PDA

View Full Version : Jay's AJ Rant (taken from the Kravitz thread)



ChicagoJ
07-25-2006, 02:47 PM
This roster is better than fighting for the 8th seed. That's not reality.

Is it? Right now, our backcourt is a lottery backcourt. And since that's where the ball starts they can also shut down our high-powered front court (just as AJ shut down O'Neal in the playoffs last spring.)

Sorry, I don't buy the "this team is improved on paper and that will automatically show up in the standings argument."

I'm not arguing that they've slipped from last season. I'm not even arguing that our top competition for slots 5-8 of the playoffs have drastically improved.

But when you've got six or seven teams fighting for the last four playoff spots, weird things happen. Did anybody think last March that Philly would fall all the way out of the playoffs and Chicago would get in? Some did, some didn't. But that's what happens when you get into a crazy race with multiple tie-breakers.

Saying "this team may be lottery-bound" is not that much different that saying, "this is about 0.500 team." A game or two under 0.500 and you're in the lottery. A game or two over 0.500 and you might have the #5 seed.

(And while I know there is a slight advantage in being the #5 seed instead of the #8 seed it isn't that much of a difference.)

vapacersfan
07-25-2006, 02:53 PM
Is it? Right now, our backcourt is a lottery backcourt. And since that's where the ball starts they can also shut down our high-powered front court (just as AJ shut down O'Neal in the playoffs last spring.)

Sorry, I don't buy the "this team is improved on paper and that will automatically show up in the standings argument."

I'm not arguing that they've slipped from last season. I'm not even arguing that our top competition for slots 5-8 of the playoffs have drastically improved.

But when you've got six or seven teams fighting for the last four playoff spots, weird things happen. Did anybody think last March that Philly would fall all the way out of the playoffs and Chicago would get in? Some did, some didn't. But that's what happens when you get into a crazy race with multiple tie-breakers.

Saying "this team may be lottery-bound" is not that much different that saying, "this is about 0.500 team." A game or two under 0.500 and you're in the lottery. A game or two over 0.500 and you might have the #5 seed.

(And while I know there is a slight advantage in being the #5 seed instead of the #8 seed it isn't that much of a difference.)

:lol2::lol2::lol2::lol2::lol2:

How much does Ragnar pay you to keep bringing this up?

You can blame AJ all you want, but he was doing everything he could to help the Pacers win. Im tired of hearing about how he lost us that game because he couldnt feed the post. If that's the case, he is just as much at fault as our other scrubs who couldnt get the job done, or better yet were to damn injured [again] to even be in the game

________________________________

As for the topic at hand, I still think its to early to judge this team. I think having all back helps, but maybe not as much as some of you think he will, but our biggest need IMO is still fixing the "1" spot and getting a reliable starter, and if at all possible ridding ourselfs of Jackson

ChicagoJ
07-25-2006, 02:57 PM
VA,

Who do you want taking more shots in an elimination game? AJ or JO?

There's a reason we lost, and AJ's inability to run the offense, and thus taking too many shots or giving the ball to JO 22-feet from the basket (and facing it) was a big contributor.

In fact, just think how badly we would've lost if he wasn't shooting lights-out.

Bball
07-25-2006, 03:19 PM
VA,

Who do you want taking more shots in an elimination game? AJ or JO?

There's a reason we lost, and AJ's inability to run the offense, and thus taking too many shots or giving the ball to JO 22-feet from the basket (and facing it) was a big contributor.

In fact, just think how badly we would've lost if he wasn't shooting lights-out.

Maybe he would've passed the ball more if he wasn't having the shooting performance of his life...

Of course I don't think you've ever really explained (IOW, you have pounded it in hard enough) in your argument that if AJ is looking for his own points then he very well could be setting the -rest- of the team up with bad shots, rushed shots, out of position, etc (You seem to have focused that issue mainly on forcing JO out of the offense but there are other players too).... Which means even if HE (AJ) shot 70%, that doesn't mean a lack of offensive flow didn't cause other players to shoot less than their normal percentage.

Sooooo... the emphassis in the counter argument has been AJ's great percentage meant he wasn't taking shots away from anyone that could've done better... But it could mean in looking for his own offense he failed to set up the other guys... and not just JO... and HURT their performance.

And if that is the case then the point total should be down and/or the other players have a less than stellar shooting percentage themselves. ...Which I haven't looked at so I don't know...

-Bball

vapacersfan
07-25-2006, 03:28 PM
VA,

Who do you want taking more shots in an elimination game? AJ or JO?

There's a reason we lost, and AJ's inability to run the offense, and thus taking too many shots or giving the ball to JO 22-feet from the basket (and facing it) was a big contributor.

In fact, just think how badly we would've lost if he wasn't shooting lights-out.

Who do I want taking more shots? That depends on who is playing better for that game. Basketball is a game of adjustments, and is your backup point is having the game of his life, you find a way to get him the rock.

I dont remember that series as well as some of you do, as a matter of fact I have tried to best to forget the last couple of seasons, but I seem to remember JO was not exactly having the best series of his career. Even when we had players who were able to feed him the rock, he wasnt exactly putting up "monster numbers".

I do agree there is a reason we lost, and that reason is that TPTB handed J.T. the keys to this team, much like they did with Artest, and to top that off they got a "under-sized shooting guard who is in a point guards body" to back him up. We could talk about Runi or Freddie, but if you are going to ****** and moan about AJ not running the offense, then there is no point in even bringing up the other guards.

Your last comment doesnt make sense to me. I realize you want to blame the loss on someone, and you have made it your mission for that person to be AJ, but I could use that statement with 10000 other games. Just think how badly we would have lost to the Lakers in 2000 in Croshere wouldnt have had such a great performance. You are supposed to keep feeding the guy who is hot, its not his fauly if he has absolutely no help.

Hicks
07-25-2006, 03:36 PM
AJ shot something like 70%! Hell yes I want him taking the shots when he's that hot. If he'd cooled down and kept shooting, I'd have an issue with him, but the man was a flamethrower that night and did the exact right thing. He had the hot hand all night. Points were being put on the board for our team!

ChicagoJ
07-25-2006, 04:57 PM
In Game #6, we had four assists (FOUR!) in the entire first half.

Guess who (irony of all ironies) had three of those four assists? Stephen Jackson. (Fred had the other one.)

Our ball movement in Game #6 was terrible. Johnson starting the game 5-6 with one turnover and no assists can be construed as (1) Fool's gold; and (2) a bad 'tone' to set in a key game.

The rest of the team (excluding AJ and JO) shot 9-33 (27%).

Our (lack of) PG play in Game #6 was the biggest reason we lost. Johnson's red-hot shooting just kept the score somewhat respectable.

We had a total of twelve (12!!) assists in game six. During Games #1 through #5 we had a total of 95 assists (an average and median of 19, a standard deviation of only 1.2, and the next lowest single-game assist total was 18.)

I don't know how anyone can argue in support of AJ taking so many shots as he did in Game #6. I guess you can argue that they should keep going to him while he's hot, but he was cooling off (3-6 on his last six shots) and he had not involved any of his teammates until it was too late.

This is why I don't like shoot-first PGs... he did exactly what you don't want to have happen. In an elimination game.

Maybe it was just me but as the fourth quarter progressed he seemed more interested in scoring 40 points than anything else.

rexnom
07-25-2006, 05:04 PM
In Game #6, we had four assists (FOUR!) in the entire first half.

Guess who (irony of all ironies) had three of those four assists? Stephen Jackson. (Fred had the other one.)

Our ball movement in Game #6 was terrible. Johnson starting the game 5-6 with one turnover and no assists can be construed as (1) Fool's gold; and (2) a bad 'tone' to set in a key game.

The rest of the team (excluding AJ and JO) shot 9-33 (27%).

Our (lack of) PG play in Game #6 was the biggest reason we lost. Johnson's red-hot shooting just kept the score somewhat respectable.

We had a total of twelve (12!!) assists in game six. During Games #1 through #5 we had a total of 95 assists (an average and median of 19, a standard deviation of only 1.2, and the next lowest single-game assist total was 18.)

I don't know how anyone can argue in support of AJ taking so many shots as he did in Game #6. I guess you can argue that they should keep going to him while he's hot, but he was cooling off (3-6 on his last six shots) and he had not involved any of his teammates until it was too late.

This is why I don't like shoot-first PGs... he did exactly what you don't want to have happen. In an elimination game.

Maybe it was just me but as the fourth quarter progressed he seemed more interested in scoring 40 points than anything else.
I think the best argument is that NJ definitely did not expect him to be so hot. If he wasn't that hot, their plan would have worked perfectly and we would have been blown out. Instead, AJ kept hot and thus kept us in the game. Kudos on that to AJ on that but that doesn't mean that Jay doesn't have a point here.

Bball
07-25-2006, 05:07 PM
I don't know how anyone can argue in support of AJ taking so many shots as he did in Game #6. I guess you can argue that they should keep going to him while he's hot, but he was cooling off (3-6 on his last six shots) and he had not involved any of his teammates until it was too late.



There's no problem as long as they are in the flow of the game and what the defense is giving us. But you're saying they weren't really in the flow of the game and it would appear you're using stats to back that up.

I never bought the argument on its face that AJ shooting 70% for the game and going for 40 was a problem even if it did mean JO was less involved. But by making the picture bigger and showing the rest of the offense in its entirety stagnated makes a more compelling argument (for me anyway).

I have to mention... I didn't get to see much of the game :blush: because I had a gig that night. So I appreciate the deeper analysis you just presented.

I'm sure someone will now say AJ wasn't the reason the offense stagnated and we're lucky he could go for 40 on some deadeye shooting....

But now Jay has my ear :cheers: :buddies:

-Bball

ChicagoJ
07-25-2006, 05:20 PM
Well, during the game I was more focused on "where" JO was getting the ball, not even "how often". Until the fourth quarter.

And for the record, he usually had to step out to 20-plus feet and face the basket, and that's not JO's strong point.

Late in the game, they put up a "shots attempted graphic" and as soon as the game was over I re-wound to watch it again.

If you're New Jersey, anytime you can get the other team's PG to take almost twice as many shots as their "go-to" guy in an elimination game (23 vs. 14), you've won. And that's really the entire story, IMO.

To get seven more points from AJ (and for the Pacers to win), he would've had to shoot 83% from the floor. That's even hotter than JO's Game #3 when he was 12-15 (80%).

Contrast that with the game JO dominated with fewer shots, a higher FG%, and we actually won that game (fairly easily).

Does anyone object if I move the AJ-related comments to its own thread?

vapacersfan
07-25-2006, 05:42 PM
As I said, I never said AJ was not at fault. But he was hot, and I will never fault a man who is hot for taking shots.

Of course, your whole argument bring up the point of having a "1" who is going to be a "pass first, shoot second" guard who is also able to feed the post (and not counting our rookies who I know as much about as the girl who I asked out at the bar last night) we dont have that guy on our squad. Tinsley would be great in that role, if he was actually able to suit up for the games.
----------------------------------------------------------

Thanks for the suggestion. Read the fine print.

:signit:

EDIT - GRACE ISN'T IGNORING ME!! :woot2:

It is not possible to ingore administrators or moderators ;)

Will Galen
07-25-2006, 05:46 PM
In Game #6, we had four assists (FOUR!) in the entire first half.

Guess who (irony of all ironies) had three of those four assists? Stephen Jackson. (Fred had the other one.)

Our ball movement in Game #6 was terrible. Johnson starting the game 5-6 with one turnover and no assists can be construed as (1) Fool's gold; and (2) a bad 'tone' to set in a key game.

The rest of the team (excluding AJ and JO) shot 9-33 (27%).

Our (lack of) PG play in Game #6 was the biggest reason we lost. Johnson's red-hot shooting just kept the score somewhat respectable.

We had a total of twelve (12!!) assists in game six. During Games #1 through #5 we had a total of 95 assists (an average and median of 19, a standard deviation of only 1.2, and the next lowest single-game assist total was 18.)

I don't know how anyone can argue in support of AJ taking so many shots as he did in Game #6. I guess you can argue that they should keep going to him while he's hot, but he was cooling off (3-6 on his last six shots) and he had not involved any of his teammates until it was too late.

This is why I don't like shoot-first PGs... he did exactly what you don't want to have happen. In an elimination game.

Maybe it was just me but as the fourth quarter progressed he seemed more interested in scoring 40 points than anything else.

Good points Jay. For what it's worth I think you proved your argument!

vapacersfan
07-25-2006, 06:03 PM
Wow, good job making this its own thread. I have no clue how you did it, but I'm impressed

beast23
07-25-2006, 06:50 PM
Is it? Right now, our backcourt is a lottery backcourt. And since that's where the ball starts they can also shut down our high-powered front court (just as AJ shut down O'Neal in the playoffs last spring.)Jay, I agree that our backcourt, although it has a ton of depth, is weak.

And, I think you know that I respect the hell out of 99% of your posts, and even usually agree with your opinion.

But the statement about Aj in last year's playoffs is probably the lamest thing I've seen you post.

Now, we can argue all day about AJ, but it really doesn't matter anymore. He's gone. But, I guess I just wonder what you would have wanted from your PG?

AJ averaged 20 points, 5.2 rebounds, 5.0 assists and shot 51.7% from the field, including 40% from behind the arc.

I know that stats never tell the whole story, but not many PGs in the league can compare to AJ's overall stats from the playoffs... not in their regular season stats and not in their playoff stats.

When it comes to shots and scoring, the problem the Pacers had in the playoffs was NOT AJ shooting the ball too much, it was the remainder of his teammates not hitting enough shots.

With AJ's overall effectiveness, if anything it would have been nice to see him be as selfish in games 1-5 as he was in game 6. If so, maybe we would have had a chance to advance.

I really don't know how much more AJ could have done to prove himself to you. Heck, when Jordan averaged 30/5/5, everybody jumped on the bandwagon. Same thing when Pippen averaged 20+/5/5, folks jumped on the bandwagon. Everybody loved those players and what they provided for their teams.

Why not AJ's 20/5/5?

ChicagoJ
07-25-2006, 06:54 PM
Fine counterpoints.

But your examples (maybe they weren't the best choices) of Jordan and Pippen - well they made their teammates better their team won.

AJ did neither. We're not talking about a 40-point performance that won the game. We're talking about scoring a bunch of points in defeat while simulataneously limiting our "best" player's number of touches.

Sollozzo
07-25-2006, 07:36 PM
Fine counterpoints.

But your examples (maybe they weren't the best choices) of Jordan and Pippen - well they made their teammates better their team won.

AJ did neither. We're not talking about a 40-point performance that won the game. We're talking about scoring a bunch of points in defeat while simulataneously limiting our "best" player's number of touches.


I don't care who it is, if a guy can hit 16-23 shots, you let him take the shots. I could care less if it's Boomer or Reggie taking the shots.

AJ is supposed to be a second tier player anyway. AJ stepped up to the plate when called upon, and stepped up well.

You keep pointing out over and over that AJ's performance severely limited JO's shot attempts, but I don't see it. JO had 14 attempts in game 6. That's what he averaged in the series. JO averaged just under 16 attempts during his 51 game season. So he had about a shot and a half less than his season average.

The more shots JO takes, the worse his percentages get. He shot a putrid 77/211 in the 05 playoffs. That's a solid 36.4% average. He shot 115/272 in the 04 playoffs for a 42 percent average. Those aren't great averages for a PF/C.

You seem to want JO to get touches like Shaq did in the prime of his career. JO unfortunately doesn't have Shaq-like percentages.

JO is a better fit from the team when he shoots for about 20-22 points. He's not a guy who you can consistantly count on to get you games in the 30's, but that's what it appears that he is always trying to do. Therefore, other guys have to deliver. Anthony Johnson delivered. Why would you stray away from a player that hot? Lot's of guys have had huge playoff performances in losing efforts. Someone has to lose.

clemdogg
07-25-2006, 08:13 PM
There was never really any consistency with our ability, as a team, to get the ball to JO. I happen to think that many things factored into that - such as just plain bad fundamentals from people like Jax, AJ, and so forth; we didn't really have any 3-pt threat which allowed more pressure on JO from more defenders, even before he got the ball; and lastly, the Nets played JO perfectly. If JO doesn't make his first few shots and doesn't get the first few calls, he is a different player the rest of the game. Cliff Robinson and company pushed JO off the block many, many times. How many offensive fouls do you remember being called on JO for just posting up? For a playoff series, there was a lot.

Yea, I'm sure AJ's shots had something to do with it. But I don't think he would defy Carlisle or the offense on purpose. Like I said, we really had no 3-pt threat, so it was easy for defenders to lay off the post feeder, which often times was AJ, resulting in an open jumper.

Furthermore, its not very logical to ever blame one aspect or one player for a whole series (or game) loss, especially when the aspect you are blaming is a 40 point performance. Many, many factors contributed in JO not getting the ball, and many, many factors contributed in the loss. We could never make enough key stops and could never hit key shots, besides game 1. Vince Carter and Richard Jefferson were waaaaay too athletic for us, and when you have Krstic just draining that open jumper, your chances are very limited. I think it is pretty absurd to say that AJ shooting more shots at above 50% was the cause of the Pacers loss.

Anthem
07-25-2006, 08:32 PM
Maybe it was just me but as the fourth quarter progressed he seemed more interested in scoring 40 points than anything else.
For what it's worth, I thought the same thing.

beast23
07-25-2006, 09:42 PM
Fine counterpoints.

But your examples (maybe they weren't the best choices) of Jordan and Pippen - well they made their teammates better their team won.

AJ did neither. We're not talking about a 40-point performance that won the game. We're talking about scoring a bunch of points in defeat while simulataneously limiting our "best" player's number of touches.Come on, Jay. Jermaine is a CAREER 46.5% FG shooter. He has never shot 50% in a season.

And you are concerned because in AJ's last 6 shots he shot a paltry 50%?

In Game 6, AJ shot 3-for-5 from behind the arc... 60 F'n percent!!! For the game, in all FG attempts, he shot 70%. Again, the problem was not that AJ was making his shots. The problem was that his teammates were missing theirs.

Remember when we had Reggie? Nearly all of us on the forum absolutely hated it when Reggie would be absolutely torching the other team in the first quarter, and the coach, whether Brown, Bird or Thomas, would predictably take him out of the game at about the 8:00 mark.

We would then watch the opponent take a big bite out of our lead, and eventually catch up early in the second quarter while Reggie was still sitting on the bench.

The point many of us made was that you do not take your hot shooter out of the game, no matter who he is. You leave him in, and you ride that horse until his shots start hitting the front of the rim, indicating that his legs are tiring a bit and he needs a breather.

In game 6, the same was true for AJ. Only this time, the coach was smart enough to leave his hot hand alone. And, his shots just kept going in.

Now, as much as I hat Iverson, Rose or even Bonzi, if they were wearing our uniform I would yell for the coach to do the same thing. Keep them on the court until their shots start falling short, and keep feeding them the ball.

Now, on the other side of the coin, I agree with you that once AJ hit the mid 30s that he was looking for 40. However, when he continues hitting 1/2 or more of his shots, I can't really fault him. No one else was finding the ocean, let alone the basket.

And, in light of the fact that his teammates were so prolific at missing shots, I find it amazing that AJ was still able to post 5 assists out of the team's 12.

If you think Jermaine needed more shots, then I have an excellent way that he could have gotten them. Rather than taking the shots away from AJ, maybe Jermaine should have gotten his arse under the boards and gathered in more than the meager 6 that he posted in nearly 40 minutes.

Now that is the statistic that I find truly pathetic from your star player in an elimination game.

Will Galen
07-25-2006, 09:57 PM
When it comes to shots and scoring, the problem the Pacers had in the playoffs was NOT AJ shooting the ball too much, it was the remainder of his teammates not hitting enough shots.


And Jay's point in a nutshell was AJ was not getting the other players the ball where they could be the most effective with it. That's the point guards job!

For instant Mark Jackson always hit Reggie the split second he cleared the screen. When we first got Tins he was holding the ball a second to long before passing it to Reggie, thus the defense had time to catch up.

AJ did do his job scoring wise, but he failed to get the ball to players where they could be most effective.

SoupIsGood
07-25-2006, 10:01 PM
AJ did do his job scoring wise, but he failed to get the ball to players where they could be most effective.

Thank you! This is it in a nutshell for me.

You can't fault AJ though. Fault whatever put him in that position. He upped his game and did his best to help his team.

rm1369
07-25-2006, 10:12 PM
Beast,

I think the question is: was the quality of the shots the rest of the team received diminished because AJ had the ball in his hands and looked primarily to set up himself? Is it possible that the other players could not get in a grove because AJ was breaking plays and effectively freezing them out? You admitted that it appeared AJ was going after 40 at some point, don't you believe that is an issue? even if he hit 50%? Remember this was a playoff game - the last game of the Pacers season.

I haven't rewatched the game and I'm not sure if I buy Jay's theory. I do know that I've played in leagues and pick up games where I forced the action and played poorly strictly because I did not fill like part of the offense. And I've never been a scorer. As fragile as the Pacers chemistry (or lack of) has been, I won't dismiss the possibility that a journeyman PG satisfying a personal grudge (that is why he played so well, he wouldn't do that to any other team) would effect his teammates overall games.


Edit: what Will said ^

vapacersfan
07-25-2006, 10:15 PM
Thank you! This is it in a nutshell for me.

You can't fault AJ though. Fault whatever put him in that position. He upped his game and did his best to help his team.

That is exactly what I have been saying all day.

I am just going to list you two as my spokesperson, that way I can just sit around and do nothing on my off days.....oh wait, that is all I have been doing :D

Mr.ThunderMakeR
07-25-2006, 10:29 PM
My memory of this series is starting to fade a little (thankfully!), but I remember that pretty much the whole team went out on the court that night to lose. AJ looked like the only player out there that was actually competing.

As for AJ taking JO out of the game, I find that hard to believe. If he is truly a 20 mil/yr player then he should always be able to keep himself involved in the game. The truth is JO had a terrible series and got outplayed by Krstic. The only person to blame for that is JO.

If you want to blame AJ for the game six loss, who are you going to blame for the other three games that we lost that all counted just as much towards our elimination?

edited for grammar

Los Angeles
07-25-2006, 10:38 PM
I have yet to hear a reasonable explanation of AJ's 5 assists despite his teammate's inability to hit the side of a barn. He was dishing like crazy, he teammates WERE OPEN MUCH OF THE TIME AND MISSING, and still he racks up a respectable 5 assists.

Anyway, when you are the best performing player on a given night, you automatically receive credit if you win and blame if you lose. It's a phenomenon that is as predictable as Old Faithful, and just as boring.

Unclebuck
07-25-2006, 10:50 PM
VA,


There's a reason we lost, and AJ's inability to run the offense, and thus taking too many shots or giving the ball to JO 22-feet from the basket (and facing it) was a big contributor.

In fact, just think how badly we would've lost if he wasn't shooting lights-out.



Are you suggesting that AJ would have taken 23 shots if he wasn't hitting them? That seems nonsensical to me. AJ averaged 12 shots per game in the first 5 games. The only reason AJ shot so much was because he was so hot. Plus most of AJ's points came in the last 15 minutes of the game.

Jay were you at the game, being there and watching AJ get hot and start scoring at will it felt like I was watching Reggie.

I cannot believe this discussion.


Edit: I tried to locate my tape of the game and I can't find it.

Kegboy
07-25-2006, 11:05 PM
Edit: I tried to locate my tape of the game and I can't find it.

I actually went and looked on youtube to see if there was anything.

I think Jay's just ****ing with us, and we're all worked up over everything, he's succeeding.

ChicagoJ
07-25-2006, 11:12 PM
No, I was stuck in Chicago that night.


You can't fault AJ though. Fault whatever put him in that position. He upped his game and did his best to help his team.

I agree. My basic premise is that he was not part of the solution. I don't know if he was truly a (malicious) problem or just got "hot" and lost track of the gameplan during the heat of the battle.
----------------------------------------------------------

I have yet to hear a reasonable explanation of AJ's 5 assists despite his teammate's inability to hit the side of a barn. He was dishing like crazy, he teammates WERE OPEN MUCH OF THE TIME AND MISSING, and still he racks up a respectable 5 assists.

I don't have the play-by-play in front of me anymore but I believe all of his assists were during the fourth quarter and four of the five were to JO (one to Danny.)

My counterpoint is that his teammates can't miss shots if they never get the ball in the first place.

By the time he was actively trying to get his teammates involved, it was too late.
----------------------------------------------------------

If you want to blame AJ for the game six loss, who are you going to blame for the other three games that we lost that all counted just as much towards our elimination?

That's easy... we're 2-0 when Peja played and 0-4 when he didn't.

Los Angeles
07-25-2006, 11:26 PM
I don't have the play-by-play in front of me anymore but I believe all of his assists were during the fourth quarter and four of the five were to JO (one to Danny.)

My counterpoint is that his teammates can't miss shots if they never get the ball in the first place.

By the time he was actively trying to get his teammates involved, it was too late.

Perhaps.

Part of me wants to watch that game again, but then the sane part of me wants the memory to fade. ;)

SoupIsGood
07-25-2006, 11:27 PM
I think I have that game on TiVo. :D

I have considered going back and watching that quarter where David got 10 FT's again.

Los Angeles
07-25-2006, 11:28 PM
But is it possible that he was keeping his teammates involved throughout the game and it wasn't until the 4th that they actually followed through?

ChicagoJ
07-25-2006, 11:44 PM
But is it possible that he was keeping his teammates involved throughout the game and it wasn't until the 4th that they actually followed through?

Outside of JO, they attempted what, 33 shots combined?

Reach your own conclusions...

I'm only talking about Game 6, where we played 1-on-five. In three other games we played 2-on-five and lost. When Peja showed up we played 3-on-five and won. :shrug:

Sollozzo
07-26-2006, 12:06 AM
No, I was stuck in Chicago that night.



I agree. My basic premise is that he was not part of the solution. I don't know if he was truly a (malicious) problem or just got "hot" and lost track of the gameplan during the heat of the battle.







Maybe he wasn't part of the solution, but are you honestly happy with him being shipped for Darrell Armstrong and scrubs? I think we could have done a tad better than that.

naptown
07-26-2006, 12:08 AM
But when you've got six or seven teams fighting for the last four playoff spots, weird things happen.

Yes and the last two years it was the Pacers that have had an abnormal amount weird things happened to them. We are DUE for a "normal" year. A "normal" amount of injuries, a "normal" amount of distractions, a "normal" amount of controversies. If we have just a "normal" year this club can win 50 ball games.

Don't get me wrong, I know there are a lot of question marks surrounding this team. The talent is there, just a matter of if their heads are in the right place. And I honestly feel the steps are being taken to put this teams head in the right place.

ChicagoJ
07-26-2006, 12:13 AM
Maybe he wasn't part of the solution, but are you honestly happy with him being shipped for Darrell Armstrong and scrubs? I think we could have done a tad better than that.

Let's call these guys by their proper names:

Expiring Contract #1
Nonguaranteed Contract #2
Nonguaranteed Contract #3

This was a move to deal with NEXT season's LT. Assuming that JO, Al, Daniels and Tinsley have decent-sized to huge contract and Danny and David are up for extensions then.

naptown
07-26-2006, 12:23 AM
Maybe he wasn't part of the solution, but are you honestly happy with him being shipped for Darrell Armstrong and scrubs? I think we could have done a tad better than that.

Happy about it? Not exactly happy, no. I liked Aj and what he brought to the team. But I do understand it.

It brings in the right kind of player that this teams needs right now. And not for what he does during games. But for what he does during practice, in the locker room, on the bench, etc. By showing these guys how to be a professional. That is why they are bringing in Al as well. After the last two years this team desperately needs some new blood here to get rid of the old feelings and bring a positive attitude.

Peck
07-26-2006, 03:56 AM
Are you really honestly trying to go over this again????

I thought you admitted to me that you were just putting out hyperbole with J.O. to counter all of the belittling of him that was going on.

So the truth is you really beleive this crap? Honestly?

I'm sorry but the notion that Anthony Johnson hurt our team in game six is so obsurd I don't even know how to reply.

Natston
07-26-2006, 04:05 AM
I could have sworn that someone had a Richard Jefferson quote supporting Jay's premise...

Unclebuck
07-26-2006, 08:12 AM
I could have sworn that someone had a Richard Jefferson quote supporting Jay's premise...


RJ talks an awful lot, so I wouldn't consider him a good source, he's just a blowhard.

DisplacedKnick
07-26-2006, 08:45 AM
I'm sorry but the notion that Anthony Johnson hurt our team in game six is so obsurd I don't even know how to reply.

Right there with ya. I've stayed out of this thread because the thought that I might have to argue that Anthony helped the Pacers in Game 6 is just nuts.

Did anyone watch the game? Did anyone notice how NJ collapsed their defense on JO and dared anyone else to shoot? Did anyone notice that outside of AJ everyone else on the team seemed scared to (except Jackson who couldn't have gotten the ball wet if he'd been standing on the bottom of the ocean).

Someone else had to be the difference-maker in the game because NJ set their defense to keep JO from doing that. Nobody but AJ and Jackson had the guts to try to do it - and Jackson couldn't shoot.

Sometimes you have to give credit to one of the top defensive teams in the league taking away your primary weapon. The reason the Pacers lost ultimately came down to NJ being the better team.

The Hustler
07-26-2006, 09:07 AM
Right there with ya. I've stayed out of this thread because the thought that I might have to argue that Anthony helped the Pacers in Game 6 is just nuts.

Did anyone watch the game? Did anyone notice how NJ collapsed their defense on JO and dared anyone else to shoot? Did anyone notice that outside of AJ everyone else on the team seemed scared to (except Jackson who couldn't have gotten the ball wet if he'd been standing on the bottom of the ocean).

Someone else had to be the difference-maker in the game because NJ set their defense to keep JO from doing that. Nobody but AJ and Jackson had the guts to try to do it - and Jackson couldn't shoot.

Sometimes you have to give credit to one of the top defensive teams in the league taking away your primary weapon. The reason the Pacers lost ultimately came down to NJ being the better team.

^^ as much as i hate to say it ... i kinda agree ... they closed down our source of points ... with no 2nd option ( peja/artest) they were able to do that ... we just didnt have an answer .... someone else needed to step up .... at least Jackson and AJ had a go

However AJ, being the PG, his job is to get the ball into a position so that player are confortable to shoot! ... so some of the blame as to be both on AJ and on Rick in not getting people into places where they can shoot .... there has to be space ... a team cant collapse on one player and not leave others open!

One of the problems seemed to be that we had no outside shot ... before it would go into J.O and when the D collapsed up came miller ... or at least Reggie was there to stop the D from Collapsing - in the games we won ... peja stopped the collapse! when he wasnt there noone stepped up!

Anyway ... this is all in the past ... we cant go back now ... weshould however address the issues and look at what we can gain from it .... Al playing inside with JO would make it a whole lot harder to send to big men to J.O as it would leave AL open .... ganger is no longer a roookie and can take on more responsibility if he starts regularly (as i expect him to) if his outside shot stays good its a huge advantage making it ahrd for defensive teams to send there SF inside on J.O .... Jax just needs to make the shot :S ... and our PG needs to be a pass first player who looks to penitrate ... if AJ had sucked in the D toward J.O and kicked it across or something instead of trying to be the No.2 option from the point ... at the end of the day some of the decision making just wasnt good enough ... as for Rick he needs a good kick ... wake up ... call some plays for Danny or someone beside J.O. ... draw up a play that uses them calapsing to our advantage! ... lets not argue over faults but look at what we can take from it!

(^^all the above is "in my opinion" if u disagree then say what u think^^)

Bball
07-26-2006, 09:56 AM
I sure wish I could've seen this game, in it's entirety, either from Conseco or my living room.

I just didn't see enough to know which side of this debate to fall on... especially with Jay's added stats.

It doesn't seem like too many have the game archived... altho I bet AJ does! ;)

-Bball

ChicagoJ
07-26-2006, 10:20 AM
Are you really honestly trying to go over this again????

I thought you admitted to me that you were just putting out hyperbole with J.O. to counter all of the belittling of him that was going on.

So the truth is you really beleive this crap? Honestly?

I'm sorry but the notion that Anthony Johnson hurt our team in game six is so obsurd I don't even know how to reply.

I believe that for whatever reason, whether sinister or just "riding the hot hand" that the Pacers adandoned a potentially winning gameplan (get JO the ball, force a mismatch, and take whatever is left) for a backup PG to shoot the ball too much. I don't really believe AJ was trying to be selfish - I think the Pacers (from coach on down) were so mentally weak that they abandoned their team's identity/ strategy in the most important game of the season but it blew up on them. And I'm not laying all the blame on AJ - somebody either gave him permission to abandon the original gameplan or passively lost control of the team.

In an elimination game, I want my "go to" guy (JO) to take (1) the most shots, (2) considerably more than his season/ playoff average. Not a journeyman backup forced into a starting position because of injury that happens to get hot.

There's no way you can convince me that it was good for the team for AJ to shoot as often as he did. It hurt JO, it hurt the other three guys on the court. AJ became "Iverson, Jr." for a night - except that he shot a high percentage.

Let's put it this way, Foster didn't play in this game. If JO was getting double-teamed by another big man then somebody else competent was open. The distribution of shots in this game was astonishingly poor.

You can argue all you want that AJ kept the score respectable. But when he takes nine more shots in an elimination game than JO does then I believe we will lose 100% of the time.

I'll check tonight to see if I've still got it TiVo'ed (I doubt it, pretty sure I hit 'delete' in disgust a long time ago.)

btowncolt
07-26-2006, 10:22 AM
Are you really honestly trying to go over this again????

I thought you admitted to me that you were just putting out hyperbole with J.O. to counter all of the belittling of him that was going on.

So the truth is you really beleive this crap? Honestly?

I'm sorry but the notion that Anthony Johnson hurt our team in game six is so obsurd I don't even know how to reply.

Wow, I never agree with Peck. Sure do now......

Peck
07-26-2006, 06:38 PM
I believe that for whatever reason, whether sinister or just "riding the hot hand" that the Pacers adandoned a potentially winning gameplan (get JO the ball, force a mismatch, and take whatever is left) for a backup PG to shoot the ball too much. I don't really believe AJ was trying to be selfish - I think the Pacers (from coach on down) were so mentally weak that they abandoned their team's identity/ strategy in the most important game of the season but it blew up on them. And I'm not laying all the blame on AJ - somebody either gave him permission to abandon the original gameplan or passively lost control of the team.

In an elimination game, I want my "go to" guy (JO) to take (1) the most shots, (2) considerably more than his season/ playoff average. Not a journeyman backup forced into a starting position because of injury that happens to get hot.

There's no way you can convince me that it was good for the team for AJ to shoot as often as he did. It hurt JO, it hurt the other three guys on the court. AJ became "Iverson, Jr." for a night - except that he shot a high percentage.

Let's put it this way, Foster didn't play in this game. If JO was getting double-teamed by another big man then somebody else competent was open. The distribution of shots in this game was astonishingly poor.

You can argue all you want that AJ kept the score respectable. But when he takes nine more shots in an elimination game than JO does then I believe we will lose 100% of the time.

I'll check tonight to see if I've still got it TiVo'ed (I doubt it, pretty sure I hit 'delete' in disgust a long time ago.)


Unbelievable. You are telling me that throwing the ball into O'Neal & watching him go one on three would have been a better option?

Let's assume you are right here, which I do not believe you are, how many points in a best case scenario would J.O. have gotten? 40? 50? 100?

My guess is about mid 30's.

Then I'm sure you would say that the other players would have been open. Great, wonderfull.

Jackson shot 20% from the field that game, you know the one game they actually had to coax him into playing.

Croshere was 2-8 & 1-4 from three point range, yes by all means let's make sure he shoots more on that night.

Fred Jones was 0% from the field. YES ZERO % from the field. Now he only shot the ball 4 times but half of those were from 3 point land. Maybe he should have shot more as well.

Granger was the only other player other than O'neal & Johnson hitting & in all honesty how much more did you want the rookie shooting vs. one of the best defensive players at the sf. spot in the NBA.

The idea of just throwing the ball down to O'Neal & watching him get abused by Clifford Robinson does not appeal to me.

I think two things are in play here.

1. Your hatred of Johnson has reached epic proportions.

2. Your new found love of O'Neal has reached epic proportions.

I just don't understand any of this. I feel as though I am in bizarro world reading how a guy who shot 16-23 from the floor hurt the team.

I bet if Jamaal Tinsley would have had the same exact stats. as A.J. we would be reading how great he was.

This is just unreal.

Destined4Greatness
07-26-2006, 06:43 PM
Please AJ went 16-23 from the field with some of those being 3 pointers. The odds that JO would have shot 16-23 are so freaking high its unbelievable plus he wouldn't have been hitting 3 pointers with them.

I am sorry but we tried the pound it into JO method the 4th quarter we were down by 20. And if screwed us up. We cut the deficit to 8 IIRC, and then JO promptly turns the ball over of misses shots 4 straight possesions. JO does not come through in the clutch. Anthony Johnson was the guy that closed out our 2 victories not JO.

ChicagoJ
07-26-2006, 06:48 PM
I guess we're talking about which way we'd rather have the season end.

I'd rather go down with my big gun blazing.

I'm not sure how much 1-on-three JO was going to face in that game. Foster didn't play. Croshere and Danny must be somewhat respected.

JO was getting abused because he had to step too far out on the wing to catch the ball. Not because NJ was repeating the SVG triple-teams on him.

Most of the time Cliff was guarding him straight up, but AJ still couldn't get him the ball close enough to the basket to be effective.

Again, there probably was nothing we were going to do that night to win. Peja's absence hurt the team much more than AJ's play. Tinsley's absence hurt the team much more than AJ's play. For that matter, Saras' overall ineptness hurt the team much more than AJ's play because if Saras could've found a way to stay on the court during the last 8-10 weeks of the season (other than other player's injuries) then perhaps we *could've* gotten the ball to JO in better position.

ChicagoJ
07-26-2006, 06:49 PM
Please AJ went 16-23 from the field with some of those being 3 pointers. The odds that JO would have shot 16-23 are so freaking high its unbelievable plus he wouldn't have been hitting 3 pointers with them.

You must've been really upset during JO's 12-15 (80%), 37-point game. How exactly did AJ close out that win?

vapacersfan
07-26-2006, 06:51 PM
Unbelievable. You are telling me that throwing the ball into O'Neal & watching him go one on three would have been a better option?

Let's assume you are right here, which I do not believe you are, how many points in a best case scenario would J.O. have gotten? 40? 50? 100?

My guess is about mid 30's.

Then I'm sure you would say that the other players would have been open. Great, wonderfull.

Jackson shot 20% from the field that game, you know the one game they actually had to coax him into playing.

Croshere was 2-8 & 1-4 from three point range, yes by all means let's make sure he shoots more on that night.

Fred Jones was 0% from the field. YES ZERO % from the field. Now he only shot the ball 4 times but half of those were from 3 point land. Maybe he should have shot more as well.

Granger was the only other player other than O'neal & Johnson hitting & in all honesty how much more did you want the rookie shooting vs. one of the best defensive players at the sf. spot in the NBA.

The idea of just throwing the ball down to O'Neal & watching him get abused by Clifford Robinson does not appeal to me.

I think two things are in play here.

1. Your hatred of Johnson has reached epic proportions.

2. Your new found love of O'Neal has reached epic proportions.

I just don't understand any of this. I feel as though I am in bizarro world reading how a guy who shot 16-23 from the floor hurt the team.

I bet if Jamaal Tinsley would have had the same exact stats. as A.J. we would be reading how great he was.

This is just unreal.

Peck, you are my hero.

I really wish I could write half as well as you do, since I was trying to make the latter point you just made in another thread and just couldnt put it together.

Needless to say, I agree 100% with everything you just said.

Destined4Greatness
07-26-2006, 07:21 PM
You must've been really upset during JO's 12-15 (80%), 37-point game. How exactly did AJ close out that win?

IIRC thats the only playoff game where JO has shot the ball more than 3 times and had a better percentage than 16-23. Considering he never even got past 16 shot attempts he wasn't pounding away to will the team to victory, he was playing a role and getting the shots every once in a while hardly dominating to will the team to victory.

AJ fourth quarter of that game 13 points, 3 of which came from the FT line.
JO fourth quarter of that game 8 points, 6 of which came from the FT Line.

Now I am sorry but I can hit 6 of 6 FT's. So if a guy scores 8 points in a quarter and only 2 from the field, I will take the guy that actually shot the ball while contested over the guy that whined about the Officials before the game to get them to go easy on him.

beast23
07-26-2006, 08:50 PM
Jay,

I'm a lot like Peck. Totally stymied. Basically because you are one of the most logical, analytical guys on the forum.

So, I can only reach one conclusion.

You're bored, need some entertainment, and decided to stir up the ***** a little. Right? You're actually f'n with us! Right?

Sollozzo
07-26-2006, 10:51 PM
You must've been really upset during JO's 12-15 (80%), 37-point game. How exactly did AJ close out that win?

Well, Johnson had 25 points and 8 assists in game 3. Not bad for a journeyman point guard being put into a tough position. But hey, I suppose Darrell Armstrong is a better fit. I think you'll be wishing Johnson was back when Tinsley missess his usual half of a season and 38 year old Armstrong has to play big minutes.

And how many times has it happened when a guy has shot over 75% and got 30 points in a playoff time like JO did? A handful. It wasn't going to happen again in game 6. A shooting display like that happens once in a blue moon.

I remember sportscenter at the time saying it happened something like 4 times. Jabbar and Wilt did it. To assume JO could have dominated like that in game 6 is ridiculous. JO's percentages are almost always in the 44-48 percent rage. He rarely breaks the 50 percent mark. If JO has a 55% shooting night, it's reason to be estatic. The bottom line is you go to who is hot. JO was hot in game 3. AJ was hot in game 6.

larry
07-26-2006, 11:25 PM
VA,

Who do you want taking more shots in an elimination game? AJ or JO?

There's a reason we lost, and AJ's inability to run the offense, and thus taking too many shots or giving the ball to JO 22-feet from the basket (and facing it) was a big contributor.

In fact, just think how badly we would've lost if he wasn't shooting lights-out.
AJ has always been a good shooter.
I would perfer AJ's shot selection and him pulling the trigger than I would have JO's. If JO was slashing to the basket getting fouled and shooting layups then I would take JO. Kristic & JO shot at about the same distance in that series. I would say Kristic is A better shooter. I like JO as A basketball player more than Kristic & AJ, but he has worse shot selection than both. It doesn't help the way it looks considering he has a worse shot than both as well.

larry
07-26-2006, 11:26 PM
Well, Johnson had 25 points and 8 assists in game 3. Not bad for a journeyman point guard being put into a tough position. But hey, I suppose Darrell Armstrong is a better fit. I think you'll be wishing Johnson was back when Tinsley missess his usual half of a season and 38 year old Armstrong has to play big minutes.

And how many times has it happened when a guy has shot over 75% and got 30 points in a playoff time like JO did? A handful. It wasn't going to happen again in game 6. A shooting display like that happens once in a blue moon.

I remember sportscenter at the time saying it happened something like 4 times. Jabbar and Wilt did it. To assume JO could have dominated like that in game 6 is ridiculous. JO's percentages are almost always in the 44-48 percent rage. He rarely breaks the 50 percent mark. If JO has a 55% shooting night, it's reason to be estatic. The bottom line is you go to who is hot. JO was hot in game 3. AJ was hot in game 6.

QFT
Quoted For Truth

Naptown_Seth
07-26-2006, 11:44 PM
It doesn't seem like too many have the game archived... altho I bet AJ does! ;)
It's one I'm keeping. Haven't burned it yet, but I would pass a copy on to a fellow fan if it was just 2-3 people

I think Anthem said he had this one still too. I know the reason I kept it was because AJ was incredible. Remember the whole series was about attacking JO. They used Krstic and bad perimeter defense from the Pacers to go after JO from game 1 on. JO got the better of them one game and it was a disaster for them, so they increased their efforts.

I agree that Jack had the guts but not the ability to make good. His shooting was just awful and cost them the game (along with what the Nets were doing that is).

Maybe if, oh, TWO OF THE STARTERS weren't sitting on the bench (and I don't mean Tinsley) they might have put up a better fight in game 6.

Sure, we could blame the sitting Peja, Foster and Tinsley but its so much easier to blast the guy going for 40 on GOOD shooting.

Let's look at Points per Shot
AJ = 1.73
Granger = 1.63
JO = 1.50
no one else over 1.00

Now the way math works is this, if you have a certain number of FGAs, the way you get the MOST points total is by giving ALL your shots to the player with the highest PPS. The closer to that you come, the better your score will be.

1.50 PPS

That was the number that helped WADE get MVP of the Finals. I didn't hear people saying "they should have gone to Shaq if they wanted to win". What, Shaq isn't good? I don't give a :censored: if its Eddie Gill scoring at a rate like 1.73, you milk that till it runs dry.

He was 6 of 7 for 15 points in the 4th till the final 30 seconds.

And when it was 92-90 JO pulled down AJ's 2nd missed of the quarter and then this happened...
Richard Jefferson blocks Jermaine O'Neal's layup

So like Reggie in 03-04, the tying shot was at the rim in JO's hands and it was blocked.

I'd rather look at the DG/Jack/AC vs Jefferson/Vince/Krstic matchup...not looking so good at either end, and Fred in the late 4th wasn't helping a lot either.



To assume JO could have dominated like that in game 6 is ridiculous.At RATS I pointed out that you have to be as good as Wilt and Jabbar's greatest nights just for Pacers fans to stop saying you suck.

That is the issue here. The team had lots of problems, but JO game 3 and AJ game 6 weren't them, nor should those nights be considered anything less than spectacular.

Guess what, Reggie had monster nights when the TEAM lost. Guess Reggie should have learned to pass the ball instead of hogging it. :rolleyes:

Sollozzo
07-27-2006, 12:31 AM
In an elimination game, I want my "go to" guy (JO) to take (1) the most shots, (2) considerably more than his season/ playoff average. Not a journeyman backup forced into a starting position because of injury that happens to get hot.






You keep repeating this point over and over. In average circumstances, everyone would agree with you. If the choice is between giving the ball to an average game JO or an average game AJ, the choice is obviously JO. But these weren't average circumstances. AJ was a red hot 70% in that game, which is not average for him, or any other player for that matter. If a guy can hit 70% of his shots, then you let him take the shots. Why dump it into JO, who consistantly shoots 44-48% instead?

It's rare for a guy to have a shooting display like JO did in game 3. It's rare for a guy to have one like AJ did in game 6. They were both hot, they both deserved the ball in those games.

There have been alot of times in the playoffs where average players pick up the torch and have big games. Maybe this is a bad example, but remember when old man Steve Smith got hot in the playoffs for the Hornets against the Heat in 04? Was Smith the go to guy? No way, Baron Davis was. But Smith had the hot hand, hence he kept getting the ball and scoring.

Naptown_Seth
07-27-2006, 12:56 AM
You keep repeating this point over and over. In average circumstances, everyone would agree with you. If the choice is between giving the ball to an average game JO or an average game AJ, the choice is obviously JO. But these weren't average circumstances. AJ was a red hot 70% in that game, which is not average for him, or any other player for that matter. If a guy can hit 70% of his shots, then you let him take the shots. Why dump it into JO, who consistantly shoots 44-48% instead?

It's rare for a guy to have a shooting display like JO did in game 3. It's rare for a guy to have one like AJ did in game 6. They were both hot, they both deserved the ball in those games.

There have been alot of times in the playoffs where average players pick up the torch and have big games. Maybe this is a bad example, but remember when old man Steve Smith got hot in the playoffs for the Hornets against the Heat in 04? Was Smith the go to guy? No way, Baron Davis was. But Smith had the hot hand, hence he kept getting the ball and scoring.
Plus Rik Smits vs the Magic. His logic says it should have gone to Reggie again, but instead it was Rik and his fake on Tree gave the Pacers a victory.

Should I really get into Kukoc 98 Game 7 4th quarter on a team with Jordan and Pippen. How about Paxson, or Kerr, or Horry? Manu in the 4th over Duncan? Terry over Dirk?

There is an endless list of role players or 2nd/3rd options getting clutch shots or coming up with big stretches to win a game that the "star" contributed to but did not dominate.

The Hustler
07-27-2006, 04:02 AM
Everyone Keeps saying its deffinitly not AJs fault or it is AJs fault .... yes AJ scored 40 points yes he was hot ..... but hes a PG ... a PGs job is to feed people with shots that they can make and execute plays ..... he didnt do that .... so many times down the floor istead of stopping up and calling for a pick and roll or trying to draw pressure off J.O and feed him went for tha running jumper of his ...

Im not saying i agree completly with Jay ... you cant deny he score points... but ild have liked to have seen some more team ball in that game opening things up for J.O .... Its quite easy to stop one guy in the paint but its even easier if you know theres only one other guy on the team thats gunna be in a position to score!

I dont think its "his fault" we lost byut i do think some accountability has to given to a PG who clearly couldnt feed the players as he should!

DisplacedKnick
07-27-2006, 06:32 AM
Everyone Keeps saying its deffinitly not AJs fault or it is AJs fault .... yes AJ scored 40 points yes he was hot ..... but hes a PG ... a PGs job is to feed people with shots that they can make and execute plays .....

Nope. A PG's job is to run the offense. He can't even execute plays unless he's the only guy involved in plays (very few called plays happen in a game anyway - generally it just involves sets). And if the best chance of scoring on a given possession is him, then it's his responsibility to take it.

The Hustler
07-27-2006, 06:42 AM
Nope. A PG's job is to run the offense. He can't even execute plays unless he's the only guy involved in plays (very few called plays happen in a game anyway - generally it just involves sets). And if the best chance of scoring on a given possession is him, then it's his responsibility to take it.

What i mean is its the PGs job to find that shot within a set ... find the guy that gunna take and make a shot the highest percentage shot available ... he has to find "the best chance of scoring" ... agreed that sometimes is him ... but lets be honest AJ isnt exactly a proven high percentage clutch shooter ...

DisplacedKnick
07-27-2006, 06:59 AM
but lets be honest AJ isnt exactly a proven high percentage clutch shooter ...

The Pacers haven't had one of those since Reggie retired. IMO AJ has shown as much clutch ability as anyone on the team - probably more.

The Hustler
07-27-2006, 07:45 AM
oh what i would give to have a 24 yr old reggie back lol

i agree we lack a clutch shooter ... even peja wasnt a gd clutch shooter ... but out of the guys available the guy ild want on the ball is my allstar ... at least if he messes up u gave it to the go 2 man ... AJ however was a back up PG in due to injury!

No way do i blame to lose completely on AJ ... i just dont think he had the career game some ppl say it was ... apart from the points he scored

Just my opinions

D23
07-27-2006, 08:28 AM
C'mon guys... has anyone really looked at the box score? All this talk about who's taking the shots and the Pacers shot a better percentage for the game. Jay believes O'neal wasn't getting quality looks at the basket but he still shot a very respectable 8/14. The fact is, JO had a decent game, and AJ stepped up and gave us a shot at winning. You can't blame him for the loss.

On that note, if you really want to figure out why we lost, look at the box score a little more closely. The two teams were very, very close in almost every statistic except rebounds. NJ out-rebounded us 44-30, and 13-6 offensively. If JO really wanted to help his team win, he shouldn't have been looking to get better shots. He should have played like a warrior, got his a** in position, and helped his team crash the boards, pure & simple.

Just my 2 cents.

The Hustler
07-27-2006, 08:46 AM
lol .. AJs fault we didnt rebound









:rolleyes: Just Kidding pls dont kill me!

DisplacedKnick
07-27-2006, 08:59 AM
My problem with the game is this - JO wasn't going to win it himself and they fired up their defense just to stop him. Somebody else had to step up.

Austin? Did his usual thing after missing a couple of shots - quit shooting even when nobody was within 10 feet of him.

Jackson? Couldn't hit a barn.

Granger? Rookie but even so he passed up some open looks.

Who else was there? Foster, Tinsley and Peja were out. For some reason Harrison didn't play even though he'd been effective earlier in the series.

Carlisle sure didn't have a problem with what AJ was doing - he left him in almost the entire game. You have to have a second scorer. In this case JO ended up being 2nd to AJ being the number 1 option but as hot as he was and with Indy so shorthanded, what choice did you have? Nobody else was going to do it.

The Hustler
07-27-2006, 09:04 AM
Hell yeah, you have to have a second scorer ... but you need a 3rd and a 4th ... if your NJ it become obvious ... block J.O and make a shot hard for AJ ... we needed more than just a second option ... and ~Rick didnt ahve much choice byut leave him in .... sarus wasnt exactly reliable against pressure D was he ...

all i was asking for was a little more distribution to find the shots for other people

as for cro yeah he did pass up shots he would usually not thought twice about ... he needed to step up not drop back ... i dont singularly blame AJ ... other people needed to step up but AJ needed to find them where the were most confortable!

ChicagoJ
07-27-2006, 10:41 AM
Answer this question: what team wins an elimination game when they go away from their #1 option?

If JO had taken 25 shots and we lost the game, I'd feel better than when his PG limits him to 14 shots. And the fourteen shots weren't where ANY of us wanting JO to get/ shoot the ball, because AJ couldn't get it to him in the paint. That was happening all series long. AJ can't make a post entry pass to save his life AND THAT'S THE REASON JO WAS TAKING SO MANY LONG JUMPERS.

Should AJ have taken "more shots than usual" because he was red-hot? Absolutely.

We lost the damn game people. If we'd forced a game #7, we could make AJ the hero.

For some of you that complain that Indy fans are content with a competitive/ but not championship calibler team - look at what you're doing (again).

You're making a "hero" out of a lesser-skilled, hard-working hard-nosed player who played a very impressive game in a defeat.

As long as Indiana fans under-appreciate they're truly talented players (like JO) and give love-fests to hard-working but limited players then this is what we (always) get: "played well in defeat." Ugh.

This is a fun discussion because its really about more than just Game #6. But I'm telling you, as I watched Game #6 my thought was this, "Damn, AJ is shooting lights out but if JO doesn't get involved we have no chance of winning." Do you guys really believe that AJ was going to lead us to victory while playing PG? C'mon. (I could listen to an argument that AJ could shoot us to victory while playing SG.)

Have I mentioned that I hate shoot-first PGs?

Do you guys really think that JO was playing lazy and just settling for long jumpers throughout that series (and yes, he was clearly nowhere near 100%. He got that shot blocked by RJ because he had no explosion in his leg. You try and jump on torn hip adductor. I remember, when I tore mine, just how excrutiating it felt when I came out of the starting blocks at nationals). I can excuse JO's lack of rebounds because he wasn't 100% (or anywhere near that) and had no explosiveness to the ball.

JO was taking bad shots because with AJ on the court, those were the best shots he could get. Saras *could* get him a better shot. For one possession. And then Jacque Vaughn would check into the game, pressure Saras, and that was the end of that.

At least if you're playing with Iverson or Marberry, you know they're going to hog the ball and take a lot of shots. And you're used to it. It may be a chicken-and-egg discussion, but IMO, Granger, Croshere, even SJax and Fred never got into a rhythm because they aren't used to playing with a PG that dominates the ball like AJ did in that game.

What does a forty-point, 70% shooting game mean when you lose? Absolutely nothing. Again, if our go-to guy has a forty-point, 70% shooting game in an elimination game we'd say, "Well, he just didn't get any help from his teammates." But JO's shooting was pretty good so he needed quite a few more "touches."

This is the most fun I've had all off-season. Bring it on. :)

Roy Munson
07-27-2006, 11:05 AM
At least if you're playing with Iverson or Marberry, you know they're going to hog the ball and take a lot of shots. And you're used to it. It may be a chicken-and-egg discussion, but IMO, Granger, Croshere, even SJax and Fred never got into a rhythm because they aren't used to playing with a PG that dominates the ball like AJ did in that game.

What does a forty-point, 70% shooting game mean when you lose? Absolutely nothing. Again, if our go-to guy has a forty-point, 70% shooting game in an elimination game we'd say, "Well, he just didn't get any help from his teammates." But JO's shooting was pretty good so he needed quite a few more "touches."



I agree with Jay 100% on this one (amazing, I know, but I can agree with him when he's not ripping on Freddy).

It would be very interesting to study league historical stats and find out how many players (especially guards) scored 30+ points in a game and his team lost. I imagine it's a lot. There's definitely a reason selfish (shoot first) point guards such as Marberry, Telfair, Francis, B. Davis, M. James play on teams with losing records. Teams win games offensively with ball movement and strategy, not by standing around and watch the PG dribble and shoot.

In my dream world where I was an NBA GM or coach, the LAST thing I'd want would be a shoot-first PG. At the most I'd want my PG to score 10-12 ppg, otherwise he wouldn't be doing his job of running the offense and distributing the ball.

D-BONE
07-27-2006, 11:13 AM
Jay, aside from the fact that I just don't buy your theory, you are essentially saying if JO has the game AJ did instead and we lose, it's somehow more acceptable.

What is this some kind of pretzel logic? It makes no difference to me who had the big game in that scenario b/c losing is not acceptable. Besdies, there's no way to know even if JO gets more shots, that he actually goes for 40 on 70% shooting.

Bottom line in that series is that their TEAM was better and PERFORMED better. And don't anyone say well if Peja had played b/c I still think they'd have won. And part of them being better was our screwy chemistry, spurious injury drama, lack of defined roles, and PG soap operas. All of which we appear to be lookng at yeat again barring more deals.

Big Smooth
07-27-2006, 11:23 AM
I just don't understand any of this. I feel as though I am in bizarro world reading how a guy who shot 16-23 from the floor hurt the team.

This is just unreal.

You nailed it. It is a ridiculous argument. I think the long, hot summer has gotten to people. ;)

able
07-27-2006, 11:40 AM
You nailed it. It is a ridiculous argument. I think the long, hot summer has gotten to people. ;)
OK, let's add this to the discussion:

Over the entire series, AJ took most shots of all, (87) versus JO (84) and Jax (82)
JO's percentage over the series is better, yet he took less shots, Granger's percentage is better, yet he took only 34 shots
Peja over 2 games took only 18 shots making 8, 6 on Ast. from JO

The backup PG as the prime-scorer on a team?

grace
07-27-2006, 11:46 AM
Answer this question: what team wins an elimination game when they go away from their #1 option?

If JO had taken 25 shots and we lost the game, I'd feel better than when his PG limits him to 14 shots. And the fourteen shots weren't where ANY of us wanting JO to get/ shoot the ball, because AJ couldn't get it to him in the paint. That was happening all series long. AJ can't make a post entry pass to save his life AND THAT'S THE REASON JO WAS TAKING SO MANY LONG JUMPERS.

Should AJ have taken "more shots than usual" because he was red-hot? Absolutely.

We lost the damn game people. If we'd forced a game #7, we could make AJ the hero.

For some of you that complain that Indy fans are content with a competitive/ but not championship calibler team - look at what you're doing (again).

You're making a "hero" out of a lesser-skilled, hard-working hard-nosed player who played a very impressive game in a defeat.

As long as Indiana fans under-appreciate they're truly talented players (like JO) and give love-fests to hard-working but limited players then this is what we (always) get: "played well in defeat." Ugh.

This is a fun discussion because its really about more than just Game #6. But I'm telling you, as I watched Game #6 my thought was this, "Damn, AJ is shooting lights out but if JO doesn't get involved we have no chance of winning." Do you guys really believe that AJ was going to lead us to victory while playing PG? C'mon. (I could listen to an argument that AJ could shoot us to victory while playing SG.)

Have I mentioned that I hate shoot-first PGs?

Do you guys really think that JO was playing lazy and just settling for long jumpers throughout that series (and yes, he was clearly nowhere near 100%. He got that shot blocked by RJ because he had no explosion in his leg. You try and jump on torn hip adductor. I remember, when I tore mine, just how excrutiating it felt when I came out of the starting blocks at nationals). I can excuse JO's lack of rebounds because he wasn't 100% (or anywhere near that) and had no explosiveness to the ball.

JO was taking bad shots because with AJ on the court, those were the best shots he could get. Saras *could* get him a better shot. For one possession. And then Jacque Vaughn would check into the game, pressure Saras, and that was the end of that.

At least if you're playing with Iverson or Marberry, you know they're going to hog the ball and take a lot of shots. And you're used to it. It may be a chicken-and-egg discussion, but IMO, Granger, Croshere, even SJax and Fred never got into a rhythm because they aren't used to playing with a PG that dominates the ball like AJ did in that game.

What does a forty-point, 70% shooting game mean when you lose? Absolutely nothing. Again, if our go-to guy has a forty-point, 70% shooting game in an elimination game we'd say, "Well, he just didn't get any help from his teammates." But JO's shooting was pretty good so he needed quite a few more "touches."

This is the most fun I've had all off-season. Bring it on. :)

In the above chapter and verse did you ever address the rebounding deficit? I would think that would have to be part of the reason why the Pacers lost.

Since86
07-27-2006, 11:49 AM
OK, let's add this to the discussion:

Over the entire series, AJ took most shots of all, (87) versus JO (84) and Jax (82)
JO's percentage over the series is better, yet he took less shots, Granger's percentage is better, yet he took only 34 shots
Peja over 2 games took only 18 shots making 8, 6 on Ast. from JO

The backup PG as the prime-scorer on a team?

Take away the 23 shot attempts from game six, and that leaves him taking 64 shots in five games. That's a 12.6 shots/game average. If he puts up his 12.6 shots, he's behind JO and Jax with 73shot attempts.

Because he shot so many during game six, which he should have, that bumped up the total number.

He should of been behind JO, maybe Jax, through the series given the situation.

able
07-27-2006, 11:57 AM
Take away the 23 shot attempts from game six, and that leaves him taking 64 shots in five games. That's a 12.6 shots/game average. If he puts up his 12.6 shots, he's behind JO and Jax with 73shot attempts.

Because he shot so many during game six, which he should have, that bumped up the total number.

He should of been behind JO, maybe Jax, through the series given the situation.
So the best player on the court and the alledged #2 get 1 shot more then the backup pg ?? on avg ?

Sorry but that doesn't cut it, why did Peja only avg 9 shots ?

the PG should be 5 shot pg behind on avg, not 1 if you discount a game as well, or ahead if you count all games.

Point guards that POINT remember ?

Since86
07-27-2006, 12:03 PM
If AJ doesn't shoot, then who is?

Fred all but disappeared in the series.
Foster can't hit the broad side of a barn.
Maybe Granger, but that's a BIG maybe.
Peja disappeared as well.
Saras?
Hulk?
Cro?
Gill?
Pollard?


He's the next best option.

AJ shot over 48% throughout the series, and that's not even including his 70% in game 6. He was just as good an option as anyone else on the team.

The situation was awful, and that's not AJ's fault.

EDIT: AJ was also playing more mins than JO as well. So when he was out, the scoring/shooting option really drops off.

D-BONE
07-27-2006, 12:09 PM
Well, first let's recall that AJ is effectively the starting PG at that time. As far as the last game, what ever happened to the addage of going with the hot hand? That can't apply to a PG or what?

Let me say in fairness to AJ's critics in this thread, I am not upset that AJ was traded in the big picture. I agree with those that contend he's more of a SG than a PG. His performance here when we needed him for various reasons was admirable. On the other hand, he isn't the piece to take us to championship contention (not that any of our other current PGs are either).

I do take exception to trying to devalue his performance in game six vs NJ. Just sounds like JO sour grapes to me. Bo-hoo! JO wasn't the "go-to-guy" for one game b/c AJ is a PG and he was on fire, but PGs are evidently never supposed to be afforded that luxury. Grasping at straws is my interpretation of trying to shift more responsibility to AJ than anyone else.

OK, AJ may not have fed the post particularly well, but I just don't think it's right to rip the guy's career game. Especially given the fact that I don't believe it would have made any difference in the outcome had somebody else been getting some of those shots.

The Hustler
07-27-2006, 12:10 PM
This is a fun discussion because its really about more than just Game #6.

Have I mentioned that I hate shoot-first PGs?


Loving both of these quotes ...

firstly this is a lot mroe than just game six ... look at the lakers .... in the playoffs Kobe finally took a few less shots ... worked the ball around and it surprised the suns so much they forced a few wins ... made it a close series .... Kobe ... one of the most talented guys in the leauge ... realised he couldnt win it on his own ...! if he cant do it then what chance has a back up PG????

Watch Jermaines 37 point game ... he diddnt jsut shoot ... the amount of times he shipped the ball out for better shots was brilliant ... he then took the shots he new were the best high percetage ones ... tht what you need .... AJ was hot but being hot and making most of the shots you take doesnt mean you can win a ball game for a team!

our bench didnt score a single point! .... whihc is ridiculous .. .the you realise they only took 7 shots in a combined playing time of over 40 mins ...

and hell yes i hate shoot first PGs ... IMO distribution and finding the best shots for the team is a PGs primary job! ... not to try and win a game on his own!

AJ had a great shooting game ... yes ... but did we win?

As for rebounding .... Several things .... No foster is always going to hurt rebounding .... people coming out to try and get the ball on offence means noone going to offensive boards ... all our starting 5 playing 36mins or more gunna be knackered ... They just played better<<<< ....

able
07-27-2006, 12:10 PM
Well he never gave them the ball enough to find out, or get them in a rythm it seems, he was to busy shooting it himself.

If Peja in the games he plays, takes 9 shots on avg and AJ 13 then there is something major wrong, no matter how you want to twist it.

Since86
07-27-2006, 12:20 PM
Well he never gave them the ball enough to find out, or get them in a rythm it seems, he was to busy shooting it himself.

If Peja in the games he plays, takes 9 shots on avg and AJ 13 then there is something major wrong, no matter how you want to twist it.

JO shot the ball, the EXACT same amount as his series average.

Should he have gotten 5more shots to find out, or 10?


If you've got a player shooting 70% from the field, you'd better give him the damn ball. I don't care if he's the starting PG, or the fourth string C. you get him the ball, because his shooting 70% is a lot better percentage than anyone else is going to shoot.

Why give Peja more shots, if he's so injured that he can't even play half the series? What makes you think he's going to do any better? His 3-10 performance in game 2 really stood out.

This discussion is more about the player, than the play.

naptown
07-27-2006, 12:20 PM
I don't remember the exact details of the games, but I want to ask one question. Were AJ's shots forced, or was he taking good shots based on what the defense was giving in that series?

My point being is that you cant just look at the box score and come to a conclusion, you have to look at what was happening in the flow of the games.

That's what I loved about the old Celts. It didnt matter who had a big game, they just tried to exploit what the defense was giving them to get people good shots.

DisplacedKnick
07-27-2006, 12:25 PM
Well he never gave them the ball enough to find out, or get them in a rythm it seems, he was to busy shooting it himself.

If Peja in the games he plays, takes 9 shots on avg and AJ 13 then there is something major wrong, no matter how you want to twist it.

He gave them the ball plenty in game 6. If someone wants to go back and watch the game tape, count how many times Croshere and Granger passed up wide open shots - like without someone within 5 feet. I don't remember the same being true with Jax but it was with Granger and Croshere was completely, 100% worthless - I've never seen someone not shoot like he didn't shoot.

Destined4Greatness
07-27-2006, 12:25 PM
Jay even said it, he would rather lose with JO shooting the ball than possibly win with AJ shooting the ball. FANGIRL.

D-BONE
07-27-2006, 12:25 PM
I have no problem with a so-called "pass-first" PG. In fact, I agree it's preferable in the big scheme of things. That doesn't mean there's some hard and fast rule that says if your PG is hot as hell he can't, on occasion, be allowed to take over a game.

I'll repeat it yet again. We weren't winning that series anyway regardless of shot distribution. Our team was too screwed up. I hope AJ's departure helps resolve our PG situation somewhere down the line. I hope JT plays the majority of a season at a level of a few years ago. I hope Saras shows marked improvement.

Trying to pin the game six loss, and by extension our lack of success last year, on his penchant for shooting more than passing is nothing more than trying to lessen the accountability on the coach, team, our so-called stars, and/or go-to-guy. We were a poor team, with wild circumstances, bad attitude, dubious injury concerns, etc. That's why we had the year we did and why we lost the playoff series.

Destined4Greatness
07-27-2006, 12:36 PM
Guys we really need to just be quite the reason we didn't win had nothing to do with AJ scoring so much or JO scoring so little(The Team is used to that).

Points off the bench 0. PLayers that actually played time off our bench. 3. Runi(Shouldn't count), Fred Jones, and David Harrison.

Jeff didn't play and JO didn't do at all well with rebounds. Getting only 5 during the course of the game. And then one in garbage time when the game was decided.

The Reason we lost that game was not our starters faults. They were tired by the end of the game. The fewest one of our starters played was 36 minutes. The Nets had 2 players that played 25.

You get outrebounded by 14, and have your starters tired you shouldn't expect to win.

But if you have to blame somebody for the Loss, Blame both. AJ and JO both had 9 FT's and missed 4. If they had hit their FT's we would have won.

ChicagoJ
07-27-2006, 12:52 PM
I'll repeat it yet again. We weren't winning that series anyway regardless of shot distribution. Our team was too screwed up.

Really, that's what it all boils down to. And Game #6 was a microcosm of that.

ChicagoJ
07-27-2006, 12:55 PM
Jay even said it, he would rather lose with JO shooting the ball than possibly win with AJ shooting the ball. FANGIRL.

I could do without the FANGIRL stuff.

And thanks for putting words in my mouth.

Tell ya what, I really wish somebody other than Jordan would've gotten hot in Game #7 in 1998. I really wish the Bulls would've been so myopic that they went away from their #1 option in an elimination game.

I realize our team was not going to win the series.

But AJ did nothing more than "play well in defeat."

You in particular wanted to scrap JO and rebuild around AJ. If I'm FANGIRL then you're LOONEY TUNES.

:buddies:

Shade
07-27-2006, 01:12 PM
For the record, I'm not heartbroken AJ isn't here anymore, but I am upset at what we got for him. It seems to me there should have been better offers on the table, and if we got rid of him strictly because of Rick, Rick is the one that should have been sent packing.

able
07-27-2006, 01:14 PM
For the record, I'm not heartbroken AJ isn't here anymore, but I am upset at what we got for him. It seems to me there should have been better offers on the table, and if we got rid of him strictly because of Rick, Rick is the one that should have been sent packing.
In both arguments I'd agree, however there's a 3rd one, which is AJ made "demands" and as such was part of bad chem, or simply an obstacle in creating a good chem.

vapacersfan
07-27-2006, 02:10 PM
Answer this question: what team wins an elimination game when they go away from their #1 option?

If JO had taken 25 shots and we lost the game, I'd feel better than when his PG limits him to 14 shots. And the fourteen shots weren't where ANY of us wanting JO to get/ shoot the ball, because AJ couldn't get it to him in the paint. That was happening all series long. AJ can't make a post entry pass to save his life AND THAT'S THE REASON JO WAS TAKING SO MANY LONG JUMPERS.

Should AJ have taken "more shots than usual" because he was red-hot? Absolutely.

We lost the damn game people. If we'd forced a game #7, we could make AJ the hero.

For some of you that complain that Indy fans are content with a competitive/ but not championship calibler team - look at what you're doing (again).

You're making a "hero" out of a lesser-skilled, hard-working hard-nosed player who played a very impressive game in a defeat.

As long as Indiana fans under-appreciate they're truly talented players (like JO) and give love-fests to hard-working but limited players then this is what we (always) get: "played well in defeat." Ugh.

This is a fun discussion because its really about more than just Game #6. But I'm telling you, as I watched Game #6 my thought was this, "Damn, AJ is shooting lights out but if JO doesn't get involved we have no chance of winning." Do you guys really believe that AJ was going to lead us to victory while playing PG? C'mon. (I could listen to an argument that AJ could shoot us to victory while playing SG.)

Have I mentioned that I hate shoot-first PGs?

Do you guys really think that JO was playing lazy and just settling for long jumpers throughout that series (and yes, he was clearly nowhere near 100%. He got that shot blocked by RJ because he had no explosion in his leg. You try and jump on torn hip adductor. I remember, when I tore mine, just how excrutiating it felt when I came out of the starting blocks at nationals). I can excuse JO's lack of rebounds because he wasn't 100% (or anywhere near that) and had no explosiveness to the ball.

JO was taking bad shots because with AJ on the court, those were the best shots he could get. Saras *could* get him a better shot. For one possession. And then Jacque Vaughn would check into the game, pressure Saras, and that was the end of that.

At least if you're playing with Iverson or Marberry, you know they're going to hog the ball and take a lot of shots. And you're used to it. It may be a chicken-and-egg discussion, but IMO, Granger, Croshere, even SJax and Fred never got into a rhythm because they aren't used to playing with a PG that dominates the ball like AJ did in that game.

What does a forty-point, 70% shooting game mean when you lose? Absolutely nothing. Again, if our go-to guy has a forty-point, 70% shooting game in an elimination game we'd say, "Well, he just didn't get any help from his teammates." But JO's shooting was pretty good so he needed quite a few more "touches."

This is the most fun I've had all off-season. Bring it on. :)

Sorry Jay, but this argument is just as much BS as your premise that AJ cost us game #6 is.

Firstly, let me get one thing out of the way. I am not your "typical" Indy fan as you put it, I am a Redskins fan, a Notre Dame fan, a semi Nationals/Orioles fan, and a Pacers fan. I have no affiliation to the Indiana area, minus some vacations.

I dont care how my team manages to win. I rarely, if ever get attached to a player as much as I have seen some people here do. I do admit I started following this team because of Reggie, and as of late I have taken to like Granger a lot, and while I would be dissappointed if he were traded tommorrow, I could live with it as long as we got a better player in return. I was frustrated when Ramsey was knocked out of game 1 last season, and I hated the idea of Boonell leading my team for the rest of the season. But guess what? He got the job done. Thats all I care about. I dont care if you are some 15th string scrub or the star player, if you get the job done then you dont the job done. Its not your fault if not one else on the squad steps there game up and helps you out.

So let me get this straight. If JO had gone for 40, and we would have lost the game, you are saying you would be fine with that? Cause if so, thats a real scary thought. Putting aside all discussion of if he is worth his salary and all the injury stuff, the bottom line is he wasnt getting the job done in that series. Granted he was not alone, but he was not able to perform at the top of his game.

I can already see it. If JO had gone for 40 and we still lost I would have been a part of the group that would be in a thread right now saying "Why was he not able to post out of all the double and tripple teams?" and "why did he not take less shots later on and set up his teammates?". And I already know the response I would have gotten. "His temamates should have moved more." and "his teammates should have gotten open and taken more shots if they wanted to help out."

Like I said, if anyone can say with a straight face that they would be fine with JO going for 30 or 40 and us still losing and it would be "ok" because we were riding our franchise player (who at the time was not performing for whatever reason, thats not the point) then that is a very cary thought.

If you truly beleive we should go away from the guy who is red hot just in order to get the "star" player more shots, then I hear there is a coaching oppurtunity in New York opening up real soon.

Now if you want to blame AJ for not being a "POINT" first "1" and instead a "shoot" first "1", then fine. But its not his fault he is average at best at feeding the post. And as I have already said a million time, if we are going to blame him for that, then lets blame the rest of the guards who were either to injured to play (or try to play) or just plain couldnt get the job done as well.



We lost the damn game people. If we'd forced a game #7, we could make AJ the hero.


This comment just boggles my mind. Well no crap we could make him the hero if we won. If Reggie would been able to score more points and force a game number 7 against the Lakers in 2000 we could make him the hero. You can only have one winner in sports, you have to have a team that walks away losing. He can still be the hero even if we lost, even if he is a "scrub". He is just as much at fault for us losing as all the other guys who didnt show up are (Im not re-showing the stats, but there is plenty of evidence of horrible shooting in this thread already just from game #6 alone)



JO was taking bad shots because with AJ on the court, those were the best shots he could get. Saras *could* get him a better shot. For one possession. And then Jacque Vaughn would check into the game, pressure Saras, and that was the end of that.


Once again, this is not AJ's fault. This is Ricks fault, and I will go one step further and say managments fault for keeping Tinsley around. If we had a reliable guard that was able to play that game, we wouldnt even be having this discussion, since AJ would have been playing the role of the "2", if even playing at all.



What does a forty-point, 70% shooting game mean when you lose? Absolutely nothing. Again, if our go-to guy has a forty-point, 70% shooting game in an elimination game we'd say, "Well, he just didn't get any help from his teammates." But JO's shooting was pretty good so he needed quite a few more "touches."


Really? He was shooting well that game? I ten d to recall JO having a pretty rough game, and never being able to get into a rythm. OF course even if he would have gotten more touches, he probably wouldnt have been able to convert them since he couldnt really do anything that whole series. Of course, I am sure that would turn out to be AJ's fault as well.




At least if you're playing with Iverson or Marberry, you know they're going to hog the ball and take a lot of shots. And you're used to it. It may be a chicken-and-egg discussion, but IMO, Granger, Croshere, even SJax and Fred never got into a rhythm because they aren't used to playing with a PG that dominates the ball like AJ did in that game.


With the exception on Granger, none of those guys could hit the broad side of a barn. How long do you keep going to them when they are shooting airballs and barely hitting the side of the rim on open 17 foot jumpers?

ChicagoJ
07-27-2006, 03:15 PM
or simply an obstacle in creating a good chem.

I think that's the case.

And I mean that both in terms of things he might've been saying and doing and in terms of his inability to mesh his game with *this* team.

vapacersfan
07-27-2006, 03:17 PM
I think that's the case.

And I mean that both in terms of things he might've been saying and doing and in terms of his inability to mesh his game with *this* team.

I still dont by the first part of you'r argument, but the truth is we were spoiled in having a guy in Artest who was dumb enough to tell us as much about himself. Even if we trade all of the guys on our team (minus Granger, hmm maybe I need a new thread :plot:) we wont know definetly if they were a problem or not.

I do agree whole heartidly with the second part of your statement, which ones again leads me back to my point about magagment relying on the wrong players, but I wont beat a dead horse [again] with that.

ChicagoJ
07-27-2006, 03:27 PM
JO's strength is playing in the post.

Granger is versatile offensive player but he's not a creator.

Ditto for Fred. Check that... he can manufacture his own shot pretty well.

Croshere is a rhythm player.

SJax - well he's turnover prone and he shoots a low percentage, but he is less likely to brick shots and turn the ball over when he's in a rhythm so he doesn't add to or take away from my point.

Last year's team - especially the remnant of players that actually showed up for the playoffs - was in desparate need of a PG that could run the offense and set them up with shots that were "in their comfort zone."

AJ just can't do that. And for whatever reason (and the reason doesn't really matter), he broke the offense and was looking for his own shot. He wasn't even trying to run the offense, he became a ballhog.

Somewhere in past, when I was learning to play PG, I understood that if I made myself higher than the #5 option at the start of the game that it would impact my teammates in a number of ways - rhythm, chemistry, etc. So the only time I ever looked for my own shot was after those guys proved they were ice cold.

Again, AJ was 5-6 with no assists in the first quarter. That set the tone for the game. Those guys were already not getting the ball in position to score with AJ and then they suddenly weren't even getting the ball at all. Its no wonder every single player struggled.

+ + + + + + + + +

Everyone's ignoring my MJ/Bulls comment. We'd all still be celebrating our 1998 Championship if Ron Harper would've started Game #7 *on fire* and then played keep-away from Jordan and Pippen the rest of the game.

Riding the "hot hand" in an elimination game is losing proposition. I'd rather lose with my big guns a-blazin' than spend the offseason wondering if our best player might've been able to do more to help us in that game.

You've all (unfairly) decided that he couldn't have done any better if he was given more opportunities. And maybe you're right, since AJ couldn't get him the ball where he needed it anyway. But that's still AJ's fault.

ChicagoJ
07-27-2006, 03:39 PM
Sorry Jay, but this argument is just as much BS as your premise that AJ cost us game #6 is.

Firstly, let me get one thing out of the way. I am not your "typical" Indy fan as you put it, I am a Redskins fan, a Notre Dame fan, a semi Nationals/Orioles fan, and a Pacers fan. I have no affiliation to the Indiana area, minus some vacations.

Yeah, so I wasn't talking to you anyway. :-p


Now if you want to blame AJ for not being a "POINT" first "1" and instead a "shoot" first "1", then fine. But its not his fault he is average at best at feeding the post.

Now that's rich. Who's fault is it then?

Are you next going to argue that it wasn't Kordell Stewart's fault that he sucked, too.

The Hustler
07-27-2006, 03:43 PM
Last year's team - especially the remnant of players that actually showed up for the playoffs) was in desparate need of a PG that could run the offense and set them up with shots that were "in their comfort zone."

AJ just can't do that. And for whatever reason (and the reason doesn't really matter), he broke the offense and was looking for his own shot.

Somewhere in past, when I was learning to play PG, I understood that if I made myself higher than the #5 option at the start of the game that it would impact my teammates in a number of ways - rhythm, chemistry, etc. So the only time I ever looked for my own shot was after those guys proved they were ice cold.

Riding the "hot hand" in an elimination game is losing proposition.


QFT

exactly what i wanted to say ...

yes AJ was hot but as PG he no way should he ahve shot so much without at least passing it up and then getting into a possition to get it back if noone else stepped up!

ChicagoJ
07-27-2006, 03:53 PM
Trying to pin the game six loss, and by extension our lack of success last year, on his penchant for shooting more than passing is nothing more than trying to lessen the accountability on the coach, team, our so-called stars, and/or go-to-guy. We were a poor team, with wild circumstances, bad attitude, dubious injury concerns, etc. That's why we had the year we did and why we lost the playoff series.

I missed this paragraph the first time through.

And I agree completely.

So I think anyone making a fuss over AJ's career game is utterly missing the point - AJ going for forty in playoff game is exactly what was wrong with last year's team. Tinsley didn't play, which meant too many minutes for AJ in the first place. JO was never in the right place because he was doing every thing possible to create the easiest passing land for his (inept at feeding the post) PG. SJax, Fred, Croshere and Granger were not in rhythm and were on the wrong side of a shooting streak. And David, since he didn't get enough "development" minutes during the regular season, wasn't really prepared to help when needed.

In all my ranting about AJ, let's not forget that the coach should've left SJax on the bench for the entire game after going AWOL for that morning's shootaround.

Maybe that's why nobody seemed to remember the gameplan - they must've gone on a manhunt looking for him instead of practicing. :banghead:

Yes, there are plenty of people to blame, including AJ. If a large number of you weren't working so hard to absolve AJ from the share of blame that he deserved, this thread would have never come to life.

Destined4Greatness
07-27-2006, 03:54 PM
If JO's strength is playing in the Post, then how come he hasn't done it consistently for 2 years.

DisplacedKnick
07-27-2006, 03:55 PM
JO's strength is playing in the post.

Granger is versatile offensive player but he's not a creator.

Ditto for Fred. Check that... he can manufacture his own shot pretty well.

Croshere is a rhythm player.

SJax - well he's turnover prone and he shoots a low percentage, but he is less likely to brick shots and turn the ball over when he's in a rhythm so he doesn't add to or take away from my point.

Last year's team - especially the remnant of players that actually showed up for the playoffs - was in desparate need of a PG that could run the offense and set them up with shots that were "in their comfort zone."

AJ just can't do that. And for whatever reason (and the reason doesn't really matter), he broke the offense and was looking for his own shot. He wasn't even trying to run the offense, he became a ballhog.

Somewhere in past, when I was learning to play PG, I understood that if I made myself higher than the #5 option at the start of the game that it would impact my teammates in a number of ways - rhythm, chemistry, etc. So the only time I ever looked for my own shot was after those guys proved they were ice cold.

Again, AJ was 5-6 with no assists in the first quarter. That set the tone for the game. Those guys were already not getting the ball in position to score with AJ and then they suddenly weren't even getting the ball at all. Its no wonder every single player struggled.


Completely
and
Totally
Untrue

Again, go back and watch the game. If Granger didn't pass up at least 4 wide open shots and if Croshere didn't pass up at least 6 I'll eat kstat's shoes (after they're boiled for sanitary reasons.) Croshere especially - I don't know how many times the defense collapsed and he received the ball just outside the 3-pt line and just passed it around the horn.

JO was in the same shape he'd been all series - able to hit a 17-foot jumper because they gave it to him but unable to score on post moves because whenever he turned inside they brought a hard double.

Croshere was afraid to shoot.

Granger could have shot more.

Jackson couldn't shoot for crap.

There was nobody else.

It's not AJ's fault that JO couldn't score in the post and it's not his fault that nobody else shot. They decided not to. I give him credit for at least having the balls to try to make something happen instead of playing Croshere's coward act.

D23
07-27-2006, 03:58 PM
I still don't agree with labeling AJ's game as the reason we lost game 6. Normally I'd agree if the point guard was trying to take over the game with poor shot selection, but I think this is a special case. If you have a guy shooting 70% and giving you 40 points, you're not losing anything.

What DOES bother me is the fact that our franchise big man got doubled up on the boards by the opposing team's point guard in an elimination game. Fatigue? They played virtually the same number of minutes. And it's not like JO was being abused by Shaq or Ben Wallace in the paint... who was he contending with?

Nenad Kristic? A soft jump-shooting big man.
Jason Collins? He's so bad the NBA had to get 2 of him to make up for the law of averages.
Cliff Robinson? Isn't he like 48? And he was probably high as a kite.

Ultimately I agree that the biggest factor in our loss was the lack of players due to injuries. Without Peja available, AJ knew someone would have to step up and he did. I only wish JO played with the same intensity:neutral:

ChicagoJ
07-27-2006, 04:01 PM
If JO's strength is playing in the Post, then how come he hasn't done it consistently for 2 years.

A knee injury. A freaky shoulder injury. A debilitating groin tear.

Have you ever tried to play carve out post position with those injuries?

Its a helluva lot easier to stand around on the perimeter like Dirk and KG even when you're 100% healthy.

Everyone seems to forget already that JO was nowhere near 100% in last season's playoffs. He came back from injury as quickly as humanly possible and did his best.

Hopefully a slimmed-down JO will be able to rely again on his quickness in the post just as he did from 2000-2004.

Peck
07-27-2006, 04:13 PM
Answer this question: what team wins an elimination game when they go away from their #1 option?

If JO had taken 25 shots and we lost the game, I'd feel better than when his PG limits him to 14 shots. And the fourteen shots weren't where ANY of us wanting JO to get/ shoot the ball, because AJ couldn't get it to him in the paint. That was happening all series long. AJ can't make a post entry pass to save his life AND THAT'S THE REASON JO WAS TAKING SO MANY LONG JUMPERS.

Should AJ have taken "more shots than usual" because he was red-hot? Absolutely.

We lost the damn game people. If we'd forced a game #7, we could make AJ the hero.

For some of you that complain that Indy fans are content with a competitive/ but not championship calibler team - look at what you're doing (again).

You're making a "hero" out of a lesser-skilled, hard-working hard-nosed player who played a very impressive game in a defeat.

As long as Indiana fans under-appreciate they're truly talented players (like JO) and give love-fests to hard-working but limited players then this is what we (always) get: "played well in defeat." Ugh.

This is a fun discussion because its really about more than just Game #6. But I'm telling you, as I watched Game #6 my thought was this, "Damn, AJ is shooting lights out but if JO doesn't get involved we have no chance of winning." Do you guys really believe that AJ was going to lead us to victory while playing PG? C'mon. (I could listen to an argument that AJ could shoot us to victory while playing SG.)

Have I mentioned that I hate shoot-first PGs?

Do you guys really think that JO was playing lazy and just settling for long jumpers throughout that series (and yes, he was clearly nowhere near 100%. He got that shot blocked by RJ because he had no explosion in his leg. You try and jump on torn hip adductor. I remember, when I tore mine, just how excrutiating it felt when I came out of the starting blocks at nationals). I can excuse JO's lack of rebounds because he wasn't 100% (or anywhere near that) and had no explosiveness to the ball.

JO was taking bad shots because with AJ on the court, those were the best shots he could get. Saras *could* get him a better shot. For one possession. And then Jacque Vaughn would check into the game, pressure Saras, and that was the end of that.

At least if you're playing with Iverson or Marberry, you know they're going to hog the ball and take a lot of shots. And you're used to it. It may be a chicken-and-egg discussion, but IMO, Granger, Croshere, even SJax and Fred never got into a rhythm because they aren't used to playing with a PG that dominates the ball like AJ did in that game.

What does a forty-point, 70% shooting game mean when you lose? Absolutely nothing. Again, if our go-to guy has a forty-point, 70% shooting game in an elimination game we'd say, "Well, he just didn't get any help from his teammates." But JO's shooting was pretty good so he needed quite a few more "touches."

This isfun I've the most had all off-season. Bring it on. :)

Well, I was going to add more to this thread but then I read this statement & it became obvious to me what was going on.

So in fairness to you I will now believe that you have just gone off of your medications instead of totally losing your mind as I had previously thought.;)

grace
07-27-2006, 04:23 PM
I will now believe that you have just gone off of your medications instead of totally losing your mind as I had previously thought.;)

I wish someone would give me the medicine. I can't read this crap any more. :suicide4:

vapacersfan
07-27-2006, 07:08 PM
Everyone's ignoring my MJ/Bulls comment. We'd all still be celebrating our 1998 Championship if Ron Harper would've started Game #7 *on fire* and then played keep-away from Jordan and Pippen the rest of the game.

Riding the "hot hand" in an elimination game is losing proposition. I'd rather lose with my big guns a-blazin' than spend the offseason wondering if our best player might've been able to do more to help us in that game.

You've all (unfairly) decided that he couldn't have done any better if he was given more opportunities. And maybe you're right, since AJ couldn't get him the ball where he needed it anyway. But that's still AJ's fault.

First of all, you are comparing apples to oranges. Harper was not "red hot" the whole game, and Jordan was not struggling mightly in that game, and/or the whole season with health and other issues. On top of that, even if Jordan was forced to get the rock at the top of the key, that was not out of his range.

Your second paragraph scares me. It really does. JO was not able to do more, and when he did have the ball that series he was being owned by Uncle Cliffy and others. He was injured, beat up, and worn out both mentally and physically.

By the same token, You've all (unfairly) decided that he would have done any better if he was given more opportunities. And maybe you're right, but up till that point he had done nothing. And as I have said a million times, if you are going to blame AJ then blame the rest of out squad for not being healthy and blame managment for relying on a point guard to run this team that is made out of glass.

vapacersfan
07-27-2006, 07:11 PM
Yeah, so I wasn't talking to you anyway. :-p



Now that's rich. Who's fault is it then?

Are you next going to argue that it wasn't Kordell Stewart's fault that he sucked, too.

I like how you skipped all my other points, and went right to this. Thats rich.

Who's fault is it? Skipping the obvious answer that its his fauly for not improving that part of his game (part of the problem is his size, which he cant change) Its the fault of the managment that brought him in knowing that he was not a good passer and the fault of his teammates who are about as reliable as my ex-girlfriend.

As for Kordell, I never really got a change to watch him. I did see him once on Monday night, and he had a great game playing QB. Next thing I knew a year and a half later he was playing wide out. Shows you how much I keep up with the NFL ;)

vapacersfan
07-27-2006, 07:13 PM
I missed this paragraph the first time through.

And I agree completely.

So I think anyone making a fuss over AJ's career game is utterly missing the point - AJ going for forty in playoff game is exactly what was wrong with last year's team. Tinsley didn't play, which meant too many minutes for AJ in the first place. JO was never in the right place because he was doing every thing possible to create the easiest passing land for his (inept at feeding the post) PG. SJax, Fred, Croshere and Granger were not in rhythm and were on the wrong side of a shooting streak. And David, since he didn't get enough "development" minutes during the regular season, wasn't really prepared to help when needed.

In all my ranting about AJ, let's not forget that the coach should've left SJax on the bench for the entire game after going AWOL for that morning's shootaround.

Maybe that's why nobody seemed to remember the gameplan - they must've gone on a manhunt looking for him instead of practicing. :banghead:

Yes, there are plenty of people to blame, including AJ. If a large number of you weren't working so hard to absolve AJ from the share of blame that he deserved, this thread would have never come to life.

By the same token, if a large number of you weren't working so hard to find a person to blame game #6 on (read, its the whole teams fault, including TPTB and the coach(s)), this thread would have never come to life.

ChicagoJ
07-27-2006, 07:21 PM
I like how you skipped all my other points, and went right to this. Thats rich.

You're not the Indy-based ticket-buying type of fan I was referring to. So thanks for your inputs but they aren't particuarly relevant. I don't know why you felt compelled to answer earlier. :shrug:

ChicagoJ
07-27-2006, 07:25 PM
By the same token, You've all (unfairly) decided that he would have done any better if he was given more opportunities. And maybe you're right, but up till that point he had done nothing. And as I have said a million times, if you are going to blame AJ then blame the rest of out squad for not being healthy and blame managment for relying on a point guard to run this team that is made out of glass.

The only game he wasn't in foul trouble, he flat-out dominated. 12-15 for 37 and a bunch of rebounds, too. So its certainly not "unfair" to think that JO might have done better if his PG had let him.

Yes, if we're going to lose I'd rather go down with JO taking 30 shots (he was over 50% so let's just put him at 16-30) and AJ shooting 7-10. At least then I'll know that our best player was put into a position to win the game for us.

vapacersfan
07-27-2006, 07:27 PM
You're not the ticket-buying type of fan I was referring to. So thanks for your inputs but they aren't particuarly relevant.

Funny, but I dropped over a G-note last year on Pacers apparel at The Home Court Gift shop, and three years ago I attended a home game against NJ.

Just because I am not a season ticket holder and do not agree with you that does not mean that my opinion is not relevant.

vapacersfan
07-27-2006, 07:28 PM
The only game he wasn't in foul trouble, he flat-out dominated. 12-15 for 37 and a bunch of rebounds, too. So its certainly not "unfair" to think that JO might have done better if his PG had let him.

Yes, if we're going to lose I'd rather go down with JO taking 30 shots (he was over 50% so let's just put him at 16-30) and AJ shooting 7-10. At least then I'll know that our best player was put into a position to win the game for us.

Yeah, the problem was the only game he wasnt in foul trouble. Notice the key word in that sentence: GAME. He could not stay out of foul trouble to save his life.

I am not going to keep going in circles, so I am done. I have already made my point, actually about 5 times.

ChicagoJ
07-27-2006, 07:30 PM
First of all, you are comparing apples to oranges. Harper was not "red hot" the whole game, and Jordan was not struggling mightly in that game, and/or the whole season with health and other issues. On top of that, even if Jordan was forced to get the rock at the top of the key, that was not out of his range.

Duh. Its a hypothetical.

Lighten up, Francis.

Does anybody even remember how well Harper played in that game - off the top of my head I don't. But if he'd have scored a bunch of points and the Bulls lost because he hogged the ball away from Jordan... we'd all remember it. (We'd remember it fondly, and I'd love to talk **** about that to everyone around here.) Alas, the Bulls were smart enough to let their elimination game be decided by their best player. Can't say that about the Pacers this year.

vapacersfan
07-27-2006, 07:32 PM
Duh. Its a hypothetical.

Lighten up, Francis.

Does anybody even remember how well Harper played in that game - off the top of my head I don't. But if he'd have scored a bunch of points and the Bulls lost because he hogged the ball away from Jordan... we'd all remember it. (We'd remember it fondly, and I'd love to talk **** about that to everyone around here.) Alas, the Bulls were smart enough to let their elimination game be decided by their best player. Can't say that about the Pacers this year.

Thank's Einstein.

ChicagoJ
07-27-2006, 07:35 PM
Yeah, the problem was the only game he wasnt in foul trouble. Notice the key word in that sentence: GAME. He could not stay out of foul trouble to save his life.

I am not going to keep going in circles, so I am done. I have already made my point, actually about 5 times.

You haven't made a point. To my knowledge you were never arguing that AJ "earned" something based on being the "Game 6 hero." Before, after, or during this thread.

From what I understand, you've been arguing something far more basic. Of course they lost as a team. Of course the absences of Tinsley and Peja were huge. Duh. And SJax's untimely AWOL. That's a given. So we're focusing solely on the discussion of whether or not AJ's ballhogging err... hot shooting that night helped or hurt the team's chances to win. Of course they were in a bad situation even before tipoff.

I'm just saying that the way they played that night made the bad situation even worse.

vapacersfan
07-27-2006, 07:39 PM
You haven't made a point. To my knowledge you were never arguing that AJ "earned" something based on being the "Game 6 hero." Before, after, or during this thread.

From what I understand, you've been arguing something far more basic. Of course they lost as a team. Of course the absences of Tinsley and Peja were huge. Duh. And SJax's untimely AWOL. That's a given. So we're focusing solely on the discussion of whether or not AJ's ballhogging err... hot shooting that night helped or hurt the team's chances to win. Of course they were in a bad situation even before tipoff.

I'm just saying that the way they played that night made the bad situation even worse.

My point has been the same since you brought this up in another thread a couple of weeks ago.

Of course it was partially his fauly, but he did everything in his "ability" to carry his team to a voctory, while the other players were either AWOL, pouting, injured, or all three hurt the team.

I'm just saying its funny how some people choose to ignore everything else and just blame the loss on AJ.

As for him ball-hogging, if any of my guys are red hot and keep taking shots and that constitues "ball-hogging", then I hope all of my guys are ball-hogs. Then again, I was also a Steve Francis fan and A.I fan when I had a change to watch them, so maybe I am just used to it...

Sollozzo
07-27-2006, 07:48 PM
Answer this question: what team wins an elimination game when they go away from their #1 option?

If JO had taken 25 shots and we lost the game, I'd feel better than when his PG limits him to 14 shots. And the fourteen shots weren't where ANY of us wanting JO to get/ shoot the ball, because AJ couldn't get it to him in the paint. That was happening all series long. AJ can't make a post entry pass to save his life AND THAT'S THE REASON JO WAS TAKING SO MANY LONG JUMPERS.

Should AJ have taken "more shots than usual" because he was red-hot? Absolutely.

We lost the damn game people. If we'd forced a game #7, we could make AJ the hero.

For some of you that complain that Indy fans are content with a competitive/ but not championship calibler team - look at what you're doing (again).

You're making a "hero" out of a lesser-skilled, hard-working hard-nosed player who played a very impressive game in a defeat.

As long as Indiana fans under-appreciate they're truly talented players (like JO) and give love-fests to hard-working but limited players then this is what we (always) get: "played well in defeat." Ugh.

This is a fun discussion because its really about more than just Game #6. But I'm telling you, as I watched Game #6 my thought was this, "Damn, AJ is shooting lights out but if JO doesn't get involved we have no chance of winning." Do you guys really believe that AJ was going to lead us to victory while playing PG? C'mon. (I could listen to an argument that AJ could shoot us to victory while playing SG.)

Have I mentioned that I hate shoot-first PGs?

Do you guys really think that JO was playing lazy and just settling for long jumpers throughout that series (and yes, he was clearly nowhere near 100%. He got that shot blocked by RJ because he had no explosion in his leg. You try and jump on torn hip adductor. I remember, when I tore mine, just how excrutiating it felt when I came out of the starting blocks at nationals). I can excuse JO's lack of rebounds because he wasn't 100% (or anywhere near that) and had no explosiveness to the ball.

JO was taking bad shots because with AJ on the court, those were the best shots he could get. Saras *could* get him a better shot. For one possession. And then Jacque Vaughn would check into the game, pressure Saras, and that was the end of that.

At least if you're playing with Iverson or Marberry, you know they're going to hog the ball and take a lot of shots. And you're used to it. It may be a chicken-and-egg discussion, but IMO, Granger, Croshere, even SJax and Fred never got into a rhythm because they aren't used to playing with a PG that dominates the ball like AJ did in that game.

What does a forty-point, 70% shooting game mean when you lose? Absolutely nothing. Again, if our go-to guy has a forty-point, 70% shooting game in an elimination game we'd say, "Well, he just didn't get any help from his teammates." But JO's shooting was pretty good so he needed quite a few more "touches."

This is the most fun I've had all off-season. Bring it on. :)


Ok, I'll answer that question.

The answer is easy. It's the Pacers. The Pacers have won an elimination game straying away from their supposed "first option."

Game 7 against Boston last year. Jermaine O'Neal shot just 5-12 (42%) for 15 points in a Pacer route. Stephen Jackson of all players was the hero of the night, shooting 8-13 for 24 points. Had 5 steals and 4 assists who.

Elmination game. Supposed go to player gets just 12 shots. Pacers win in a route.

Tinsley started that game and played 24 minutes, so is it his fault that JO didn't get more shots? It seems you blame everyone else but Jermaine when he has shortcomings.

Wait, maybe it's no ones fault. Maybe the Pacers played a much better game without dumping the ball into JO every time. Jax was hot, so he got the most shots that night.

Let's look at JO's stats in games where the Pacers are facing elimination. I'll throw 2001 out since he wasn't really a go to player.

2002: 8-16 for 18 points (was he the go to guy? probably not, but i put the stats in anyway.)

2003: 6-15 with 13 made freethrows for 25 points in a Pacer loss in game 6 against Boston

2004: 8-19 for 20 points in a game 6 loss against Detroit.

2005: 5-12 for 15 pointsin a game 7 win against Boston. 11-22 for 22 points in a game 6 loss against Detroit.

2006: 8-14 for 21 points.

So since 2002, in games when the Pacers are on the verge of elimination, JO has averaged 20.1 points and shot 46.9%. That's almost identical to what he averages on a regular basis. Yet, you're calling for him to get the ball dumped into constantly like Duncan or Shaq in their primes. The problem is, those guys could take over games consistantly, and score far more than their normal averages in mustwin elimination games.

I think it speaks for JO's abilities. when his statistics in games when the Pacers are on the verge of being bounced are identical to his statistics in regular games. He just isn't the type of player that can take over a game when called upon. Not that there's anything wrong with that, only a select few can. That just means you have to look for other guys to have big games as well. He can have monster games like he did in game 3 this year, but every player can have those.

There isn't anything wrong with that. There are only a few players who can do things like Shaq and Duncan. Jermaine O'Neal is definitely one of the best players in the league. Yet for some reason, you seem to believe he should get the same amount of touches as they did when they were in their primes. Atleast that's what I'm gathering from your posts. I would much rather take Johnson's 16-23 than dump it into JO.

beast23
07-27-2006, 07:49 PM
Well, I was going to add more to this thread but then I read this statement & it became obvious to me what was going on.

So in fairness to you I will now believe that you have just gone off of your medications instead of totally losing your mind as I had previously thought.;)Congrats... you caught on. Didn't get a response to my one thread, so I kind of figured it out as well.

Now, I'm a noncombatant.

But daaaammmmmn. This sucker's got a hell of a lot of energy, doesn't he?

ChicagoJ
07-27-2006, 07:50 PM
Who has said that losing Game #6 is solely his fault?

Who has ignored everything else?

This thread isn't about the myriad of other valid reasons. Everyone knows what they are so there's no real need to talk about them here.

This is solely in response to the notion that has been appearing in various threads that AJ deserved (1) a starting spot; or (b) not to be traded; or (c) some other special status solely because he was our "Game 6 hero" or "He was the only guy that stepped up in Game 6."

Well of course he was, when your PG has 4.6x more FGAs than assists, of course he was the only guy that even had an opportunity to step up in that game. He made sure we'd all be talking about HIM this summer.

Bball
07-27-2006, 07:51 PM
Who's up for a dinner break? What sounds good?

-Bball

ChicagoJ
07-27-2006, 07:52 PM
Congrats... you caught on. Didn't get a response to my one thread, so I kind of figured it out as well.

Now, I'm a noncombatant.

But daaaammmmmn. This sucker's got a hell of a lot of energy, doesn't he?


Have I mentioned just how much I HATE shoot-first PGs?

:flirt:

ChicagoJ
07-27-2006, 07:52 PM
Who's up for a dinner break? What sounds good?

-Bball

Noble Roman's Sicilian.

I'm so sick of "Chicago style" pizza.

Jermaniac
07-27-2006, 07:53 PM
My point has been the same since you brought this up in another thread a couple of weeks ago.

Of course it was partially his fauly, but he did everything in his "ability" to carry his team to a voctory, while the other players were either AWOL, pouting, injured, or all three hurt the team.

I'm just saying its funny how some people choose to ignore everything else and just blame the loss on AJ.

As for him ball-hogging, if any of my guys are red hot and keep taking shots and that constitues "ball-hogging", then I hope all of my guys are ball-hogs. Then again, I was also a Steve Francis fan and A.I fan when I had a change to watch them, so maybe I am just used to it...I swear to God when I see someone write pouting in their post I want to end my life.

beast23
07-27-2006, 07:56 PM
Have I mentioned just how much I HATE shoot-first PGs?
:flirt:Even if the shoot-first PG is really cute and gives you a smile?

vapacersfan
07-27-2006, 07:58 PM
Who has said that losing Game #6 is solely his fault?

Who has ignored everything else?


I could name names, but its pointless. There are some here that think it is soly on him, and I beleive that with all of my heart




This thread isn't about the myriad of other valid reasons. Everyone knows what they are so there's no real need to talk about them here.


That was part of my point, and yes this thread is about the other valid reasons. Like I said, we can blame AJ all we want but un-like others he actually stepped up his game and actually played well.



This is solely in response to the notion that has been appearing in various threads that AJ deserved (1) a starting spot; or (b) not to be traded; or (c) some other special status solely because he was our "Game 6 hero" or "He was the only guy that stepped up in Game 6."


I must have missed all of these threads, although I dont doubt they exist. I have no problem with him being gone, although I do think we may have been able to get more for him. I do have a problem with him taking all the blame for one loss (which before long will turn into blame for the whole series), in which no one else shows up


Well of course he was, when your PG has 4.6x more FGAs than assists, of course he was the only guy that even had an opportunity to step up in that game. He made sure we'd all be talking about HIM this summer.

He was the only one that was able to hit any shots, check the boxscore if you beleive otherwise.

Of course you have admitted this is just fun for you, and that you hate shoot first "1"'s, so to this topic I say "adieu". Have a good night. I need to go find some food.

ChicagoJ
07-27-2006, 07:58 PM
Even if the shoot-first PG is really cute and gives you a smile?

Well... that's a different story altogether.

I'm sure the chemistry would be bad, though. :disappoin

vapacersfan
07-27-2006, 07:59 PM
I swear to God when I see someone write pouting in their post I want to end my life.

That is the first time I have used that in a while.

I dont really like the word, but it fits our team well. Really kind of sad, actually.

Jermaniac
07-27-2006, 08:00 PM
Pouting though sounds like something a 9 year old girl would say or a teacher. Say *****ing or something.

vapacersfan
07-27-2006, 08:01 PM
Pouting though sounds like something a 9 year old girl would say or a teacher. Say *****ing or something.

Yeah, but I dont want to be act like a "thug" :dead:

ChicagoJ
07-27-2006, 08:02 PM
I could name names, but its pointless. There are some here that think it is soly on him, and I beleive that with all of my heart

I haven't exactly gotten much support on this one, if you haven't noticed. Maybe you could tell me who is agreeing with me?


That was part of my point, and yes this thread is about the other valid reasons. Like I said, we can blame AJ all we want but un-like others he actually stepped up his game and actually played well.

I haven't really paid any attention to the off-topic reasons. And I started this thread. :-p


I must have missed all of these threads, although I dont doubt they exist. I have no problem with him being gone, although I do think we may have been able to get more for him. I do have a problem with him taking all the blame for one loss (which before long will turn into blame for the whole series), in which no one else shows up

JO, on one leg and getting the ball in poor position, still shot > 50%.


He was the only one that was able to hit any shots, check the boxscore if you beleive otherwise.

Check the boxscore? Are you kidding me? At the very beginning of this thread I posted a whole bunch of stuff from the boxscore and official play-by-play. Also, JO was > 50% in that game. So he wasn't the only one hitting shots.


Of course you have admitted this is just fun for you, and that you hate shoot first "1"'s, so to this topic I say "adieu". Have a good night. I need to go find some food.

I still want that pizza.

vapacersfan
07-27-2006, 08:08 PM
I must have missed the post where you listed the box-score :whoknows:

I just ordered 3 medium from Domino's so if you want to come down and pick some up I'll gladly share.

able
07-27-2006, 08:22 PM
I swear to God when I see someone write pouting in their post I want to end my life.
NONONONONONO you should celebrate life!

it means they have no argumetns left and reach for the inevitable "hoorah" in the sky, in other words; make it up, think bright and prevent to look the a***hole that you might look if you were trying to put a real point across

able
07-27-2006, 08:28 PM
I haven't exactly gotten much support on this one, if you haven't noticed. Maybe you could tell me who is agreeing with me?



et moi brute?



I haven't really paid any attention to the off-topic reasons. And I started this thread. :-p
attention !=Jay



JO, on one leg and getting the ball in poor position, still shot > 50%.
.534 be accurate|



Check the boxscore? Are you kidding me? At the very beginning of this thread I posted a whole bunch of stuff from the boxscore and official play-by-play. Also, JO was > 50% in that game. So he wasn't the only one hitting shots.
OYE facts only get in tha way of perception!

vapacersfan
07-27-2006, 08:28 PM
NONONONONONO you should celebrate life!

it means they have no argumetns left and reach for the inevitable "hoorah" in the sky, in other words; make it up, think bright and prevent to look the a***hole that you might look if you were trying to put a real point across

Yeah, thanks for throwing the insults out there.

I realize you have a double standard that you can do anything, but what actually happens in a point was made and you decided that since you dont like the fact that we have "imature" players you resort to personal insults instead of actually using facts to argue your point.

able
07-27-2006, 08:33 PM
Yeah, thanks for throwing the insults out there.

I realize you have a double standard that you can do anything, but what actually happens in a point was made and you decided that since you dont like the fact that we have "imature" players you resort to personal insults instead of actually using facts to argue your point.
You feel "addressed"?

not my fault, it was "general"

If I have a "double standard" it is so way beyond what you can comperehend that is definitely not worth discussing here, if you feel addressed then it remains your problem, not mine, I did not make the statement, you did.

Now keep whatever personal grievances you have out of it and we may have a serious discussion.




"edges are to thin to thread on"
(Quote "unknown")

vapacersfan
07-27-2006, 08:36 PM
Well I am the only one who used it, and Jermanic clearly quoted me.

Trust me, I wont waste any time in this thread discussing my feelings about the other issue. Everyone clearly knows where I stand on that, and no matter how hard you try ot bothe rme with this "insults" you wont ever come close to bothering me.

Bball
07-27-2006, 09:21 PM
:whistle:

-Bball

ChicagoJ
07-28-2006, 11:41 AM
Nobody wants to keep fighting with me about this?

After today, I'm going to be gone for ten days. Don't waste your opportunities...

:D

Destined4Greatness
07-28-2006, 11:53 AM
SO wait Jay you are saying its a good thing that JO was hurt and still shot >50%.

SOme would look at it as, JO hasn't been healthy for the Playoffs since 03. And hasn't started the season healthy since 04.

ChicagoJ
07-28-2006, 11:59 AM
No, I'm saying that the popular argument that "AJ stepped up because JO didn't/ couldn't" is garbage.

The crux of my point is this, we have no idea of JO could've stepped up and led this team to victory because AJ didn't let him.

Its not like JO was stinking up the gym - he had an average - at worst - game on a limited number of touches. Give him more touches, and even on one leg, he might've been able to prolong our season by another game before this messed-up team lost Game #7 in NJ. And maybe Peja would've decided to join the team for that game. Or not...

His injury was hampering his ability to chase down rebounds, and may have contributed to his foul trouble all series long. But he was making the best of a limited opportunity in our elimination game.

grace
07-28-2006, 12:02 PM
Nobody wants to keep fighting with me about this?

After today, I'm going to be gone for ten days. Don't waste your opportunities...

:D

I blame this thread for me being sick. Thanks alot. :mad:




:puke:

Destined4Greatness
07-28-2006, 12:08 PM
Look he got 6 Rebounds, one in garbage time when the game was already decided. 0 Blocks, 0 Steals, 0 Assists.

In the course of the game, AJ had 5 Rebounds, the same as JO. Had 5 Assists, 2 steals, 3 fewer fouls(In more minutes), and 1 less TO. Oh yeah 19 more points, on a better percentage.

Stepping up means more than putting a decent % up. AJ stepped up that game, JO didn't. How many times have we force fed JO the ball in the 4th in a comeback attempt and won. If ever, its been a while.

ChicagoJ
07-28-2006, 02:18 PM
If you're waiting until the fourth quarter to get JO involved, its too late.

The point is - thanks to AJ we'll never know if JO could've stepped up in that game or not. He did the best he could with the limited opportunities and the lousy passes that AJ gave him.

I can understand/ excuse JO's lack of rebounding because of his injury. I don't like it. But AJ's first assist came at the 7:18 mark ... OF THE THIRD QUARTER. Even when Iverson or Marberry become ballhogs they get at least one assist in the first half.

AJ, by turning himself into a no-pass scorer, is the guy that is responsible for the performance overall from JO that you are complaining about.

You want JO to step up and do more in that situation - and I agree. I don't buy for one minute the argument that you should ride the hot hand in an elimination game. That's a bad idea, IMO. You need your best player to carry your team to victory.

And that means your PG has to keep him involved, not play ballhog.

DisplacedKnick
07-28-2006, 02:33 PM
No, I'm saying that the popular argument that "AJ stepped up because JO didn't/ couldn't" is garbage.


The problem wasn't JO. He did about the same as he did all series - they gave him the open jump shot and doubled him whenever he went into the post.

The problem was besides JO nobody else stepped up. AJ was the only other player on the entire team who showed any aggression. Outside of Jax who just sucked, everyone else played like complete crap.

So JO's getting doubled when he goes inside and everyone else is sleepwalking. I give AJ a huge amount of credit. If he hadn't done what he did you'd have lost by 20.

And keep in mind that a huge portion of AJ's points came when JO was on the bench. Frex, IIRC he scored the first bunch of points in the 4th - when JO was on the bench,

Anyway, this is my last post on this. I'm repeating myself and I tend to do the same thing online when I start repeating myself as I do in real life - get frustrated and loud. Time to find something else to talk about.

ChicagoJ
07-28-2006, 02:39 PM
The problem wasn't JO. He did about the same as he did all series - they gave him the open jump shot and doubled him whenever he went into the post.

The problem was besides JO nobody else stepped up. AJ was the only other player on the entire team who showed any aggression. Outside of Jax who just sucked, everyone else played like complete crap.

So JO's getting doubled when he goes inside and everyone else is sleepwalking. I give AJ a huge amount of credit. If he hadn't done what he did you'd have lost by 20.

And keep in mind that a huge portion of AJ's points came when JO was on the bench. Frex, IIRC he scored the first bunch of points in the 4th - when JO was on the bench,

Anyway, this is my last post on this. I'm repeating myself and I tend to do the same thing online when I start repeating myself as I do in real life - get frustrated and loud. Time to find something else to talk about.

Fair enough. Your point is that the other guys that played all sucked worse than AJ and JO. And that's true - I'm not disputing that point.

The other three guys were worthless. I'm mostly concerned about the FGA disparity between the two guys that were good for something that night.

Since86
07-28-2006, 02:42 PM
The one shooting 20% higher, should get more shots. Plain and simple.

ChicagoJ
07-28-2006, 02:47 PM
Maybe in a regular season game.

The NBA playoffs are all about having the best players step up. If the other team shuts JO down, that's okay. But for his own PG to shut him down. :banghead:

In the NBA playoffs, you need your "star"/ "best" (whatever you call him) player to take the most shots.

Since86
07-28-2006, 02:58 PM
Maybe in a regular season game.

The NBA playoffs are all about having the best players step up. If the other team shuts JO down, that's okay. But for his own PG to shut him down. :banghead:

In the NBA playoffs, you need your "star"/ "best" (whatever you call him) player to take the most shots.

:banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead: :banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead: :banghead::banghead:


AJ did not, I repeat, DID NOT shut down JO. JO averaged 14 shots per game during the series, and that's the exact amount he got!

AJ was shooting 70 freaking percent. He gave you the best shot at scoring baskets, and that's what wins basketball games, SCORING!

Going by percentages, it would have taken JO over thirty shot attempts to hit 16. 30!!!

My god, when the game is on the line JO gets a bunny blocked by Richard Jefferson, but he should get the ball more?

Cliff was pushing him off the block for the entire series. JO was taken out of the game by the Nets, not because of AJ.

ChicagoJ
07-28-2006, 03:06 PM
In an elimination game, if JO was averaging fourteen shots for the series (which was way too low anyway, IMO), I'd want him to take between 24 and 30.

Whether or not JO could jump or not with that injured groin muscle is irrelevant. Yes, he was limited physically. Yes, its a damn shame that nobody from the Pacers did anything to lessen the double teams.

AJ shooting 70% resulted in a loss. But we don't know what would've happened if the team would've put the ball in their star's hands and let him try to win the game. Maybe they still would've lost. Or maybe JO would've had an opportunity to show his team and fans what he can do.

I'm pissed off that he didn't get that opportunity because some career backup/ journeyman got hot in a crucial game and they foolishly rode the hot hand.


Cliff was pushing him off the block for the entire series. JO was taken out of the game by the Nets, not because of AJ.

I'd say the groin injury probably took him out of the game more than anything else. Still, you've got to give your main guy a chance to be the hero. And they sorta tried - but it was too late and JO had run out of gas from fighting all game just to get the ball 22 feet from the basket.

Maybe if he could've gotten the ball earlier in the shotclock and in better position he wouldn't have been so flatfooted at the end of the game.

Since86
07-28-2006, 03:21 PM
I think it's pretty funny that the only two that are standing behind JO should of gotten more touches in Game 6, are the biggest Tinsley backers.

It doesn't matter if Boomer was shooting 70%. You give the shots to the person most likely to score, and it was Anthony Johnson that night.

There's no other way to put it. This discussion is more about AJ, than what happened.

ChicagoJ
07-28-2006, 03:22 PM
Well, no fooling.

I called it "Jay's AJ rant" for a reason.

:flirt:

Since86
07-28-2006, 03:24 PM
So you're saying if it was Tinsley, you wouldn't have the same problem?

ChicagoJ
07-28-2006, 03:33 PM
If Tinsley would've turned into a ballhog like that in a crucial game, I'd be going ape****.

Have I mentioned that I hate shoot-first PGs?

I'm less a "Tinsley" fan per se and more of a fan of his ability to run the team and the offense. I recognize that there may be a myriad of other problems. I just want to see if those problems continue under another coach because I'm not ready to jettison a PG that (usually) plays the way I think a PG should play.

And yes, when Tinsley was scoring a bunch of points during the suspensions last season, I was voicing concerns about that... I didn't want him to ever believe he could become a capable scorer in the NBA so we wouldn't have to worry about him hogging the ball. And yet, now that's becoming a legit concern about him, too.

Destined4Greatness
07-28-2006, 03:34 PM
Lol would rather JO shoot 20 times and us lose than AJ shoot 20 times and we win. Whats JO's bedroom look like.

And Jay, how many times have leaned on JO in the fourth, said "Come on we are behind we need you to lead us to victory" force fed him the ball and WON. Name me one game one game where thats happened.

Because I seem to recall a JO that when we were down 8 points losing the ball 4 straight possesions. 2+2+2+2=8-12 we could have potentially tied it up. But JO acted like a black hole and we lost. NAME ONE TIME JO scored 12 or more points in the fourth, in a come from behind victory. I bet you can't find one.

ChicagoJ
07-28-2006, 03:44 PM
I'm not going to even look for one. I'm talking about the fact that JO wasn't invovled FOR THE WHOLE DAMN GAME. Not just the fourth quarter.

You continue to act like AJ led us to victory in that game. This nonsense is the inspiration for this thread. Had AJ actually led us to victory, I would've quietly thanked our lucky stars. But he didn't.

Since you keep putting words in my mouth about what I want, I'll return the favor:

You'd rather lose with AJ chunking up too many shots so that you can blame JO for not stepping up (even though he didn't really have an opportunity to step up.)

Since86
07-28-2006, 03:55 PM
He got the second most shot attempts, lead the team in turnovers, and managed to commit 5fouls while playing 40mins (only second to AJ).

He's rebounding wasn't spectacular, only had 6, and didn't block one single shot.

He had plenty of ways to impact the game, and failed to do so in every category.

Destined4Greatness
07-28-2006, 04:00 PM
I'm not going to even look for one. I'm talking about the fact that JO wasn't invovled FOR THE WHOLE DAMN GAME. Not just the fourth quarter.

You continue to act like AJ led us to victory in that game. This nonsense is the inspiration for this thread. Had AJ actually led us to victory, I would've quietly thanked our lucky stars. But he didn't.

Since you keep putting words in my mouth about what I want, I'll return the favor:

You'd rather lose with AJ chunking up too many shots so that you can blame JO for not stepping up (even though he didn't really have an opportunity to step up.)

He was hardly chucking up shots. And No AJ didn't lead us to victory. But time and time again JO has failed to lead us back from a deficit. It was time to give somebody else a chance. Why let JO embarrass his *** again. You should be happy JO didn't get to look like a loser.

Sollozzo
07-28-2006, 05:45 PM
[b]In an elimination game, if JO was averaging fourteen shots for the series (which was way too low anyway, IMO), I'd want him to take between 24 and 30.[b/]

Whether or not JO could jump or not with that injured groin muscle is irrelevant. Yes, he was limited physically. Yes, its a damn shame that nobody from the Pacers did anything to lessen the double teams.

AJ shooting 70% resulted in a loss. But we don't know what would've happened if the team would've put the ball in their star's hands and let him try to win the game. Maybe they still would've lost. [b]Or maybe JO would've had an opportunity to show his team and fans what he can do.[b/]

I'm pissed off that he didn't get that opportunity because some career backup/ journeyman got hot in a crucial game and they foolishly rode the hot hand.



I'd say the groin injury probably took him out of the game more than anything else. Still, you've got to give your main guy a chance to be the hero. And they sorta tried - but it was too late and JO had run out of gas from fighting all game just to get the ball 22 feet from the basket.

Maybe if he could've gotten the ball earlier in the shotclock and in better position he wouldn't have been so flatfooted at the end of the game.


How do you respond to the fact that the Pacers routed the Celts in an elmination game last season in game 7 with JO just going 5-12 for 15 points? That's a crappy 42%. 12 shots? Tinsley started that game and played half of it. I guess Tinsley froze JO out then? I know you won't blame JO's lack of shots that game on JO, because it seems that whenever JO has a shortcoming, it's everyone elses fault but his.

Wait, maybe Tinsley or the other players don't deserve any blame at all. Stephen Jackson had 24 points on 8-13 shooting. Did the Pacers (gasp) win an elimination game straying away from their supposed best player and riding the hot hand?

You said that JO "would've had the opportunity to show his team and his fans what he can do"

I think he's had plenty of opportunities.

2002: 8-16 for 18 points (was he the go to guy? probably not, but i put the stats in anyway.)

2003: 6-15 with 13 made freethrows for 25 points in a Pacer loss in game 6 against Boston

2004: 8-19 for 20 points in a game 6 loss against Detroit.

2005: 5-12 for 15 pointsin a game 7 win against Boston. 11-22 for 22 points in a game 6 loss against Detroit.

2006: 8-14 for 21 points.

So since 2002, in games when the Pacers are on the verge of elimination, JO has averaged 20.1 points and shot 46.9%

See a pattern there? Those are pretty much IDENTICAL to his regular season statistics. Yet you want him to get the ball 24-30 times in a game like that? He's had more than enough opportunities to prove himself to the fans when the game is on the line, yet every time he has had an average game.

For some reason, you seem to think JO is capable of taking over a game on a Shaq or Duncan level. He can't do it. Anyone can have a huge game here and there (like JO did in game 3), but JO has proven he can't dominate a game on a consistant basis like Shaquille or Duncan could in their primes. There's nothing wrong with that, there are only a couple of players who can dominate games like that. It's just that JO certainly isn't one of them.

If we had a 2001 Shaquille O'Neal on our team, I would more than agree with you. He is a guy who needed to get atleast 25 shots in elmination games, because you knew he could make over 60% of them and deliver his team to victory. JO's track record in elmination games as a Pacer is a far cry from that. Yet, you seem to think JO deserves the same amount as touches as a Shaq. That formula only works when you have the superstar to do it.

JO has never once had a monster game when the Pacers are on the verge of being kicked out of the playoffs. At some point, you have to stop blaming his teammates and realize that in reality, JO can't take over games like Shaq or Duncan could.

I would much rather give it to a guy shooting 70% than give it to JO, who is a consistant 44-48% shooter.

ChicagoJ
07-28-2006, 06:51 PM
If you don't think your best player can take over in an elimination game, then you're right, you need to do something where he's now your best player.

I've been ignoring your "other games" because they are useless to either side of the discussion.

In the NJ series, that was Reggie's last heroic game. He was still our clutch player.

Against Boston - well that team was in shambles but everyone on the planet still believed Reggie was the go-to guy.

Against Detroit, JO was playing with a Game #4 knee injury and one could argue that Artest was freezing him out during the very famous coaching tirade in which Rick was absolutely screaming at Ron to get the ball to JO but Ron fired up a forty-footer with lots of time on the shotclock then tried to drive and dunk on four Pistons. Probably not a good example either.

In 2005 and 2006, he'd just returned from some serious injuries and wasn't 100%.

You're going to use those games to determine whether or not JO can step it up?

:crazy:

I'm not the JO-excuse-maker. But that's reality and that's just incredibly harsh to use games in which he was not the "go-to" guy or games in which he had rushed back from injury in order to try to help his team win in the first place to say "he can't do it and he'll never be able to do it." And I know you haven't said "never" but D4G will be in here soon to do that for us, I'm sure.

So he hasn't stepped up - no one can argue that he's got a history of playing at the Duncan/ Shaq level in those games. But if you put Duncan/ Shaq in the same fact pattern, what would you have?

We really need to see a healthy JO on a normal (non-dysfunctional) team before we make these type of judgments.

HongKongFooey
07-28-2006, 11:09 PM
Jay@Section204... I dont understand why you are so down on the team? Are you just screwing around? Are you a Sixers fan-drone, patrolling the competitions fan sites? The Pacers will win 65 games minimum this year, if they get a few breaks here and there, 70 is possible.

Keep the hope alive.

Bball
07-28-2006, 11:27 PM
Jay's been figured out. Hopefully, now he can see the light... make that :sunshine:

:tongue:

-Bball

Robertmto
07-29-2006, 01:24 AM
Jay@Section204... I dont understand why you are so down on the team? Are you just screwing around? Are you a Sixers fan-drone, patrolling the competitions fan sites? The Pacers will win 65 games minimum this year, if they get a few breaks here and there, 70 is possible.

Keep the hope alive.

:D :laugh: :applaud: :jump: :rotflmao: :jester: :lolchair: :lol: :chuckle: :funny: :lmao: :grinno: :grinyes: :yay: :rimshot: :happy2: :great:

no seriously, ur killin me - stop!!

Anthem
07-29-2006, 02:42 AM
Jay@Section204... I dont understand why you are so down on the team? Are you just screwing around? Are you a Sixers fan-drone, patrolling the competitions fan sites? The Pacers will win 65 games minimum this year, if they get a few breaks here and there, 70 is possible.

Keep the hope alive.
Post more often!

It's the offseason, we need the entertainment.

Naptown_Seth
07-29-2006, 03:30 AM
Jay@Section204... I dont understand why you are so down on the team? Are you just screwing around? Are you a Sixers fan-drone, patrolling the competitions fan sites? The Pacers will win 65 games minimum this year, if they get a few breaks here and there, 70 is possible.

Keep the hope alive.
Where's the double-take smiley? Who said what!?!

DisplacedKnick
07-29-2006, 06:43 AM
Jay@Section204... I dont understand why you are so down on the team? Are you just screwing around? Are you a Sixers fan-drone, patrolling the competitions fan sites? The Pacers will win 65 games minimum this year, if they get a few breaks here and there, 70 is possible.

Keep the hope alive.

You forgot to add the 16 playoff and 5-6 exhibition wins.

Hater.

Unclebuck
07-29-2006, 09:07 AM
If you don't think your best player can take over in an elimination game, then you're right, you need to do something where he's now your best player.

I've been ignoring your "other games" because they are useless to either side of the discussion.

In the NJ series, that was Reggie's last heroic game. He was still our clutch player.

Against Boston - well that team was in shambles but everyone on the planet still believed Reggie was the go-to guy.

Against Detroit, JO was playing with a Game #4 knee injury and one could argue that Artest was freezing him out during the very famous coaching tirade in which Rick was absolutely screaming at Ron to get the ball to JO but Ron fired up a forty-footer with lots of time on the shotclock then tried to drive and dunk on four Pistons. Probably not a good example either.

In 2005 and 2006, he'd just returned from some serious injuries and wasn't 100%.

You're going to use those games to determine whether or not JO can step it up?

:crazy:

I'm not the JO-excuse-maker. But that's reality and that's just incredibly harsh to use games in which he was not the "go-to" guy or games in which he had rushed back from injury in order to try to help his team win in the first place to say "he can't do it and he'll never be able to do it." And I know you haven't said "never" but D4G will be in here soon to do that for us, I'm sure.

So he hasn't stepped up - no one can argue that he's got a history of playing at the Duncan/ Shaq level in those games. But if you put Duncan/ Shaq in the same fact pattern, what would you have?

We really need to see a healthy JO on a normal (non-dysfunctional) team before we make these type of judgments.


Jay reading this post it just hit me. JO has been injured the last three playoffs .

vapacersfan
07-29-2006, 02:46 PM
Jay reading this post it just hit me. JO has been injured the last three playoffs .

It's all AJ's fault.

Destined4Greatness
07-30-2006, 01:48 PM
Jay reading this post it just hit me. JO has been injured the last three playoffs .

See when Tinsley does that its a tradable offense. But people don't even notice when JO is injured the last 3 playoffs. Along with starting the season hurt the last 2 years.

vapacersfan
07-30-2006, 02:01 PM
See when Tinsley does that its a tradable offense. But people don't even notice when JO is injured the last 3 playoffs. Along with starting the season hurt the last 2 years.

I am far from a JO "fanboy" or "supporter", so save me that line, but when was the line time Mel-Mel came in third in MVP votes?

Destined4Greatness
07-30-2006, 02:05 PM
An MVP runner up should be held to a higher standard than a role player.

BTW JO didn't deserve that. He benefitted from Tinsley actually being healthy most of the year, same with Foster. Artest breaking out, and Harrington being runner up sixth man. The Dude shot 43% from the field that year, thats average for a guard. Its pathetic for a post player.

vapacersfan
07-30-2006, 02:08 PM
I dont care how much he didnt "deserve" it, bottom line is he was a MVP runner up.

He gets more chances then our PG who cant stay healthy does.

Destined4Greatness
07-30-2006, 02:10 PM
WHy because 3 years ago he was the third best at his position. And now hes like 6th. Please a Franchise player has to be held to a higher standard than role players. Thats what makes them franchise players. And its also why JO is a crappy franchise player, hes not held to any standard he does no wrong. He could shoot 1-20 in a game and he would get an A for effort.

vapacersfan
07-30-2006, 02:13 PM
WHy because 3 years ago he was the third best at his position. And now hes like 6th. Please a Franchise player has to be held to a higher standard than role players. Thats what makes them franchise players. And its also why JO is a crappy franchise player, hes not held to any standard he does no wrong. He could shoot 1-20 in a game and he would get an A for effort.

Your JO "hate" is just as old as others professed love for him and the "he can do no wrong" attitude.

Mr.ThunderMakeR
07-30-2006, 03:42 PM
@ Destined4Greatness

I usually find myself agreeing with your JO opinions but even I have to admit that he was a stud 3 years ago. In fact I would love to have that JO back. Back when he was leaner and faster and relied more on his quickness in the low post to dominate. Back when he was an actual franchise player.

Ah those were the days...

Bball
07-30-2006, 03:51 PM
@ Destined4Greatness

I usually find myself agreeing with your JO opinions but even I have to admit that he was a stud 3 years ago. In fact I would love to have that JO back. Back when he was leaner and faster and relied more on his quickness in the low post to dominate. Back when he was an actual franchise player.

Ah those were the days...

JO has played a lot of basketball at high levels of competition in his life. Maybe it shouldn't be so surprising that he's having injury issues.

-Bball

Destined4Greatness
07-30-2006, 04:47 PM
OK No player dominates shooting 43% in the post. The year before he was the 3rd in MVP voting he dominated. That year, no. The voters were a year off. He shot 48% from the field and had more RPG. Plus IIRC his FT% was higher.

But no if you are a post player shooting 43% from the field, you are not dominating. The award isn't what matters, what you did to get it does, so when you don't deserve an award it means Jack.

Naptown_Seth
07-31-2006, 11:32 PM
OK No player dominates shooting 43% in the post. The year before he was the 3rd in MVP voting he dominated. That year, no. The voters were a year off. He shot 48% from the field and had more RPG. Plus IIRC his FT% was higher.

But no if you are a post player shooting 43% from the field, you are not dominating. The award isn't what matters, what you did to get it does, so when you don't deserve an award it means Jack.
You have totally lost sight of the original point though. The MVP vote was brought up to point out that JO has results that Tinsley hasn't had. So okay, you are right and JO's true MVP caliber year was the season before. You are still making their point, Tinsley has NOT had an MVP caliber season whether the voters got the wrong year or not. JO has. In fact he has had 2 of them despite the 43% shooting of 03-04 that makes it not as strong a season.

He was 20/10/2 with well over 2 blocks per game in both seasons. FT% was basically the same (higher in 03-04).

I really like Tinsley's game, but he has yet to produce at the level JO has and had been injured just as much. More actually since he was worthless for the NJ series last year while JO played and even dominated in one of their 2 victories.