave his head.......

Roaming Gnome
04-11-2006, 08:56 AM
After doing much thinking on the subject, I've come to the conclusion that there is something that JO must do. One move to reconnect to the Pacers past glory, show he's ready and willing to do the dirty work necessary, show he's willing to make sacrifices for the team by doing something he's refused to do in the past, show some leadership and draw the team together, even if it is only symbolic.

He's got to shave his head.......

As crazy as that sounds...It may show that their are not individuals on this team, no one too good for team. Before, I lauged at the flack that some of you gave J.O. about not doing this, but now it sounds like it is needed more then ever.

Fool
04-11-2006, 09:07 AM
It would be more interesting if you/someone started an "Official "Is this team better with changed JO or regular JO" thread" instead..

I think Carlisle is better without JO.

grace
04-11-2006, 02:14 PM
As crazy as that sounds...It may show that their are not individuals on this team, no one too good for team. Before, I lauged at the flack that some of you gave J.O. about not doing this, but now it sounds like it is needed more then ever.

It sounds like a good idea to me except if you're expecting the whole team to do it Austin has already said he won't shave his head again. Why? He's still waiting for it to grow back after the last time he did it.

In fact the more I think about it the more I think not many of the guys would agree to do it.

CableKC
04-11-2006, 02:46 PM
No one seemed to complain about JONeal prior to our current streak of suckage. Why complain about him now?

Just because we are losing now?

He maybe a small part of the problem....but I think that jettisoning the players that most of us wouldn't mind seeing gone ( SJax and Tinsley ) would be a good start.

Trading JONeal should only happen IF a reasonable deal can be had ( where we don't have to give up Granger and/or Harrison ) for a player of equal or greater value ( as in KG ) or if Bird/Walsh want to essentially rip out the foundation of the Pacers....meaning we are headed back to lottery land.

Trading JONeal is the "nuclear" option....which I don't think we need to do.

Bball
04-11-2006, 03:07 PM
No one seemed to complain about JONeal prior to our current streak of suckage. Why complain about him now?

Just because we are losing now?



Some people have had questions and redflags raised ever since JO returned last year and made very little difference in the team and then went out with an injury and the team played some of their best and most sustained basketball of the season.

The question has always been why that was and whether it was the player or the system.

JO without Artest has left JO exposed as a paper tiger in the system the Pacers keep running or are forced to run. Artest wasn't the complimentary player to JO, JO was the complimentary player to Artest.

That doesn't mean Artest didn't have issues.

-Bball

Knucklehead Warrior
04-11-2006, 04:58 PM
No one seemed to complain about JONeal prior to our current streak of suckage. Why complain about him now?

Just because we are losing now?

No. I think most of us thought the Ps would have been kicking butt with Tins and jermO back and instead we suck. WTF? It's the frustration and disbelief of what's happening with our supposedly two best players coming back. Remember when we were talking about overhauling Cleveland to get home court? Instead now we have people who would rather not even make the playoffs.

xi Sickness xi
04-11-2006, 08:59 PM
J.os a beast we play better with him.

Anthem
04-11-2006, 10:49 PM
Here's a question for you guys.

Jermaine for Odom, Bynum, and Mihm. Yes or no?

Jermaniac
04-11-2006, 10:52 PM
I chose No

SoupIsGood
04-11-2006, 10:54 PM
Here's a question for you guys.

Jermaine for Odom, Bynum, and Mihm. Yes or no?


No

MagicRat
04-12-2006, 09:11 AM
It sounds like a good idea to me except if you're expecting the whole team to do it Austin has already said he won't shave his head again. Why? He's still waiting for it to grow back after the last time he did it.

In fact the more I think about it the more I think not many of the guys would agree to do it.


Actually, JO is the only one who needs to do it. Just walk into the locker room one day bald and ready to do battle.

If they then decide to do a team-wide thing, Austin is fully exempt. He needs the extra cushioning........

Diamond Dave
04-12-2006, 09:25 AM
Here's a question for you guys.

Jermaine for Odom, Bynum, and Mihm. Yes or no?

I'll buy J.O.'s plane ticket.

Oh man, would that be a sweet deal for us.

SoupIsGood
04-12-2006, 04:00 PM
I'll buy J.O.'s plane ticket.

Oh man, would that be a sweet deal for us.

Why?

Are ya a big Bynum fan?

I might do it if a pick of some sort was tossed in.