PDA

View Full Version : Are you satisfied with Jeff Foster starting and finishing



Unclebuck
06-27-2004, 03:17 PM
Simple question that has not been asked - point blank in quite some time.

I realize Jeff will never be an allstar, I realize he will never make some of you forget the former center the Pacers had, but I like Jeff a lot as the starting center.

If someone were to tell me that for the next 5 - 6 years that Jeff will be the starting center alongside J.O, I would be happy.

Let me address a few arguments I foresee some of you making.

1) What about the Pistons series. Jeff was basically taken out of that series because he could not score. I consider that a special situation. Tinsley was getting physically worse by the game. The pacers were put in a tough position of having to change their game. The fact is the Pacers lost the series.

2) Pacers need a bigger stronger center. Pacers need a bigger styronger center to allow J.O to play power forwartd. I really disagree with both of these. Pacers need a very good one on-one defender so J.O can do what he does best and that is be the Pacers Ben Wallace on defense, block shots. Help out. If J.O has to defend players like Sheed, Odom, and other good offensive players he would not be able to help out on defense.

If Dampier replaces Foster, J.O will have to guard Odom, Sheed.

3) So many, myself includes made the point that Brad and J.O were a very good combo offesively, and yes they were, but Jeff and J.O are a much better combo defensively

I have several more reasons, but I have to go

Anthem
06-27-2004, 03:25 PM
I would not want Dampier, if that's what you're really asking.

Mark Blount is a pretty good one-on-one defender. I would probably prefer Blount start and Jeff back up both power positions.

Hicks
06-27-2004, 04:05 PM
I'm satisfied. I think Harrison might be a good alternative to Jeff against guys who are just overpowering Jeff, and could be a better help defender FOR JO with his shotblocking when needed as well.

Jeff/Harrison is enough, let's just get a SG so scoring from the 5 isn't even an issue.

Snickers
06-27-2004, 04:09 PM
Yes I am. I don't think we could find a scrappier, more intense rebounder and defender at the 5. Plus, he's a reliable enough scorer [at least in the paint] to make the D pay for lagging off him completely. If he improves his mid-range jumper just a touch, he'd be near perfect.

And I agree with Hicks, if Harrison develops quickly enough to be our top backup, he'd complement Jeff very nicely.

Ragnar
06-27-2004, 04:42 PM
I am happy with Jeff. I think the only thing we need is a 15 to 18 ppg sg.

Suaveness
06-27-2004, 04:45 PM
Yes. Very much so. Personally, I think he fits better with this offense than Brad did. We can't have everyone on this team trying to score. He does a fantastic job playing his role. Could not be happier with him there.

SoupIsGood
06-27-2004, 05:04 PM
I am happy with the Foster/Harrison combo next year, except for the fact that the burst of energy he would bring off the bench in games was significant, kind of like a Mark Madsen, but I think his game has improved too much for him to not start.

sixthman
06-27-2004, 05:41 PM
I've never seen Harrison play, so I don't know if I am satisfied with him as a backup to Foster.

But am I satisfied with Foster and Pollard as our centers for this coming season. Hell, no!

Pig Nash
06-27-2004, 05:45 PM
I love Foster! :bowdown:

rabid
06-27-2004, 11:39 PM
I am happy with Jeff. I think the only thing we need is a 15 to 18 ppg sg.

I agree. Add another major scoring option at the 2 and we won't need big scoring out of the 4 AND 5.

Jeff complements J.O. very well defensively. I'm very happy with him as our starting center.

Kstat
06-27-2004, 11:46 PM
I think you guys need a center with a nice mid-range game, can score in the 15-18ppg range and can pass a little too.

beast23
06-28-2004, 12:11 AM
I think you guys need a center with a nice mid-range game, can score in the 15-18ppg range and can pass a little too.I believe that our center needs to be CAPABLE of scoring 15-18 ppg, if left open or JO is double-teamed.

However, I'd like to have a center that doesn't have a personal need to score in that range, but is more than capable of stepping up when the opportunity presents itself.

Buck -

I agree that Jeff is a very mobile center on both ends of the floor. But, mobility or not, we had problems covering both Ben and Rasheed, and keeping both off the boards.

I think our interior defensive presence needs to be more physical. Perhaps in time Harrison can provide that. I do believe that either of Dampier or Foyle could provide that.

Jeff plays about 23-25 minutes a game. That's half a game. Plenty of opportunity for another center, whether a starter or bench player, to make a major contribution. I just want that player to be a big physical defender who is capable of hitting a 10 foot shot if left open.

As for Jeff, there is only one thing about Jeff that irks the hell out of me. He absolutely must improve to 70% from the line. Until he does, he has no business finishing games for us.

Based on needs, I would prioritize them as SG first, center second. So, if we do go after a center first, I hope we use the MLE to land one. And not trade Al. Doing so could put us in a position where where we are forced to trade a second upper tier player to get the SG we need.

So my thoughts are to get the SG we need first, then to step back and see what can be done to acquire the center.

Netweeny
06-28-2004, 12:13 AM
I think you guys need a center with a nice mid-range game, can score in the 15-18ppg range and can pass a little too.

Just like Ben Wallace!! :P:zip:

Hicks
06-28-2004, 12:16 AM
Sounds like Kstat's trying to bait us. :devil:

I don't think we need Brad Miller (there I'll get his name out) to succeed, just a productive SG.

Kstat
06-28-2004, 12:23 AM
You need offense from either the SG spot or center spot. I'll leave it at that.

MagicRat
06-28-2004, 12:24 AM
I think you guys need a center with a nice mid-range game, can score in the 15-18ppg range and can pass a little too.

Just like Ben Wallace!! :P:zip:


I get his point to be "Just like Brad Miller." Trying to work up a BM controversy to get a jump on his "Most Hated" title defense.......:mad:




http://www.giffs.hpg2.ig.com.br/gifs14/be.gifYou typed "work up a BM", heh, heh.....http://www.giffs.hpg2.ig.com.br/gifs14/be.gif

tora tora
06-28-2004, 12:24 AM
Jeff's perfect for the team, he looked to be a little more aggressive on the offensive end during the second half of the season. He has a pretty wack jump shot for a white boy though. :stretch:

MagicRat
06-28-2004, 12:28 AM
Jeff's perfect for the team, he looked to be a little more aggressive on the offensive end during the second half of the season......

Jeff was much improved finishing around the basket last season. His jumper looks good, but it's generally not a good idea for him to shoot one.....

RA231
06-28-2004, 12:33 AM
We got killed on the boards in the playoffs. JO would still have to play some center. Yes we had trouble scoring against the pistons, but who didnt? We got out rebounded by even Miami. Getting dampier means that Jo doesnt have to play center, and there wont be many rebounds that get by Dampier and JO. Dampier can block shots to, Foster cant. Our interior defense and rebounding improves greatly with the addition of Dampier. We could use our MLE to sign somebody like Q-rich or Jackson. Freddie could even start, he has improved greatly. We could trade Scott and Harrington for Dampier.

Kstat
06-28-2004, 12:42 AM
I'd add the one drawback with dampier instead of foster is perimeter defense. I remember we had a field day in the finals forcing shaq's slow *** out to the 3-point line with pick and rolls, and he was always too slow to recover defensively. I can certainly imagine Dampier having similiar problems.

RA231
06-28-2004, 12:48 AM
I'd add the one drawback with dampier instead of foster is perimeter defense. I remember we had a field day in the finals forcing shaq's slow *** out to the 3-point line with pick and rolls, and he was always too slow to recover defensively. I can certainly imagine Dampier having similiar problems.

Dampier isnt as slow as Shaq but he isnt as quick as Foster. I would still take Dampier over Foster anyday.

Kstat
06-28-2004, 12:50 AM
I'd say dampier and shaq would probably tie in a footrace. Good rebounder and post scorer, but not much in the way of lateral mobility.

Anthem
06-28-2004, 12:52 AM
I'm not sure that adding Damp really improves our rebounding that much. I mean, he was good last year, but Foster's been good for a long time.

RA231
06-28-2004, 12:54 AM
I'm not sure that adding Damp really improves our rebounding that much. I mean, he was good last year, but Foster's been good for a long time.


He was 4th in rebounds per game and 1 in rebounds per 48 minutes, yeah I would say he is an okay rebounder, maybe average(sarcasim)

Kstat
06-28-2004, 12:56 AM
Jeff's one of the top 5 offensive rebounders in the NBA, IMO. Offensive rebounding requires speed and anticipation, which foster does very well. However defensive rebounding requires strength and technique, which foster isnt as strong at. Foster's a pretty average defensive rebounder.

beast23
06-28-2004, 01:05 AM
You need offense from either the SG spot or center spot. I'll leave it at that.That, I'll disagree with.

Whether or not we get any offensive from the center position, we absolutely MUST have consistent production and perimeter shooting from the SG position.

I think that even you would admit that had the Pacers even had one player able to consistently hit perimeter shots, the Pistons series with the Pacers might have ended differently.

I agree that we could use another big body on our interior, I just believe that a consistent perimeter shooter is a more important acquisition at this point in time.

RA231
06-28-2004, 01:22 AM
Scot Pollard and Al Harrington for Dampier. That still leaves Jeff to guard Odom and Sheed. But we still needed more rebounding and that is what Dampier gives us, he can also block shots and score a lot better than Foster. I dont think we need to get rid of Foster. I just think that he would be better coming off the bench and in some cases come in and play more minutes to guard guys like Odom and Rasheed.

Peck
06-28-2004, 02:38 AM
The fact that this question even needs to be asked makes me wanna :suicide:

Could we all get past the Brad Miller thing? If you guys don't want us to tell you about Brad would be better than this or that would you please drop the entire line of Jeff/Brad comparisons?

You are kidding yourselves if you think anybody outside the fan base of the Indiana Pacers thinks that Jeff Foster is better than Brad Miller at anything.

I am posting the following Uncle Buck Quote for a reason. "I realize Jeff will never be an allstar".

My reason is simple, it is not my opinion that Brad Miller is an All-star it is a fact. In two differant Conferances no less.

According to Uncle Buck, Jeff is much better than Brad at defense. I think that's a joke myself, but there is no way for me to prove this. However I will say this, also according to U.B. defense wins ball games. Yet, Foster, who is supposedly better at defense than Brad could not get off of the bench for more than 4 min. in the deciding game of the E.C. finals.

Does anybody on here right now want to come forward & tell me that Brad Miller would not have started vs. the Pistons in every game assuming he was not injured? (there are you happy I put the injury thing in there for those who want to tell us how Brad was injured all of the time)

I don't care if it was a special circumstance, it was a real circumstance & it will be one that will be repeated again next season (hopefully) & I want to know how Jeff will react then?

Part of being good on defense is being good on offense. What the hell am I talking about, you ask. Simple, if your man has to spend zero energy guarding you on the offensive end then he can put all of his energy in to scoring. For the most part, you are not going to stop scorers every time from scoring in all games. At some point in time they are going to hit their shots. Ron Artest being one of the rare exceptions of people who can do this. But if you notice Ron also will wear his man down on the offensive end of the floor as well.

Sorry everybody, I think some of you will have to give me some credit. I have kept out of the Miller thing since the end of the season & never even mentioned that I thought that Brad would have been a deciding factor vs. the Pistons because I thought we all had moved on.

But I swear to God, to read how Foster is better at defense, rebounding, cat petting, chili eating, etc., etc. makes me wanna lose my mind.

Brad Miller is an F'n all-star. You do not get to be an F'n all-star by just being an offensive player only, at least not when you are voted on by coach's. Fans are a differant story.

If an offense was all it took then Jalen Rose would be at least a 2 time all-star & he has not even cracked the team.

:scream::scream::scream::shakehead::shakehead:

Here let's all just do this.

Jeff Foster>>>>>>>>>>>>:king: :arrgh:

Ok, now that I have that off of my chest....

I'm perfectly fine with Jeff Foster being the center. The price is right & so far there just aren't that many big men in the east yet that I fear Jeff being bolled over. I think he will eventually be overtaken by some of the younger stronger guys, but for now they won't hurt him.

He does need to improve his offense. I would like to see him be able to hit a jumper, but if he can't then I would like to see him at least come up with some form or offense. Being able to hit a layup would be nice.

Defensively, for now, he compliments O'Neal fairly well. However some day there may come a time when a team produces two big men & then I'm not sure what's going to happen.

I'll tell you one thing though, without getting a scoring guard we will be in deep crap if Jeff can't come up with some form of offense.

I would much rather see us get a shooting guard than worry about center.

BTW, I'm interested to see how many people even aknowledge the fact that I am saying that I am fine with Jeff Foster as center & even now give a nod to Donnie for making probably a wise financial move, or how many people will just blow up on the Brad Miller comments?

I'd rather have Brad, but I'd rather have Jeff than Scott Pollard.:peace:

looking

Kstat
06-28-2004, 03:45 AM
Brad Miller? whats all this about Brad Miller? I was referring to Rik Smits:P

Unclebuck
06-28-2004, 09:44 AM
Buck -

I agree that Jeff is a very mobile center on both ends of the floor. But, mobility or not, we had problems covering both Ben and Rasheed, and keeping both off the boards.

I think our interior defensive presence needs to be more physical. Perhaps in time Harrison can provide that. I do believe that either of Dampier or Foyle could provide that.

Jeff plays about 23-25 minutes a game. That's half a game. Plenty of opportunity for another center, whether a starter or bench player, to make a major contribution. I just want that player to be a big physical defender who is capable of hitting a 10 foot shot if left open.

As for Jeff, there is only one thing about Jeff that irks the hell out of me. He absolutely must improve to 70% from the line. Until he does, he has no business finishing games for us.

first, then to step back and see what can be done to acquire the center.



Agree with part and disagree with part.

Jeff was very close to shooting 70% from the FT line. I'll check the stats, but I think he was over 65% for sure.

I don't agree with you about any trouble keeping Ben and Sheed off the boards. Not when Jeff and a healthy J.O were in there, no problem at all.

I do agree that I would have no problem with a better center than Pollard being brought in, but if AL is still around there aren't many minutes.

Unclebuck
06-28-2004, 09:53 AM
Foster's free thorw shooting.

2004 playoffs - 80% 8 of 10
2004 regular season - 67%
2003 regular season - 54%



Peck, I almost missed your post. let me first say I read your whole post and enjoyed the last part of your post.

But I have to blow up a little.

Your comment about Jeff barely getting off the bench in games 4, 5, and 6 are ineresting. Because brad barely got off the bench in games 5 and 6 a year earlier against the Celts.

We have discussed this so many times, but I can maybe count 2 or 3 guys in the whole league that brad defends better than Jeff does. In the game at Sacramento Brad tried to guard J.O. but was doing such a horrible job for the Kings had to play their joruneymen backup center whose name I am drawing a blank on.

Ask the King fans if they need a little athleticism in their front court

diego
06-28-2004, 10:02 AM
personally i think we need a bigger body at least play alongside Jeff. I would like to get Damp or Blount, both would serve major needs.

UB, dont forget, unless we give Jeff up intrade we will still have him on team to play in situations where he benefits the team. IE...Miami.

We need more size down low, period. We would not have played LA the way Detroit did, because we are much smaller on the blocks than Detroit was. I really like Jeff, and think is very quality back up.

Lets be honest here we are talking about a guy who will never be an all star center IN THE EAST.

Unclebuck
06-28-2004, 10:31 AM
We need more size down low, period. We would not have played LA the way Detroit did, because we are much smaller on the blocks than Detroit was. I really like Jeff, and think is very quality back up.





"we are much smaller on the blocks than Detroit" ?

Not starting unit vs starting unit. Jeff is as big as Ben and J.O is as big as Sheed. granted we don't have Okur or Campbell coming off the bench and Campbell played Shaq a lot and veyr well.

MSA2CF
06-28-2004, 10:42 AM
The NBA has changed. Big big guys aren't always needed. Jeff does quality work and he gets the job done. He does what he does very well. :thumbsup: As long as he's on the team, he will be one of my very favorite Pacers.

diego
06-28-2004, 10:46 AM
We need more size down low, period. We would not have played LA the way Detroit did, because we are much smaller on the blocks than Detroit was. I really like Jeff, and think is very quality back up.


"we are much smaller on the blocks than Detroit" ?

Not starting unit vs starting unit. Jeff is as big as Ben and J.O is as big as Sheed. granted we don't have Okur or Campbell coming off the bench and Campbell played Shaq a lot and veyr well.



Yes height wise but not strength wise. Big difference. Foster is nowhere near as strong as Ben and does not have th ejumping ability either. Come on UB, you know what i meant. Not to mention your points about Cambell and Okur.

MagicRat
06-28-2004, 10:52 AM
We need more size down low, period. We would not have played LA the way Detroit did, because we are much smaller on the blocks than Detroit was. I really like Jeff, and think is very quality back up.


"we are much smaller on the blocks than Detroit" ?

Not starting unit vs starting unit. Jeff is as big as Ben and J.O is as big as Sheed. granted we don't have Okur or Campbell coming off the bench and Campbell played Shaq a lot and veyr well.



Yes height wise but not strength wise. Big difference. Foster is nowhere near as strong as Ben and does not have th ejumping ability either. Come on UB, you know what i meant. Not to mention your points about Cambell and Okur.


Well, Foster is listed at 242 lbs. and Ben is listed at 240, so Jeff must be stronger.....:P

And Jeff jumps as well or better than most guys his size...see Hoop's avatar.....

diego
06-28-2004, 10:54 AM
We need more size down low, period. We would not have played LA the way Detroit did, because we are much smaller on the blocks than Detroit was. I really like Jeff, and think is very quality back up.


"we are much smaller on the blocks than Detroit" ?

Not starting unit vs starting unit. Jeff is as big as Ben and J.O is as big as Sheed. granted we don't have Okur or Campbell coming off the bench and Campbell played Shaq a lot and veyr well.



Yes height wise but not strength wise. Big difference. Foster is nowhere near as strong as Ben and does not have th ejumping ability either. Come on UB, you know what i meant. Not to mention your points about Cambell and Okur.


Well, Foster is listed at 242 lbs. and Ben is listed at 240, so Jeff must be stronger.....:P

And Jeff jumps as well or better than most guys his size...see Hoop's avatar.....




Please tell me your joking. Foster looked like a rag doll against Ben.

Unclebuck
06-28-2004, 10:57 AM
Pacers lost to the Pistons for several reasons, but Jeff Foster was not one of those reasons. he was not taken out of the lineup because he did not play well. if Reggie and Ron would have been able to score Cro would not have been needed. Also if Tinsley would have been healthy he could have created enough offense to keep Jeff on the floor

EditL Wow I need a 4th grade writing class. A double negative in one sentence. :P

Suaveness
06-28-2004, 11:01 AM
The only reason Jeff was taken out was not because of his playing ability or lack of it, but because we needed offense. Jeff held his own against Ben pretty well.

MagicRat
06-28-2004, 11:16 AM
Please tell me your joking. Foster looked like a rag doll against Ben.

I'm joking. You must not've ventured into the Billups-Wagner strongman thread.....http://forums.rpgforums.net/images/smilies/strong.gif

diego
06-28-2004, 11:27 AM
The only reason Jeff was taken out was not because of his playing ability or lack of it, but because we needed offense. Jeff held his own against Ben pretty well.


OMG are you kidding me. Lets look at some numbers shall we:

Lets just look at games 1-3 since Jeff didnt get off the bench in the last 3 games.

Ben Wallace - 46 rebounds, 33 points, 12 blocks
averages - 15.3rpg/11ppg/4bpg

Foster - 22 rebounds, 4 points, 3 blocks
averages - 7.33 rpg, 1.33ppg, 1bpg

To me that looks like domination. Buts lets not let facts get in the way of our warm and fuzzy 61 win season. Gimme a break. Ben destroyed Foster, plain ans siimple. You cannot say the only reason he was pulled was for more offense. If Jeff was controlling Ben they would have kept him in there, PERIOD. But Ben was destroying us. Come on guys take off the pacer colored glasses. i love Foster and his hustle, but it was obvious he is no match for Ben.

MSA2CF
06-28-2004, 11:35 AM
Numbers mean nothing, unless they pertain to wins/losses. ;)

Suaveness
06-28-2004, 11:40 AM
The only reason Jeff was taken out was not because of his playing ability or lack of it, but because we needed offense. Jeff held his own against Ben pretty well.


OMG are you kidding me. Lets look at some numbers shall we:

Lets just look at games 1-3 since Jeff didnt get off the bench in the last 3 games.

Ben Wallace - 46 rebounds, 33 points, 12 blocks
averages - 15.3rpg/11ppg/4bpg

Foster - 22 rebounds, 4 points, 3 blocks
averages - 7.33 rpg, 1.33ppg, 1bpg

To me that looks like domination. Buts lets not let facts get in the way of our warm and fuzzy 61 win season. Gimme a break. Ben destroyed Foster, plain ans siimple. You cannot say the only reason he was pulled was for more offense. If Jeff was controlling Ben they would have kept him in there, PERIOD. But Ben was destroying us. Come on guys take off the pacer colored glasses. i love Foster and his hustle, but it was obvious he is no match for Ben.



One on one matchups meant nothing in that. And numbers don't tell the entire story. Yes, Ben had more rebounds. But Foster's hustle plays accounted for a lot. I don't seem to remember Ben beating us offensively. And defensively he got a lot of rebounds because we missed a lot of shots. A lot.

Foster definitely had a presence in there. Do you think we would have won game 1 without him? I don't. Think about if someone else had guarded Ben. Pollard maybe? Ben would have blown by him every time. Because of Foster's quickness, he was able to stay with him.

Ben is definitely a polished defensive player and has a good nose for the ball. But Foster played him better than anyone else Detroit faced.

debohstheman
06-28-2004, 11:46 AM
OMG are you kidding me. Lets look at some numbers shall we:

Lets just look at games 1-3 since Jeff didnt get off the bench in the last 3 games.

Ben Wallace - 46 rebounds, 33 points, 12 blocks
averages - 15.3rpg/11ppg/4bpg

Foster - 22 rebounds, 4 points, 3 blocks
averages - 7.33 rpg, 1.33ppg, 1bpg

To me that looks like domination. Buts lets not let facts get in the way of our warm and fuzzy 61 win season. Gimme a break. Ben destroyed Foster, plain ans siimple. You cannot say the only reason he was pulled was for more offense. If Jeff was controlling Ben they would have kept him in there, PERIOD. But Ben was destroying us. Come on guys take off the pacer colored glasses. i love Foster and his hustle, but it was obvious he is no match for Ben.


nobody is saying foster is ben wallace. He doesnt put up the same kind of numbers. hell, he isnt as good. but ben played a hell of a lot more minutes than jeff...and had guards that were able to penetrate and/or stretch the defense...giving ben TONS of wideopen dunks and layups....

if and when tinsley is playing healthy..he does the same thing for jeff....jeff is exactly what we need offensively when tinsley is in the game......
when AJ comes in...i think Jeff does not do as much on the offensive end (well, nobody does)...which is why i think jeff is more effective as a starter than as a backup.

anyways..im straying all over the place here..
but my points are:

1. foster can jump..jesus you guys havent seen him sky over anyone for a dunk?
2. foster is a good defender and excellent rebounder.
3. foster is not ben wallace
4. foster doesnt need to be ben wallace
5. if foster was ben wallace's long lost brother id be okay with it
6. both foster and ben wallace depend on their guards for their offensive game....and in the ECF...with tins hurt and reggie being old....BEN's guards had the advantage.....and that explains why his numbers are much better than jeff's.

debohstheman
06-28-2004, 11:47 AM
hey
how do i highlight the part im replying to ...so i can differentiate it from my post?

Suaveness
06-28-2004, 11:49 AM
hey
how do i highlight the part im replying to ...so i can differentiate it from my post?

Just click the "quote" part under their name.

DisplacedKnick
06-28-2004, 11:52 AM
What's satisfied? He's better than about half of the EC centers.

The problem isn't really having Jeff, or even if he starts or not. The problem is you don't have someone who can really muscle people in the post - particularly on defense.

Jeff's one of the best defenders against interior athletic players but he can't stand up to the physical guys. I know the thought was that Pollard was going to be that guy but he wasn't.

It's less a Jeff problem than having to always match JO up with someone better suited to guarding athletes than bangers. That's why Blount would be such a good pickup. Who starts would be kind of irrelevant but it would help your matchups a lot.

And I still can't figure out why he can't hit a 15-foot jump shot. His form's good, his footwork's good - but the ball doesn't go in.

Suaveness
06-28-2004, 11:57 AM
And I still can't figure out why he can't hit a 15-foot jump shot. His form's good, his footwork's good - but the ball doesn't go in.

That is what I wonder about too. He has excellent form on his outside shots and FTs. I just think if he practices a little more, they will start going in.

ChicagoJ
06-28-2004, 12:00 PM
It's less a Jeff problem than having to always match JO up with someone better suited to guarding athletes than bangers. That's why Blount would be such a good pickup. Who starts would be kind of irrelevant but it would help your matchups a lot.

That's basically my point as well. As a combo, JO and either Jeff or Al is just too light.

Now that I've said that... after being offline all weekend... we didn't trade Al yet, did we?

debohstheman
06-28-2004, 12:02 PM
i think that for Jeff to be effective offensively he needs to be matched with a point guard (or guards) that can penetrate and/or stretch the D with a good 3pt shot. He has that in tinsley (although not for the entire ECF). He does NOT have that in AJ.

Ben W. needs the same thing. He had that the entire ECF..Jeff did not.

i do agree, blount would be a great pickup. Who would people here rather see? id much rather see blount.

Suaveness
06-28-2004, 12:03 PM
It's less a Jeff problem than having to always match JO up with someone better suited to guarding athletes than bangers. That's why Blount would be such a good pickup. Who starts would be kind of irrelevant but it would help your matchups a lot.

That's basically my point as well. As a combo, JO and either Jeff or Al is just too light.

Now that I've said that... after being offline all weekend... we didn't trade Al yet, did we?


Maybe :devil:

Hicks
06-28-2004, 12:07 PM
Peck, Jeff can and DOES hit most of his layups/close shots now. That's an old criticism of Jeff that's a year too old now. He improved big time at hitting most of his gimme's this past year.

Unclebuck
06-28-2004, 12:13 PM
Here is what it is going to take for Jeff to become able to hit the 10-15 ft wide open jumper during games.

I don't care if he shoots 10,000 jumpers each and every day this summer, unless or until he is encourages and forced to shoot during real games, practice won't mean a thing.

it has to start in training camp, the coaching staff much force Jeff to shoot when open, every time. Then it must cary over to the preseason games. Then and most importantly it has to carry over to the regular season.

I don't care if Jeff has a few games early in the season where he goes 1 for 8 and the Pacers lose a game or two because of it. If he keeps shooting it will pay off in the long run, he'll get some confidence and he'll get used to taking the shots and then used to making a good %.

Look at Freddie this past season, in November, December and January his outside shooting was poor, but he kept shooting ad it really paid off late in the season and during the playoffs.

If jeff has all the confidence in the world on October 1st, if he had shot 10,000 jupers per day all summer, that won't mean a thing if he is not forced to shoot.

If jeff can become a decent shooter from 12 - 15 ft it will open up his driving to the basket game.


Edit: I am a huge believer in in quick athletic big guys, it helps a defnese so, so much.

Jay to your point about the pacers not being strong enough at the 4 and 5 positions. That is another reason why Ron is so important he helps offset that a little.

Keep in mind though Jeff is an extremely physical player, and he has gotten quick good at it

debohstheman
06-28-2004, 12:18 PM
im with you UB 100%

Hicks
06-28-2004, 12:19 PM
I agree UB that that's how Jeff will learn to hit them. However I don't expect it to happen, Rick never encouraged Ben to do anything offensively in Det.

Maybe that will change here, though. Other things he didn't do there have changed.

ChicagoJ
06-28-2004, 12:59 PM
Edit: I am a huge believer in in quick athletic big guys, it helps a defnese so, so much.

Jay to your point about the pacers not being strong enough at the 4 and 5 positions. That is another reason why Ron is so important he helps offset that a little.

Keep in mind though Jeff is an extremely physical player, and he has gotten quick good at it




Somewhere I was going to post that I'm no longer concerned about Jeff's ability to score 'garbage' points. I don't think the Pacers need to run any plays for him, as long as he scores a high % of the time in 'garbage' opportunities, then the opponents have to take him somewhat seriously. I'll include wide-open fourteen footers from the baseline as 'garbage points' because the defense is basically begging him to shoot those.

Jeff is never going to be part of 'stretching the defense' and if that's what the Pacers need from the PF position, then they've got to find someone else. I'm not saying that it has to come from the PF position, we can all dream about a physical PF with a jumper like Buck Williams or Oakley but those guys are very rare in today's NBA.

I'm intrigued with the idea of Harrison backing up both JO and Jeff next season. That might alleviate some of my concerns about our (lack of) size at 4 and 5. Last season, our two best backups (Al and Austin) were also undersized for that position. I know its a big 'if' but if he's ready to play 12-16 mpg then that's a huge pickup in the draft. If not, then what the heck, it *was* the 29th pick.

SkipperZ
06-28-2004, 01:33 PM
Edit: I am a huge believer in in quick athletic big guys, it helps a defnese so, so much.




I agree completely with this, but I would have to say that even better is a quick athletic big guy that can block shots. Having two shot blockers as opposed to one I feel gives a team defense a WHOLE new dynamic.

This is the only thing I have against Jeff. Offensively, I think I think Jeff is adequate offensively for this team, but could be much better obviously. he shoots the close range shot very well, even adding the reverse layup to his repertoire, and he has always been capable of throwing it down. However, a center with shot blocking ability, post up moves and a mid range jumpshot would catapult this team into greatness in my opinion.

I think Jeff is good enough to start and end games for a winning team, and if lucky, even a championship team. But this Pacer team has the ability to be GREAT next season. I really believe that. and with an outside shooter, a shotblocking center, and minus Al Harrington (I believe in the case of al it is addition by subtraction) this team could be GREAT.

SkipperZ
06-28-2004, 01:34 PM
Oh btw that is why I think Marcus Camby would be a GREAT addition to this team, but no one seems to want him and i know hes probably just going to resign with the nuggets.

beast23
06-28-2004, 02:01 PM
One way to improve Jeff's offensive game is to team JO how to block out under the boards.

That would definitely lead to more garbage points for Jeff.

MSA2CF
06-28-2004, 02:16 PM
Foster can hit threes too. I've seen him before games shooting them.

edit: Maybe he's just too afraid to take the shots? Maybe he's just a good practice shooter, not a game shooter.
adding more

ChicagoJ
06-28-2004, 02:29 PM
One way to improve Jeff's offensive game is to team JO how to block out under the boards.

That would definitely lead to more garbage points for Jeff.

True. That's JO's biggest remaining weakness, IMO. I'd also like him to pass out of a double-team a little quicker, but that's just nitpicking.

Peck
06-28-2004, 04:41 PM
Foster's free thorw shooting.

2004 playoffs - 80% 8 of 10
2004 regular season - 67%
2003 regular season - 54%



Peck, I almost missed your post. let me first say I read your whole post and enjoyed the last part of your post.

But I have to blow up a little.

Your comment about Jeff barely getting off the bench in games 4, 5, and 6 are ineresting. Because brad barely got off the bench in games 5 and 6 a year earlier against the Celts.

We have discussed this so many times, but I can maybe count 2 or 3 guys in the whole league that brad defends better than Jeff does. In the game at Sacramento Brad tried to guard J.O. but was doing such a horrible job for the Kings had to play their joruneymen backup center whose name I am drawing a blank on.

Ask the King fans if they need a little athleticism in their front court



Your going to have to remind me which game that was. Was it the game in Sacramento that Brad scored 18 points grabbed 15 rebounds & threw out 10 assist in leading Sacramento to victory. Or was it the game in Indiana that coming off of the bench he scored 12 points grabbed 13 rebounds threw out 5 assist & blocked 4 shots in leading Sacramento to victory.

BTW, Mr. Rebound Jeff Foster, was out rebounded in both of those games by the player that is not a better rebounder. If memory serves me correct, 4 of Brad's rebounds on that second game came in the last 3 min. of the game to seal victory. Also the earth bound Miller outblocked the sky soaring Foster.

I'm sorry, but I'll say it again, outside the fan base of the Indiana Pacers nobody will say that Jeff Foster is better at anything compared to Brad Miller.

Even if I conceded that Jeff is a better defender
(I don't btw) I would have to not only concede this I would have to say that Brad sucks as a defender to even make it equal, because Brad is so much better at everything else. But because Brad does not suck as a defender then the fact that he is better at everything else more than trumps any advantage you think Jeff might have as a defender.

Oh, btw, those same games that you are talking about I would like to remind you of one thing. They started out both games with Jeff guarding Brad. He was destroyed in both games & O'Neal had to switch to him.

I will never EVER concede that Jeff is a better player than Brad. I will never EVER concede that Jeff is a better fit for our team. For the one thing you list as an advantage (I do not agree with) I can list everything else that Brad does better.