PDA

View Full Version : This might make you feel better about #11's flaws



Evan_The_Dude
12-02-2007, 12:00 AM
We all know and complain about Tinsley's inability to consistently knock down the outside shot. We also complain about his turnovers. Well consider this:

This year Jason Kidd is nearly averaging a triple double with 11.5ppg, 10.5 assists, and 8.9 rebounds in 36.8 minutes per contest. However he's also averaging 4.27 turnovers per game and shooting 36% from the field and 30% from beyond the arc. We all know Jason Kidd isn't and has never been the worlds greatest shooter, hardly even average because he's only a career 40% shooter from the field and 33% for his career from beyond the arc (something he improved on, then fell back away from). Nobody questions Kidd though. They know he know's how to run a team, and his assist numbers show it and have shown it his whole career.

This year Jamaal Tinsley is averaging 13.4ppg, 8.5 assists (this number has climbed by .2 after just about every game this season-- he's now 5th in the league btw), 1.9 steals (10th in the league), and averaging 4.4 rebounds in 34.6 minutes per game. Now the rebounds don't match up to Kidd's 8.9, but Tinsley is still probably in the top 5 in rebounds for a point guard, maybe even top 3 [edit: Just checked, looks like he's 3rd behind Kidd (8.9) and Baron Davis (5.1). However Tinsley averages 3.59 turnovers per game and shoots 37% from the field and 26% from three. People have been questioning Jamaal's ability to run this team for nearly his entire career here.

I don't know about anybody else, but I'd take Jason Kidd and his bad shooting on this team because I know how good he is at doing other things that help the team. I'm not a Jamaal hater and I have never been, but even I've been critical of his flaws. But this year I'm seeing what he can truly do with some freedom, and I'm realizing that even though his weaknesses are showing plain as day, his strengths far outweigh his weaknesses. Seeing the number comparison between him and Kidd put me at ease a bit. I mean, I know he's not Jason Kidd, but it appears that he's a late bloomer (not all due to his own fault either). I just hope that he works on his shot selection & accuracy, and work on cutting down his turnovers a bit.

NPFII
12-02-2007, 09:44 AM
A PG who needs to "work on his decision making" is a very big problem, especially if he's in his what - 75th year in the league?

The real difference between the elite PGs and the rest of the bunch is in basketball-IQ. Kidd, Nash, Baron, Deron, Paul - they're all extremely smart players who seem to see everything all the time.

Tinsley OTOH, is not the brightest lamp in the room, if you get my drift...

JayRedd
12-02-2007, 11:41 AM
Sorry...But I can't take a thread seriously when it leads by comparing Jamaal Tinsley with Jason Kidd.

McKeyFan
12-02-2007, 06:38 PM
One of JT's biggest problems is that teams sag off of him in crunch time. He usually shoots and misses.

But the last two games he has come up big in the clutch. And JOB said in an interview that JT is constantly working on his shooting.

If he can turn around this one part of his game, it could make the difference for me being a fan instead of a trade JT guy.

Trader Joe
12-02-2007, 07:08 PM
A PG who needs to "work on his decision making" is a very big problem, especially if he's in his what - 75th year in the league?

The real difference between the elite PGs and the rest of the bunch is in basketball-IQ. Kidd, Nash, Baron, Deron, Paul - they're all extremely smart players who seem to see everything all the time.

Tinsley OTOH, is not the brightest lamp in the room, if you get my drift...

Please backup your last comment with something of substance...

Infinite MAN_force
12-02-2007, 10:44 PM
Sorry...But I can't take a thread seriously when it leads by comparing Jamaal Tinsley with Jason Kidd.

Why? That is exactly what illustrates his point. Here is a point gaurd generally considered one of the greats, and he shows that Tinsley's numbers are not all that dissimiler.

JayRedd
12-03-2007, 11:45 AM
Why? That is exactly what illustrates his point. Here is a point gaurd generally considered one of the greats, and he shows that Tinsley's numbers are not all that dissimiler.

There are no numbers, letters, symbols, shapes, colors or textures that make Jason Kidd and Jamaal Tinsley at all similar.

Since86
12-03-2007, 03:38 PM
Please backup your last comment with something of substance...

How about the three consecutive trips down the floor against Den. where AI was trying to guard Shawne and Tinsley didn't even rotate the ball around to the weakside where another player could feed the ball into him in the post, or call Shawne over to his side?

JOB called a time out the next time down the floor, and when they came out he looked to get it inside but never did.

I was gonna post about it in the post-game thread, but decided against it because it was a win and I didn't want to turn it into another Tinsley debate, but he just doesn't have a high basketball IQ. He treats the game as read and react as opposed to dissecting the situation and evaluating it, and then making a play happening.

To be fair about the Den. game, he did have Klezia trying to guard him as well. He scored once out of the initial three trips, atleast, and I'm positive someone else scored out of the timeout, which is the biggest reason I wasn't really all that upset about it and didn't post, but it still goes back to recognizing the easiest play on the court.

Tinsley has a scoring mentality no matter what he says he'd rather do. His assists comes a lot from looking to attack and then passing to where the help came from. There's not anything wrong with it, there are a lot of score first PGS, that are really good. It's just a preference as to which you like better.

Trader Joe
12-03-2007, 04:01 PM
Tinsley is not a score first PG and he does not have a scorer's mentality IMO. Also there is nothing wrong with being a read and react player as a PG. Nash is a read and react player so is Kidd, just because you don't break down every single play doesn't mean you don't have a high bball IQ. Dunleavy loves to evaluate a situation and he still does some really dumb things particularly on the defensive end. Dumb plays are a part of basketball.
Watch a Suns or Nets game Kidd and Nash will both make stupid mistakes, but A.) they either get lucky and a teammate helps them out when they make a mistake (this is especially true for Nash, he'll have 4-5 plays a game that just make you go WTF?, but his talented cast and crew make up for it) or B.) they still produce solid numbers and their teams win games so people forget about their mistakes.
When you play an offense like we currently have in place where Tins spends so much time with the ball in his hands you have to live with the 4-5 plays a game that make you say WTF? because he is probably going to make up for those 4-5 plays.

I feel like I'm babbling, and I am not trying to say that Tins=Nash or Kidd, but I am trying to say that those two guys aren't that much different from Tins in the way they play the game. They have just been far more consistent throughout their careers. Plus they have both always played in systems that suit their skills.

OakMoses
12-03-2007, 04:05 PM
Please backup your last comment with something of substance...

The first Denver game where he had 3 shots blocked by Camby in the last 3 minutes of the game comes to mind also.

Tinsley is having a great year, and perhaps nothing demonstrates this better than the following statement: The main difference between Kidd and Tinsley is on-ball defense. That he's approaching Kidd in other categories is fairly remarkable.

naptownmenace
12-03-2007, 04:12 PM
I feel like I'm babbling, and I am not trying to say that Tins=Nash or Kidd, but I am trying to say that those two guys aren't that much different from Tins in the way they play the game. They have just been far more consistent throughout their careers. Plus they have both always played in systems that suit their skills.


That's so true. Tinsley's defense is better than Nash's who is terrible defensively but the good that Nash does throughout the game makes up for whatever he gives up on the defensive end. Tinsley is doing the same thing but unlike early in the season, he is actually doing a better job of staying in front of the guy he's guarding and not committing silly fouls.

I'm trully shocked at the transformation but I'm happy about it. This is one thing I don't mind being wrong about. In fact I want Tinsley to prove me wrong because that would mean that the Pacers are going to win a good number of games.

Since86
12-03-2007, 04:25 PM
Tinsley is not a score first PG and he does not have a scorer's mentality IMO. Also there is nothing wrong with being a read and react player as a PG. Nash is a read and react player so is Kidd, just because you don't break down every single play doesn't mean you don't have a high bball IQ.

I could only get as far as this before I just HAD to stop.

1.) Mel-Mel the Abuser didn't get his nickname by looking for the open player every time down the floor. He is a scoring PG. He looks to drive first, always has. I can dig up thread after thread after thread talking about how he gets into his one-on-one match ups and likes to out shine his opponent. Yes, he doesn't do this as often, but he is most definately a scoring Pg without an outside shot.

2.) I said there was nothing wrong with being a read and react player, hell that's how I play, but I don't like my PG to be that way. The very last line of my post talks about your preference on which you like.

3.)I didn't say being a read and react player was a sign of low basketball IQ, please show me where I did. I used an example of not recognizing the biggest mismatch of the entire game as an example. He got to focused on trying to take Klezia to the basket, which he didn't and settled for a mid-range jumper BTW, instead of seeing a 6fter (on a good day) trying to guard someone almost a full foot taller camped out on the opposite block. Which again goes back to him being a score first PG.


I couldn't continue if you misconstrued my post in your first three sentences to the point it was going in the opposite direction.

Trader Joe
12-03-2007, 05:57 PM
I could only get as far as this before I just HAD to stop.

1.) Mel-Mel the Abuser didn't get his nickname by looking for the open player every time down the floor. He is a scoring PG. He looks to drive first, always has. I can dig up thread after thread after thread talking about how he gets into his one-on-one match ups and likes to out shine his opponent. Yes, he doesn't do this as often, but he is most definately a scoring Pg without an outside shot.

2.) I said there was nothing wrong with being a read and react player, hell that's how I play, but I don't like my PG to be that way. The very last line of my post talks about your preference on which you like.

3.)I didn't say being a read and react player was a sign of low basketball IQ, please show me where I did. I used an example of not recognizing the biggest mismatch of the entire game as an example. He got to focused on trying to take Klezia to the basket, which he didn't and settled for a mid-range jumper BTW, instead of seeing a 6fter (on a good day) trying to guard someone almost a full foot taller camped out on the opposite block. Which again goes back to him being a score first PG.


I couldn't continue if you misconstrued my post in your first three sentences to the point it was going in the opposite direction.

Go back and read you're original post. I think you'll find that it would be pretty easy for someone to discern read and react player=low basketball IQ from the way that part of your post is formed. I don't know why I'm even responding though if you didn't even finish reading my original post...:rolleyes:

Also I think you'll notice that after my very first sentence I use three magic letters, IMO. My post wasn't even necessarily directed towards you. Your post just sparked my thoughts on the subject. I wasn't saying you were wrong or even trying to debate with you. I was simply stating my opinion on the matter.

Evan_The_Dude
12-03-2007, 06:30 PM
There are no numbers, letters, symbols, shapes, colors or textures that make Jason Kidd and Jamaal Tinsley at all similar.

I'm not comparing Jamaal Tinsley to Jason Kidd, I mean seriously I'm not that stupid. My point is that there have been people here that have said they wouldn't mind giving up Tinsley and bringing in Kidd [this was mostly last season when word spread that the Nets might look to trade Kidd in the midst of his divorce drama]. If you look at numbers -- strictly numbers, it doesn't appear that Kidd would have a much different effect on this team than Tinsley. Also I was saying that if people don't complain much about Kidd's poor shooting and turnovers, then why do we complain so much about Jamaal's when he's putting up similar numbers? Why is it ok for Kidd, but not Tinsley?

JayRedd
12-04-2007, 12:56 PM
I'm not comparing Jamaal Tinsley to Jason Kidd, I mean seriously I'm not that stupid. My point is that there have been people here that have said they wouldn't mind giving up Tinsley and bringing in Kidd [this was mostly last season when word spread that the Nets might look to trade Kidd in the midst of his divorce drama].

I wasn't trying to imply you're stupid.

But here you go comparing them still.


if people don't complain much about Kidd's poor shooting and turnovers, then why do we complain so much about Jamaal's when he's putting up similar numbers? Why is it ok for Kidd, but not Tinsley?

Because he's Jason Kidd.

He's one of the 10 best PGs ever.

He had 11 triple doubles last year. He has 4 so far this year.

For him, high TO totals and a lack of range are minor flaws in an otherwise near-perfect PG. For guys like him and Nash, TOs are often from trying to do something that would have been amazing -- threading the needle in the lane, a cross-court 50-foot bounce pass, a dribble-drive kick out to a spot-up shooter in the opposite corner.

For guys like Jamaal (and other non-Hall of Fame PGs), TOs are usually mistakes.

JKidd doesn't make many mistakes. Especially, in late or important situations. So those that he does make are overshadowed by the fact that his decision-making, floor generalship (it's a word) and overall understanding of what his team needs to do offensively on any and every important possession are off the charts. That more than makes up for an errant bouncepass that hit someone in the knee 7:13 into the 2nd Quarter.

Tinsley historically makes many mistakes. His decision making in late or important situations has historically been questionable. His mistakes aren't overshadowed by rock-steady and generally great play in the waning minutes of a close game. His errant pass 7:13 into the 2nd Quarter might happen again with 0:13 left in the 4th Quarter.


If you look at numbers -- strictly numbers, it doesn't appear that Kidd would have a much different effect on this team than Tinsley.

You just can't compare Jason Kidd and Jamaal Tinsley via numbers.

It's like comparing apples and kangaroos.