PDA

View Full Version : do we need a Back up at the point?



sportsmusicxboxpacer
12-10-2007, 03:02 AM
since i still see no real back up and we did free roster space is there any point guards out there we can use ? tinsley cant do this on his own :confused:

bellisimo
12-10-2007, 04:30 AM
this is going to be the most lop sided poll in the history of Pacers Digest ;)


its not a question of us needing it...its a question of us finding one that is good...and at the moment my guess is we'll be stuck with what we got....

aero
12-10-2007, 06:16 AM
Personal opinion about the current events of said player aside.....

We do in fact need a backup PG. Perhaps we can address this issue in the upcoming NBA draft after this season (pending we DON'T trade this years #1 pick with a player around trade deadline time)

...unless we dont have a #1 pick this year from any trade we did in the past.

If it were me, Id be picking us a PG this upcoming draft. I wanted us to go after a PG back when we drafted Shawne....This years upcoming draft should be pretty decent with the PG position. Here are a few names that stand out, not sure if we'd have a shot at getting any of them:

- Derrick Rose
- Tywon Lawson
- D.J. Augustin

Id rather draft a PG and groom him, rather then trading for a aging vet. just me .2 cents.

McKeyFan
12-10-2007, 10:16 AM
Not only does Jamaal need a backup, he apparently needs people "covering his back."

:D

McKeyFan
12-10-2007, 10:18 AM
JT and JO for Heinrich/Wallace.

Or Heinrich/Duhon for Tins/Ike.

Or Heinrich for Ike/Shawne.

BlueNGold
12-10-2007, 10:33 AM
Not only does Jamaal need a backup, he apparently needs people "covering his back."

:D

beat me to it. I think I read "bodyguard" instead of "backupguard".

Shack80
12-10-2007, 10:53 AM
kevlar

Ragnar
12-10-2007, 11:22 AM
Of course we need a backup pg. Jamaal cant play every minute of every game and apparently we don't have anyone else who can play point.

I am not sure what before all hell breaks loose is supposed to mean.

Why this team cant sign someone like Brevin Knight is beyond me. He was available, fits into Obie's system and would have been fairly cheap.

McKeyFan
12-10-2007, 11:33 AM
I am not sure what before all hell breaks loose is supposed to mean.

I was thinking it had to do with things like high speed chases, bullet ridden cars, AK 47 assault rifles, shattered elbows, and, at worst, a bullet lodged in our starting point guard.

Thankfully, all hell hasn't broken loose just yet.

Ragnar
12-10-2007, 11:57 AM
I was thinking it had to do with things like high speed chases, bullet ridden cars, AK 47 assault rifles, shattered elbows, and, at worst, a bullet lodged in our starting point guard.

Thankfully, all hell hasn't broken loose just yet.

I was unaware there was a high speed chase involving Jamaal when did this happen? From what I read he just drove downtown. And he was not one of the people who chased after the people who shot at them.

Certainly he should feel lucky he is not dead and I hope he stops going to places where this might happen.

McKeyFan
12-10-2007, 01:06 PM
I was unaware there was a high speed chase involving Jamaal when did this happen? From what I read he just drove downtown.

Well, you gotta figure if someone is shooting an AK 47 at your car and hitting your homey in the passenger's seat in the elbow, then you're probably not trying to get away at the speed limit.

Trader Joe
12-10-2007, 02:13 PM
Well, you gotta figure if someone is shooting an AK 47 at your car and hitting your homey in the passenger's seat in the elbow, then you're probably not trying to get away at the speed limit.

Uhhh, the car was parked when the shooting occured and I'm not sure I'd call the Pacers equipment manager Tinsley's "homey".

JayRedd
12-10-2007, 02:47 PM
I was unaware there was a high speed chase involving Jamaal when did this happen? From what I read he just drove downtown. And he was not one of the people who chased after the people who shot at them.

You're very right. That was James Tinsley. Not Jamaal Tinsley.

Dr. Goldfoot
12-10-2007, 03:06 PM
Yes we need a backup. I was saying that when Tinsley was enjoying some fan appreciation.

tdubb03
12-10-2007, 03:18 PM
Does Quis count?

Trader Joe
12-10-2007, 03:26 PM
We should get a backup PG and probably sooner rather than later, but we shouldn't trade Shawne, Danny, or Ike for the PG unless it is a young guy with equal or greater potential to one of those three.

MyFavMartin
12-10-2007, 03:37 PM
We're lucky that we're not discussing the need for a starting PG.

Young
12-10-2007, 03:53 PM
No we don't need one at this time.

We gave Travis Diener 5 million dollars for a reason. I am more than willing to give him, and Andre Owens too for that matter, more than 20 some games to prove their worth.

Ragnar
12-10-2007, 04:14 PM
No we don't need one at this time.

We gave Travis Diener 5 million dollars for a reason. I am more than willing to give him, and Andre Owens too for that matter, more than 20 some games to prove their worth.

Every time I think about the 5 mil we gave Diener I :puke:

For 4 mil over two years the Clippers got Travis Knight

dlewyus
12-10-2007, 04:24 PM
No we don't need one at this time.

We gave Travis Diener 5 million dollars for a reason. I am more than willing to give him, and Andre Owens too for that matter, more than 20 some games to prove their worth.

I am also not ready to give up on these 2 just yet. Diener is a great shooter. He'll get it back if we don't give up too soon. Owens can be a defensive stopper in time. It could cost some games until they get more experience. I'm willing to endure that.

Anthem
12-10-2007, 04:41 PM
Diener is a great shooter.
You know what makes somebody a great shooter? Hitting shots.

Travis has hit 51 NBA threes in his life. IN HIS ENTIRE CAREER, only 51.

How can you even hope to claim "great shooter" status for somebody who's only hit 51 shots in his life?

Moreover, he's a career 36% shooter from behind the arc. That's not much for a "great shooter."

kester99
12-10-2007, 04:42 PM
We've needed PG back-up since the season began. (Anthony Johnson!!! 2.86 mill @ hawks) Diener and Owens are there, Marquis is there, Rush handles the ball well, BUT it would be nice if we could have come into the season with a tried and true utility PG (Darrell Armstrong!!! 1.2 mill @ nets).

BruceLeeroy
12-10-2007, 05:18 PM
I went with wait and see till the deadline, but even then I'm not sure I'd be willing to give up Shawne or Ike which is probably what it would take to get a decent backup. IMO Marquis is starting to look more comfortable running the point and I think he's actually a better option than most of the players that have been discussed as trade options on here. If we can find a player that can help us without taking away our young talent I'd be for it, but otherwise I think we should wait and draft one this year or sign a free-agent.

JayRedd
12-10-2007, 05:34 PM
Does Quis count?

No.

BruceLeeroy
12-10-2007, 05:49 PM
No.

If he doesn't count than who can we get that's better, and who are you willing to give up to get it?

Young
12-10-2007, 05:50 PM
And out of curiousity for those who say yes we do need a backup point guard who are we going to get that is going to make that much of a difference and who are we going to give up in return?

Basically I think Jamaal plays 35 minutes a night as long as he is our starting point guard. I don't care who is backup is Jim is not going to cut down on Jamaal's minutes. So we are talking about 15 minutes or so a game.

Sure we could probably trade Jeff, or maybe Marquis for a decent backup point guard. But is it worth it? I don't think so. I'm willling to wait, and hope that Diener or Owens pans out.

JayRedd
12-10-2007, 05:55 PM
If he doesn't count than who can we get that's better, and who are you willing to give up to get it?

I'm willing to give up most of our players, but no, there is not really many available people that I am all that excited about.

Doesn't change the fact that we only have one legitimate NBA PG on this roster or the fact that Marquis Daniels is a SF. We, of course, still need a real back-up PG.

Trader Joe
12-10-2007, 06:10 PM
We could get one of Houston's PGs and they are all better than Diener or Owens. I think they could be open to making a deal. Believe it or not David Harrison could probably get us a good backup PG with the way he has been playing. He only has one year on his deal, so he is low risk for the team acquiring him, and if he pans out great if not you let him go.

BruceLeeroy
12-10-2007, 06:44 PM
I'm willing to give up most of our players, but no, there is not really many available people that I am all that excited about.

Doesn't change the fact that we only have one legitimate NBA PG on this roster or the fact that Marquis Daniels is a SF. We, of course, still need a real back-up PG.

Don't get me wrong I'm not happy with our pg position. Haven't been for several years now. I figured the poll was talking about our options this season and there just isn't anyone out there worth giving up those guys I mentioned or any other valuable piece for a back-up PG that plays 13 min. per game. I agree though the position needs addressed ASAP and we do need a legitimate backup pg.

You really think Marquis is playing so badly at the point that he's not even an option? I think he's a big reason why we've been playing so well of late. He needs minutes and because of his lack of shooting its hard to play him 30 min. at the wing positions because they don't guard him out there. Giving him those 13 min. at PG has been key to our better defense and league leading rebounding IMO.

JayRedd
12-10-2007, 07:12 PM
You really think Marquis is playing so badly at the point that he's not even an option? I think he's a big reason why we've been playing so well of late. He needs minutes and because of his lack of shooting its hard to play him 30 min. at the wing positions because they don't guard him out there. Giving him those 13 min. at PG has been key to our better defense and league leading rebounding IMO.

I've got no problem with Marquis. Like the guy quite a bit. And I wish we had more minutes for him.

But he's not a PG. It's not what he does best. And it changes our whole offense when he's out there trying to do it. Danny and Dunleavy have to change their roles and it just creates a whole discontinuity with the way we're running the J'OB system for the other 35 mpg. And I don't like that influence on a team that is already violently bi-polar as it is.

When Quis in the game, I want him playing SF.

I mean, guys like Antoine Walker, Toni Kukoc and Anthony Mason brought the ball up some back in the day and were adequate at initiating their team's offense. But they weren't PGs, and although it's nice that their coaches could go to that as a fall-back option, it was never anyone's ideal situation. And this becomes even more apparent in an up-tempo scheme.

Basically, you can put a cat in the oven but that don't make it a biscuit.

And in a League with at least 50 serviceable PGs, there really is no excuse for not having two on our roster. (Nor is there any excuse for not having a single SG not named Kareem Rush on our roster for that matter...but that's a whole other story.)

CableKC
12-10-2007, 07:29 PM
Basically, you can put a cat in the oven but that don't make it a biscuit.
:spitout: :rotflmao:

And in a League with at least 50 serviceable PGs, there really is no excuse for not having two on our roster.
I would hope that TPTB recognize this too....but I get the impression that they would much rather "sit and wait" until the trade deadline to see if someone can be acquired through the trade of one of our current player ( which appears unlikely unless one is acquired in a JONeal trade ) and live with Marquis as the backup PG with Deiner and/or Owens waiting in the wings when either Marquis or Tinsley goes down.

aceace
12-10-2007, 07:32 PM
In the offense we now run "quick" .... Quis is very good at this, he can get it down the floor and create. If you notice, over the last 5 or so games JOB has found plenty of time for Quis to be on the floor. I don't think we need to even be shopping for a backup PG. I think we need to give Deiner more time, he will fit in better eventually. Players take time to adjust to new teams.

BruceLeeroy
12-10-2007, 07:49 PM
I've got no problem with Marquis. Like the guy quite a bit. And I wish we had more minutes for him.

But he's not a PG. It's not what he does best. And it changes our whole offense when he's out there trying to do it. Danny and Dunleavy have to change their roles and it just creates a whole discontinuity with the way we're running the J'OB system for the other 35 mpg. And I don't like that influence on a team that is already violently bi-polar as it is.

When Quis in the game, I want him playing SF.

I mean, guys like Antoine Walker, Toni Kukoc and Anthony Mason brought the ball up some back in the day and were adequate at initiating their team's offense. But they weren't PGs, and although it's nice that their coaches could go to that as a fall-back option, it was never anyone's ideal situation. And this becomes even more apparent in an up-tempo scheme.

Basically, you can put a cat in the oven but that don't make it a biscuit.

And in a League with at least 50 serviceable PGs, there really is no excuse for not having two on our roster. (Nor is there any excuse for not having a single SG not named Kareem Rush on our roster for that matter...but that's a whole other story.)

I agree he has looked shaky at times. He seemed to be pressing the first couple weeks he was given the backup job, but recently it looks like he might be getting more comfortable in the system.

He's not your typical PG for this offense I'll give you that, but playing him at the point allows us to have a very big line-up. It allows Shawne to play more minutes at the wing and that will free more minutes for guys like Ike and David when they get healthy. IMO it's worth giving up a little offense for better defense and rebounding. If he slows down a little and uses his size to his advantage a bit more I think he could be an ok backup PG.

There was an article in the Star after the Orlando game that said Stan Van Gundy changed his rotations and didn't play Keyon Dooling who had been playing well the previous few games because we had too much size. Then it went on to say he was kicking himself for it, but the fact that he would think he needed to matchup with us is pretty telling.

wintermute
12-10-2007, 09:28 PM
Every time I think about the 5 mil we gave Diener I :puke:

For 4 mil over two years the Clippers got Travis Knight

brevin knight actually but point taken.

and sacto got beno udrih for next to nothing.

quis has been our best backup pg so far but he really does play better as a wing.

hinrich is an intriguing possibility - bulls might feel the need to shake things up. it would probably cost jermaine though and his byc status makes him hard to trade for this year.

there's one guy out there that we know - keith mcleod. he's not great, but he's competent enough. i'd try hard to see if he would sign for the vet. min. now

jeffg-body
12-10-2007, 09:46 PM
I can't say we really need a back-up PG to the Tin Man right now. I think we need to play who we have more consistently and give our starting PG some rest during the game or he will be gassed by January.:cool:

Naptown_Seth
12-11-2007, 03:05 PM
Is it wrong or relevant for me to call Diener a "hollow point" guard. You know, for extra damage. ;)

I am interested to see what can be made of the Dun/Quis lineups as a solution. I mean you put Ike back in the rotation with Harrison and you can run a lot of pretty big lineups out there. The Pacers aren't the only ones who need to match up.


Basically, you can put a cat in the oven but that don't make it a biscuit. Clearly you forgot the butter and baking powder. Typical rookie mistake. Emril's cat biscuit is a house specialty, and I think the IMA is now serving Puck's version as well. Deee-lish (as long as they don't use calico, blech)

Don't worry, you're not the only one that doesn't get it. Look at this messed up attempt, totally missed the point.
http://wildschwein.wordpress.com/2007/03/13/crunchy-baked-kitty-biscuits/

Dr. Goldfoot
12-11-2007, 03:09 PM
Why don't we trade someone with value for a position player we need? Would there be any takers for Quis? What about Harrison? Or Dun?

Naptown_Seth
12-11-2007, 03:22 PM
Or Ike for that matter. Ike couldn't fetch a solid PG? I think he could get something pretty nice to be honest.

Not that I want him gone anymore than I want DG, Shawne, Quis, or Harrison out. Give to get, I think most of us know that cost comes with it.

Dr. Goldfoot
12-11-2007, 03:30 PM
Give to get, I think most of us know that cost comes with it.


Do we? Most of the time people only want to trade players when they're playing poorly or viewed in a bad light.

Last week it Murphy, this week it's Tinsley, before Murph it was an injured JO, before that it was Harrison, before that it was Williams etc...

There are players on this team whose value in a trade situation is greater than their value to the team on the court. Marquis Daniels & David Harrison come to mind. Surely we could package those two or even Ike and get some pieces we need.

McKeyFan
12-11-2007, 03:32 PM
I'm surprised several of you are quick to trade Quis.

He seems pretty crucial to me.

:whoknows:

Dr. Goldfoot
12-11-2007, 03:34 PM
He's not. He can't hit the three. He's injured way too much. Right now the Pacers are using him as a point guard which takes away his only move.....create for himself.

indygeezer
12-11-2007, 03:37 PM
He was crucial last year when he was the only person that could hit a shot. We suffered badly when he was out during the second half of the year.
Not that Dun-dun is hitting with some sort of consistency Quis isn't nearly as vital, especially if you add in chronic knee pain.

Alpolloloco
12-11-2007, 03:38 PM
Trading JO to upgrade both our backcourt positions is the only way to go!

Dr. Goldfoot
12-11-2007, 04:44 PM
Did the team suffer because he was out or did they just suffer? His chronic knee pain and constant DNP's are obviously a detriment to his value. Both his trade value and his value to this team on the court.

If somebody was willing to take him I'd like to think management would jump at the chance to get him out of here. I know that contradicts my original point (his trade value) but I still think teams see alot of potential in this guy. I really don't. If Marquis and a young big like David were on the table I think a few teams would be interested.

McKeyFan
12-12-2007, 05:22 PM
He's not. He can't hit the three. He's injured way too much. Right now the Pacers are using him as a point guard which takes away his only move.....create for himself.

We need him, right now anyway, because he CAN play pg if necessary. Trade him for a pg? Okay.

But the majority of his minutes come at the 2 and 3, IIRC. When he's on the court with Tins, he's pretty effective.

But no doubt, the injury issue is a serious problem.

McClintic Sphere
12-20-2007, 07:29 PM
No, not with quizey hit the threezies like he izzie.

Will Galen
12-20-2007, 07:36 PM
JT and JO for Heinrich/Wallace.

Or Heinrich/Duhon for Tins/Ike.

Or Heinrich for Ike/Shawne.

I LOVE IT


THAT YOU'RE NOT THE GM!

naptownmenace
12-21-2007, 11:37 AM
What a difference a week can make. Anybody feel any differently about Quis as the team's main back up now?

McKeyFan
12-21-2007, 11:48 AM
Always liked Quis at either position.

Its injuries that concern me.

Major Cold
12-21-2007, 11:48 AM
I am worried that injuries in the back court will immediately start this back up.

LoneGranger33
12-21-2007, 11:55 AM
Ridnour for Murphy?

EDIT - Nevermind, I have faith that Diener will turn it around.