PDA

View Full Version : Is Tinsley good enough



Unclebuck
06-02-2004, 02:44 PM
Simple question: Is Jamaal Tinsley good enough to be the starting point guard on a championship team. We all know his strenghts and weaknesses, so take everything into account.

I am not going to answer right now, because I'll be honest I don't know, and I want to read what others think about this simple question, that I think is difficult to answer.

sweabs
06-02-2004, 02:53 PM
I really believe Tinsley is good enough.

He is still a young player, and this year we saw him make strides in his decision making process. His youth still showed at times, however, during his 3-point-jacking escapades...but I like to see him aggressive. If he can work on that 3 point shot even more (which we all know he is capable of making) then he poses another threat outside the arc which he taught Miami the hard way in Game 1 I believe.

His passing abilities are awesome which we basically know, and he can run the offense with confidence.

What I really liked from Jamaal this year was his ability to penetrate, beat his defender off the dribble and work on that little tear drop in the lane. If he continues to work on that its gonna be great.

Keep Jamaal! I personally love the guy.

Arcadian
06-02-2004, 02:53 PM
Avery Johnson was. BJ Armstrong was. Kenney Smith was. Derrick Fisher was.

I say that Tinsley is as good as any of those PGs. So, yes, he is good enough to start for a championship team.

I'll go further say that pg is no longer our biggest concern for filling a spot. Tins is solid as a starter.

TheSauceMaster
06-02-2004, 02:56 PM
if you asked me this question before the Season Started , I would have said no way. I think Jamaal could be good enough if he continues to work on his game and continues to improve like he has in the past year ...look out next season. I think adding a Good SG option makes Jamaal's Job much easier and he can actually focus on being the team leader more than worrying about scoring , I am not saying he doesn't need to scored.

I think most everyone can see without Tinsely our offense goes kinda crazy or sputters so to speak, I used to really hate Jammal even more than I hated AJ this year and that's alot of Hate trust me , but he has really shown me he has the abiltity to work hard and improve his game and I think after he get's healed up and we start next season we may see his real potential.

I am not saying Jammal is a top 5 or 10 PG ....he no Steve Nash or Jason Kidd but for his price I think he is a great value and I think he can still get you a champoinship if he has the proper tools to work with.

Dukins
06-02-2004, 02:59 PM
Here we go again. Oh yeah he is starting material. He is more than capable of getting guys the ball in the right spot. Which he has proven. It also has been proven you do not have to have a steller or even an above average pg to win it all. Given tinsley defense or lack there of i believe our team defense could overcome is flaw. I like Tinsley ability to steal the ball(one of the best this season) That creates fastbreaks. Like i said before only if he could improve on his shooting. He did improve from last years shooting woes. So has a determination to improve in that area. Also he is a fighter even through injuries as we seen last night. No question he is the guy at this point in time.

ChicagoJ
06-02-2004, 03:03 PM
I think its difficult to answer, too.

The problem I see is this, the guys that are better are impossible to trade for. And they aren't free agents. Or they're in the twilight of their careers. So it would take a blockbuster move to improve ourselves at the PG position in the short-run. The guys that can be picked up aren't as well balanced as Tinsley (for example, Nash is better offensively but worse defensively so we might be better off with Tinsley.)

I'm going to touch on this in my post-mortem writeup, but because Tinsley was 'broken down' again in the playoffs, it really hurt our team's chances. He's three-for-three. :o

I've been all over Rick to play Tinsley more minutes, but I also acknowledge that when Tinsley gets tired, his game deteriorates quickly. And that's Tinsley's responsibility to be ready to play more than 32 mpg at the same high level. It seems that Rick preferred to play Tinsley, but felt the need to constrain his minutes.

But I've been thinking about this all series - allegedly Travis and Chauncey were "Rick's" guys at PG. Tinsley is nothing like those guys. Might Steve Francis be more of the style of player Rick would prefer at PG? I personally wouldn't, because I don't consider Travis, Chauncey, Franchise to be true PGs, but that might be the direction we're heading, especially since we no longer run a gazillion screens for our SG. Its more important for us that our fowards are good passers since we work inside-out so much.

I'm looking forward to Ragnar's response here, too.

Roy Munson
06-02-2004, 03:05 PM
He definitely is. As long as he's coached by someone who will keep him under control.

If Thomas was still the coach of the Pacers, I'd say "no way". But then if Thomas was still the coach of the Pacers, it would be a moot point because they wouldn't be a championship contender anyway.

Snickers
06-02-2004, 03:33 PM
Jamaal has been an incredibly improved player under Carlisle. And even though he was hurt pretty much the whole playoffs, he still made the team better whenever he was on the court. He's a guy who plays hard and plays well in the playoffs, regardless of injuries. He and Jermaine showed me a lot the last few weeks. I almost get choked up when I think about how much I like having these two guys on our team. :)

It's kinda weird to think about the guy that just last years was making stupid downcourt lobs all over the place as being a championship point guard, but I think he is. He needs to get that leg back in one piece, stay in shape, and keep improving his jumper [and that little teardrop floater he has, I like that].

Unclebuck
06-02-2004, 03:37 PM
I'm going to touch on this in my post-mortem writeup, but because Tinsley was 'broken down' again in the playoffs, it really hurt our team's chances. He's three-for-three. :o

I've been all over Rick to play Tinsley more minutes, but I also acknowledge that when Tinsley gets tired, his game deteriorates quickly. And that's Tinsley's responsibility to be ready to play more than 32 mpg at the same high level. It seems that Rick preferred to play Tinsley, but felt the need to constrain his minutes.





I've tried to make that point all season long, 32 minutes is the magic number for Tinsley. His legs aren't the best. he has great hands, second only to Kidd

Spicoli
06-02-2004, 03:50 PM
Is Tins good enough?

Yes, I believe he is, albeit with a shooting guard who can compliment his deficiencies. I enjoyed his competitiveness this season as much as anything. I don't remember seeing that intensity in him in previous years.

Another thing, I still expect to see significant improvement in his game next season. There's no reason he can't ratchet up his game a few more notches this offseason. He needs to continue to work on his shot and steadily improve on defense. I think he can and will do that.

The final piece to the puzzle for this team remains at SG.

Hicks
06-02-2004, 04:15 PM
Yes, Jamaal is good enough.

waterjater
06-02-2004, 04:19 PM
Yes for all the positive reasons mentioned above and I thought he really gutted it out in the playoffs.

Water

ChicagoJ
06-02-2004, 04:22 PM
I'm going to touch on this in my post-mortem writeup, but because Tinsley was 'broken down' again in the playoffs, it really hurt our team's chances. He's three-for-three. :o

I've been all over Rick to play Tinsley more minutes, but I also acknowledge that when Tinsley gets tired, his game deteriorates quickly. And that's Tinsley's responsibility to be ready to play more than 32 mpg at the same high level. It seems that Rick preferred to play Tinsley, but felt the need to constrain his minutes.

I've tried to make that point all season long, 32 minutes is the magic number for Tinsley. His legs aren't the best. he has great hands, second only to Kidd

Oh, I know you have. I really was listening. It just may not have seemed like it. :borg:

DisplacedKnick
06-02-2004, 04:39 PM
Can I add "ditto?"

He won't carry your team but he can run an offense - it all depends on the players around him. His limitations always seemed to be making dumb decisions with the ball and defense and he's improved in both of those areas a LOT.

I don't consider being a strong 3-pt threat necessary for a good PG. It sure would help with Indy because the Pacers don't have any shooters besides Reggie. But Avery Johnson couldn't hit a shot beyond 15 feet - he just had Sean Elliott and Mario Elie on the floor with him.

fwpacerfan
06-02-2004, 04:47 PM
Avery Johnson was. BJ Armstrong was. Kenney Smith was. Derrick Fisher was.

I say that Tinsley is as good as any of those PGs. So, yes, he is good enough to start for a championship team.

I'll go further say that pg is no longer our biggest concern for filling a spot. Tins is solid as a starter.

Well put. Starting PG is no longer a question. Tinsley improved a lot this year and I think he will improve more over the summer.

Artestaholic
06-02-2004, 06:13 PM
With Tracy McGrady on board, Jamison Brewer would be good enough.

Ragnar
06-02-2004, 06:26 PM
I cant even imagine why this is coming up. For most of the playoffs Tinsley was our best player. When he was on the floor the team player better D and scored more points than with him on the bench. He drove the lane and made great passes. Why the heck would this even be a topic?

Is it because he was injured for the last few games? If anything it shows his true value. With him healthy we would have beaten the Pistons we would be in the finals right now. With him injured we still came damn close in two games we lost and won two more.

If the Pacers traded Tinsley for Francis I would not be a Pacer fan anymore. Its not that I am that big of a Tinsley fan, Its that I cant stand the style of play we would be going to with Francis at the point. I hate that kind of basketball and we would never make the finals with that kind of pg. (notice Houston is going to dump him because they know this too)

Now if you want to question his ability to stay healthy then I could see a possible argument. He was injured the last couple of years. The last two were because of conditioning. This years I think was just a freak accident. I hope he will be healthy in next years playoffs but who knows. But as far as him being good enough thats just crazy talk. Jason Kidd was injured this year so should the Nets trade him? Is he not good enough any more?

Roy Munson
06-02-2004, 06:45 PM
Fred Jones could be that player, but he lacks the outside shot right now .

If I read one more person repeat this cliche, I'm going to puke on my keyboard.

Did those of you who keep repeating this even watch any games during the second half of the season, or the playoffs?

Roy Munson
06-02-2004, 06:58 PM
Fred Jones could be that player, but he lacks the outside shot right now .

If I read one more person repeat this cliche, I'm going to puke on my keyboard.

Did those of you who keep repeating this even watch any games during the second half of the season, or the playoffs?He was great in the playoffs. 50% from the three point line. Clearly, he is getting better, and he is a gamer. BUT, he also shot 30% for the regular season. Not good enough.

PUKE, PUKE, PUKE PUKE...Damn, now I have to clean my keyboard.

He shot nearly 50% from the field AFTER December. His shooting percentage for the season was badly skewed by the bad start he got off to during the Oct-Nov-Dec. In fact, he was the Pacers second leading 3 point shooter, pct-wise, from January through the end of the playoffs.

Clearly, that is good enough.

Kegboy
06-02-2004, 10:14 PM
Is Jamaal Tinsley good enough

He's good enough, he's smart enough, and, gosh darn it, people like him.

:chuckle:

Hicks
06-02-2004, 10:33 PM
Is Jamaal Tinsley good enough

He's good enough, he's smart enough, and, gosh darn it, people like him.

:chuckle:

I DEMAND A PHOTOSHOPPED PICTURE TO GO WITH THIS POST! :laugh:

Kegboy
06-02-2004, 10:43 PM
Is Jamaal Tinsley good enough

He's good enough, he's smart enough, and, gosh darn it, people like him.

:chuckle:

I DEMAND A PHOTOSHOPPED PICTURE TO GO WITH THIS POST! :laugh:

NOOOO! I don't want to see Al Frankin's ugly mug on Tinsley's body!!! :p

Hicks
06-02-2004, 10:45 PM
Is Jamaal Tinsley good enough

He's good enough, he's smart enough, and, gosh darn it, people like him.

:chuckle:

I DEMAND A PHOTOSHOPPED PICTURE TO GO WITH THIS POST! :laugh:

NOOOO! I don't want to see Al Frankin's ugly mug on Tinsley's body!!! :p

Actually, I was thinking Tinsley's head on Al Frankin's body wearing the trademark sweater.

Doug in CO
06-02-2004, 10:48 PM
He is - except against Dwyane Wade and TJ Ford - we need a fast backup - and NOT BREWER.

TheSauceMaster
06-02-2004, 10:59 PM
I could be cruel I have a nice fishing Picture ..But I wont :devil:

FireTheCoach
06-02-2004, 11:19 PM
Simple question: Is Jamaal Tinsley good enough to be the starting point guard on a championship team.

I think he'll do.

Will Galen
06-02-2004, 11:24 PM
Larry Bird thinks he can become an AllStar. I don't think Tins is going anywhere.

MagicRat
06-03-2004, 12:24 AM
Is Jamaal Tinsley good enough

He's good enough, he's smart enough, and, gosh darn it, people like him.

:chuckle:

I DEMAND A PHOTOSHOPPED PICTURE TO GO WITH THIS POST! :laugh:

NOOOO! I don't want to see Al Frankin's ugly mug on Tinsley's body!!! :p

Actually, I was thinking Tinsley's head on Al Frankin's body wearing the trademark sweater.

I'm willing to give you a choice......

http://home.comcast.net/~magic_rat/KegboyJamaal2.jpghttp://home.comcast.net/~magic_rat/JamaalSmiley.jpg

sweabs
06-03-2004, 12:29 AM
Magic Rat you are too good.

Hicks
06-03-2004, 12:56 AM
Classic, MagicRat, CLASSIC. :laugh:

Suaveness
06-03-2004, 11:03 AM
Yes, without question Tinsley is fine.

And for those thinking Fred cannot shoot...you will have to deal with me :devil:

LAPacer
06-03-2004, 11:08 AM
"Tinsley is going to be an allstar"

-Larry Bird (this year)
-Gary Payton (two years ago)

Tinsley will be ok.

SycamoreKen
06-03-2004, 11:15 AM
Tinsley is fine. As was stated before, we have greater needs. Now only if we could get Fred to grow 4 inches taller......


Great pics Rat!

ABADays
06-03-2004, 01:05 PM
I'm eating crow here because at the beginning of the season I couldn't stand to see him on the court. Other than MAYBE Artet, Tins was our most improved player this year. And he proved to be one thing I never thought would be possible - coachable. So yes, I think he can and, in my eyes, his stock rose significantly as a gamer this last series.

fwpacerfan
06-03-2004, 04:19 PM
Yes, without question Tinsley is fine.

And for those thinking Fred cannot shoot...you will have to deal with me :devil:

Fred definitely can shoot. I can't locate his college stats but if I remember correctly he was thought of as a good outside shooter.

Where is a good site to look up past year's college stats?

Slick Pinkham
06-03-2004, 04:45 PM
Yes, without question Tinsley is fine.

And for those thinking Fred cannot shoot...you will have to deal with me :devil:

Fred definitely can shoot. I can't locate his college stats but if I remember correctly he was thought of as a good outside shooter.

Where is a good site to look up past year's college stats?

37% as a senior- OK but not great

http://www.nba.com/draft2002/profiles/fred_jones.html

Fred Jones

Selected in the first round (14th overall) by the Indiana Pacers.
HIGHLIGHTS
Only Oregon player to rank in top 10 in eight different categories Ė steals (second), assists (third), blocks (fourth), scoring (fifth), three-pointers made (fifth), free throws made (sixth), free throw percentage (sixth) and field goals made (seventh).
Became sixth Duck and 73rd player in Pac-10 history to amass 1500 career points.
Finished career 49th all-time in Pac-10 scoring.


AT OREGON
As a senior, team MVP guided Oregon to Pac-10 regular season title and NCAA Tournament Elite Eight berth.
Named to AP Honorable Mention All-America Team, All-Pac 10 First Team, NABC All-District First Team, USBWA All-District First Team, Basketball Times All-America Third Team and Basketball America All-America Fourth Team.
Topped Ducks in scoring (fifth in Pac-10) and ranked second in rebounding (16th in Pac-10).
Total of 650 points was second-best in school history (Terrell Brandon, 745).
Matched Brandonís school record for total single-season steals and ranked third in Pac-10 (1.8 spg).
Scored 20 points or more in eight of final 12 games.
Scored in double figures 32 times and reached 20 points 15 times.
Tied career high with 36 points against Stanford.
Sank game-winner against USC with :01 left to help Oregon clinch share of Pac-10 title.
Two days later hit clinching basket with :13 left against UCLA to give Ducks title outright.
Finger-roll layup with :02.8 left against Texas sent Oregon into NCAA Elite Eight.
Named to All-Midwest Regional First Team.
Made it to the semifinals of ESPNís Slam Dunk Championship.

Earned All-Pac-10 Honorable Mention status as a junior.
Led team in scoring eight times, rebounding six times and assists 11 times.
Ranked second on the team in scoring ( eighth in the Pac-10), rebounding (5.6 rpg, 16th in Pac-10) and assists (3.4 apg, 10th in Pac-10).
Topped team in free throw percentage (seventh in Pac-10), steals and minutes (31.9 mpg).
Scored career-high-tying 36 points in 37 minutes against Arizona State.

As a sophomore, topped team in blocks and ranked third in rebounding (3.9 rpg).
Led team in rebounding six times and scoring twice.
Poured in season-high 27 points (on 9-of-17 shooting from the floor, including 3-of-5 from three-point range) to spark upset of Arizona.

Earned spot on All-Pac-10 Honorable Mention Freshman Team.
Ranked second in the league in three-point accuracy.
Tipped in game-winner with :0.8 seconds left against Cal.
Topped team in scoring (14 points) and rebounding (eight boards) vs. Xavier in NIT consolation game.
STATISTICS
SEASON G GS FGM FGA PCT FTM FTA PCT REB AST STL BL PTS AVG
1998-99 32 9 103 201 .512 50 74 .676 108 62 23 22 290 9.1
1999-00 30 23 100 249 .402 62 81 .765 117 99 30 21 291 9.7
2000-01 30 23 100 249 .402 62 81 .765 117 99 30 21 291 9.7
2001-02 35 33 215 413 .521 169 194 .871 189 111 63 18 650 18.6
TOTALS 125 92 554 1151 .481 389 483 .805 571 367 148 74 1644 13.2
Three-point field goals: 1998-99, 34-for-83 (.410); 1999-00, 29-for-107 (.271); 2000-01, 33-for-108 (.306); 2001-02, 51-for-137 (.372). Totals: 147-for-435 (.338).

Slick Pinkham
06-03-2004, 04:46 PM
oops... double post

Suaveness
06-03-2004, 04:49 PM
Hicks- any chance you could find a really good game Jones played in his senior year and put it on able's ftp? I would love to see what Jones is capable of doing, since I had not seen him in college.

Hicks
06-03-2004, 05:22 PM
I have 0 access to recordings of Fred's college games. And if you meant James, same deal.