PDA

View Full Version : Does Trade Help Tinsley?



Cobol Sam
01-20-2007, 02:55 PM
Looking back at Jamaal's numbers, he has the capability to average 8+ assists per game, maybe more.

Jamaal has been injury prone. He has shown questionable dedication and effort.
BUT not this year. He said he is going to play 82 games this season, and so far nothing has kept him from the court... nothing. He has had inspired performances this season.

Here is what I was thinking about. With the insertion of Murphy and Granger into the starting lineup, we gain a quality shooter and an all around quality player. We lose a PF/SF who was jacking up 3s, and an inconsistent shooter and finisher at SG.

To my way of thinking this might spell increased opportunities for Jamaal Tinsley to toss some assists into the stat sheet. With Murphy stretching the defense out of the post, Tinsley won't be needing to shoot outside as much.

I think this trade could really help JT$ (iowa state nickname) as much as its going to help Jermaine and Danny.
Forget about shopping for point guards.. at least for the rest of this season, I want to see Jamaal run this lineup.

Mourning
01-20-2007, 03:39 PM
I don't think so. Maybe his assist numbers will go up (likely), but our perimeter defence MIGHT (emphasize added) be a lot worse. We will just have to see. Offensively I think this team is a lot better and probably smarter, defensively ... probably not though Al was pretty pathetic in that department aswell. One part of our defence might become better, defensive rebounding.

For all the flack Stephen got he was a pretty decent defender most of the time. He unfortunately also seemed to have nights where he really, visually, stinked it up defensively.

Anyway, now that we have some decent distributors/passers from the SG and SF position the need for a pure passing PG might just have been diminished, while the need for a defensive specialist to counter opposing teams PG's slashing and cutting at will just got a lot bigger. IF he could actually should a bit too that would be a major bonus.

Alpolloloco
01-20-2007, 03:44 PM
I hope he does well in the stat sheet (especially in assists) but I'm not sure he's the right PG for this new halfcourt team.

So I think your title should be

Does trading Tinsley help the Pacers?

Cobol Sam
01-20-2007, 03:54 PM
I don't think so. Maybe his assist numbers will go up (likely), but our perimeter defence MIGHT (emphasize added) be a lot worse. We will just have to see. Offensively I think this team is a lot better and probably smarter, defensively ... probably not though Al was pretty pathetic in that department aswell. One part of our defence might become better, defensive rebounding.

For all the flack Stephen got he was a pretty decent defender most of the time. He unfortunately also seemed to have nights where he really, visually, stinked it up defensively.

Anyway, now that we have some decent distributors/passers from the SG and SF position the need for a pure passing PG might just have been diminished, while the need for a defensive specialist to counter opposing teams PG's slashing and cutting at will just got a lot bigger. IF he could actually should a bit too that would be a major bonus.

Defense is a concern thats certain, but our team defense should be better with the addition of rebounding like you said, Granger in the starting lineup, and shot blocking.

Cornrows
01-20-2007, 04:06 PM
Having a couple spot up shooters he can use to drive and dish may help with assists. I think Dunleavy and Murphy have better sense of how to play a half court game, moving without the ball etc. Hopefully that will raise Tinlsey's level of play because his currrent inconsistent production won't allow this team to progress no matter how good the new guys play.

Roferr
01-20-2007, 04:43 PM
With Murphy and Dun both shooting about 45% and along with Granger shooting more, Tinsley should pick up more assists and take fewer shots. Although, a lot of it depends on what type of mental attitude, Tins displays.

Will he be pisssed because of the trades and try to do too much offensively? Once he learns that the new players can only be of help, his attitude should be ok....then if not, RC has to step up and sit him down.

ABADays
01-20-2007, 04:52 PM
I don't think it's going to make any difference. Tinsley is a mano-e-mano guy. Likes to try and take over games without the talent to back it up. Doubt it will even occur to him that there are shooters out there with him.

Cobol Sam
01-20-2007, 05:02 PM
I don't think it's going to make any difference. Tinsley is a mano-e-mano guy. Likes to try and take over games without the talent to back it up. Doubt it will even occur to him that there are shooters out there with him.

Haha I really disagree. Its not like Tinsley is this unthinking unintelligent person. The times he has taken over games have been out of frustration or getting caught up in the moment. They don't make him unable to do other things. In fact I'm sure the times in which he hasn't taken over games significantly out number the times he has. I never understand the posts on this board which treat these basketball players like one dimensional robots or something.

BlueNGold
01-20-2007, 05:28 PM
Haha I really disagree. Its not like Tinsley is this unthinking unintelligent person. The times he has taken over games have been out of frustration or getting caught up in the moment. They don't make him unable to do other things. In fact I'm sure the times in which he hasn't taken over games significantly out number the times he has. I never understand the posts on this board which treat these basketball players like one dimensional robots or something.

This line about Tinsley being forced to take over games is only true if it's an order from RC. A dumb order, that is. There have always been better alternatives than Tinsley's one-on-one garbage. Jack posting up was just one of them. Al shooting a forced 3 is better. Oh, and there's that guy named Jermaine O'Neal. Al or Granger could score more points shooting forced 3's than Tinsley could ever score with his forced 2's.

Also, when Tinsley is really active, many times he never even looks at another player from the time he gets the ball. Total tunnel vision. He just goes right down on the block and attempts to score. That is not always true, but it happens...and not infrequently. Then, after he gets his shot blocked, its a race to the other end of the floor where are forwards have to chase the other team's guards.

BTW, that's why our TEAM was above average in assists, yet Tinsley was below average in assists as a starting PG.

Cobol Sam
01-20-2007, 05:36 PM
This line about Tinsley being forced to take over games is only true if it's an order from RC. A dumb order, that is. There have always been better alternatives than Tinsley's one-on-one garbage. Jack posting up was just one of them. Al shooting a forced 3 is better. Oh, and there's that guy named Jermaine O'Neal. Al or Granger could score more points shooting forced 3's than Tinsley could ever score with his forced 2's.

Also, when Tinsley is really active, many times he never even looks at another player from the time he gets the ball. Total tunnel vision. He just goes right down on the block and attempts to score. That is not always true, but it happens...and not infrequently. Then, after he gets his shot blocked, its a race to the other end of the floor where are forwards have to chase the other team's guards.

BTW, that's why our TEAM was above average in assists, yet Tinsley was below average in assists as a starting PG.

Huh? you don't seem to be replying to anything that I had said. So I'm unsure what to say back. So I'll say: ******* the knicks?

vapacersfan
01-20-2007, 05:46 PM
I cant wait for the Tinsley "fanboys" to come in here and tell us he will get better if managment was not "trading all the talent for soft whities" or if "Rick was not the coach".

My opinion on the guy is pretty well known. I think he is a good PG, not great, but that is when Jamaal Tinsley shows up. When "Mel-Mel" shows up I would rather have Saras on the floor.

Naptown_Seth
01-20-2007, 05:46 PM
Defense is a concern thats certain, but our team defense should be better with the addition of rebounding like you said, Granger in the starting lineup, and shot blocking.
But Danny's main problem is awareness. He doesn't play good team defense yet, he's still figuring it out I think. He matches up incorrectly in transition, or sometimes gets confused on the rotations, lots of stuff like that which goes unnoticed in the highlight reels.

He is one of the worst Pacers when it comes to biting fakes as well, and SGs going up-fake into a drive make him a sincere liability. I LOVE Granger as a Pacer, so this is not a sign of some issue or agenda, just my honest eval of where he's at right now.

We all see him run down blocks and make very ATHLETIC steals, because that's his game right now. He uses his talents as a crutch. Eventually that's going to end when he really starts to understand the game. Maybe that's this season (doubtful to me, more like next year mid-way), but it's definitely not going to happen right away.

So I'm expecting some rough defensive outings in the immediate future. Hoping to be terribly wrong about that. :)


I will say that Mike's offensive awareness (and Murphs for that matter) should benefit Tinsley, as would finding more PT for Williams paired with Granger. Those 2 are currently the team's top 2 shooters IMO.

Quis is nice as a scorer, but it all comes off his own dribble, so his increased role doesn't help Tins to me.


My main worry is that without Jack and Al Tins will take it upon himself to force his scoring more, something that was already becoming a problem. All year he has just not looked himself, despite being able to stay on the court (which is a great thing at least).

Cobol Sam
01-20-2007, 05:53 PM
But Danny's main problem is awareness. He doesn't play good team defense yet, he's still figuring it out I think. He matches up incorrectly in transition, or sometimes gets confused on the rotations, lots of stuff like that which goes unnoticed in the highlight reels.

He is one of the worst Pacers when it comes to biting fakes as well, and SGs going up-fake into a drive make him a sincere liability. I LOVE Granger as a Pacer, so this is not a sign of some issue or agenda, just my honest eval of where he's at right now.



I have kind of noticed that too. I've been wondering if this has something to do with our problems with pick and roll defense sometimes. I think Tinsley has a lot to do with that particular problem though too.

BlueNGold
01-20-2007, 05:53 PM
Huh? you don't seem to be replying to anything that I had said. So I'm unsure what to say back. So I'll say: ******* the knicks?

Your point is that Tinsley benefits from the trade because he will have better options to make assists. My argument is that he already had pretty good options...at least better than the Tinsley one-on-one competition that he more often than not lost.

The fact he might have better options after this trade does not excuse his poor PG performance prior to the trade. He had options, but he did not use them. The question is, will he use them now.

GetMoney
01-20-2007, 06:11 PM
I cant wait for the Tinsley "fanboys" to come in here and tell us he will get better if managment was not "trading all the talent for soft whities" or if "Rick was not the coach".

he would

i still think we should keep him and at least see what he does with the team we have now for the remainder of the season

Cobol Sam
01-20-2007, 06:35 PM
Your point is that Tinsley benefits from the trade because he will have better options to make assists. My argument is that he already had pretty good options...at least better than the Tinsley one-on-one competition that he more often than not lost.

The fact he might have better options after this trade does not excuse his poor PG performance prior to the trade. He had options, but he did not use them. The question is, will he use them now.

Okay I get it now. I guess I don't agree that Tinsley has been a one-on-one point guard all year or had poor PG performance. He has been good some games and not as good others. I'd take more than a handful of point guards ahead instead of him, but I'd take him over a handful at the same time.

beast23
01-20-2007, 08:04 PM
... Its not like Tinsley is this unthinking unintelligent person. The times he has taken over games have been out of frustration or getting caught up in the moment. They don't make him unable to do other things...Tinsley has very, very rarely "taken over" a game. I mean, come on... you can't count on more than one hand the times that Tinsley has every been the significantly best performer among the 10 players that are on the floor at any point in time.

But, by taking over a game, I think you really mean those intances where he gets caught up in his one-on-one game against the opposing PG. I wouldn't call that "taking over"; I would call that going into Tinsley's "selfish mode".

But I really disagree with your perspective of saying that when he is caught up in the moment that it's not like he's unable to do other things. What you totally miss is that it is not a question of whether he is ABLE to do other things, it is a question of whether he is WILLING to do other things.

Quite frankly, when he gets into one of his selfish modes out of frustration, he is totally unwilling to see anything or anyone outside of himself.

As far as the trade is concerned, I could care less if Tinsley gets two or even three extra assists a game. It's about the team. Extra assists by a single player dont's matter much if the team is not scoring more points. With Tinsley, it's not about how many assists he does or doesn't get; it's about whether he can ultimately learn to defend anybody. That's where he could most affect the bottom line of this team, and that has nothing to do with his getting an extra assist or two per game.

hoopsforlife
01-20-2007, 09:59 PM
Your point is that Tinsley benefits from the trade because he will have better options to make assists. My argument is that he already had pretty good options...at least better than the Tinsley one-on-one competition that he more often than not lost.

The fact he might have better options after this trade does not excuse his poor PG performance prior to the trade. He had options, but he did not use them. The question is, will he use them now.

Well, we have the answer to this question now. Post Knicks game.

The question "Does the trade help Tinsley" is interesting to me. Though I believe a trade of Tinsley would help the Pacers. It might even help Tinsley, but then, I don't really care if it would.

Mourning
01-21-2007, 12:51 PM
I cant wait for the Tinsley "fanboys" to come in here and tell us he will get better if managment was not "trading all the talent for soft whities" or if "Rick was not the coach".

:amen:

Cobol Sam
01-21-2007, 01:53 PM
But I really disagree with your perspective of saying that when he is caught up in the moment that it's not like he's unable to do other things. What you totally miss is that it is not a question of whether he is ABLE to do other things, it is a question of whether he is WILLING to do other things.

Quite frankly, when he gets into one of his selfish modes out of frustration, he is totally unwilling to see anything or anyone outside of himself.



I guess you've spent more time talking to him about what he is thinking when he takes over games than I have...

beast23
01-21-2007, 09:49 PM
I guess you've spent more time talking to him about what he is thinking when he takes over games than I have...
Actually, I wouldn't bother talking to Tinsley if he and I were the last two humans on the face of the earth.

But when I watch him play, and he gets into his 1-on-1 game against the opposing PG after being shown up, it doesn't take a PhD in Psychology to predict what he's going to do.

He's going to react by trying to one up the opposing PG by continuously calling his own number. And if he can't do it, sooner or later he will commit absolutely stupid ticky-tack fouls or pull some bonhead move to get a technical called on himself.

Cobol Sam
01-21-2007, 10:19 PM
Actually, I wouldn't bother talking to Tinsley if he and I were the last two humans on the face of the earth.



HAHA well you just discredited everything you ever say about him.

PacerMan
01-21-2007, 11:37 PM
Looking back at Jamaal's numbers, he has the capability to average 8+ assists per game, maybe more.

Jamaal has been injury prone. He has shown questionable dedication and effort.
BUT not this year. He said he is going to play 82 games this season, and so far nothing has kept him from the court... nothing. He has had inspired performances this season.

Here is what I was thinking about. With the insertion of Murphy and Granger into the starting lineup, we gain a quality shooter and an all around quality player. We lose a PF/SF who was jacking up 3s, and an inconsistent shooter and finisher at SG.

To my way of thinking this might spell increased opportunities for Jamaal Tinsley to toss some assists into the stat sheet. With Murphy stretching the defense out of the post, Tinsley won't be needing to shoot outside as much.

I think this trade could really help JT$ (iowa state nickname) as much as its going to help Jermaine and Danny.
Forget about shopping for point guards.. at least for the rest of this season, I want to see Jamaal run this lineup.

Murphy and is a career 43% shooter. Al is a career 45% shooter and is shooting 46% from the 3 pt line this year.............................................. .
ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh :)

George Foreman
01-22-2007, 12:00 AM
I actually thought that topic was gonna be about Tinsley being traded. Also that's my stance, I want the dude gone. He used to be my favorite player and my grandad used to brag about them sharing the same last name, but, I think this team needs..... I can't think of any available point guards I'd like to play for the Pacers.

END POST!!:-p