PDA

View Full Version : Dahntay Jones is exactly who we knew he was, sadly



ChicagoJ
01-13-2010, 03:26 PM
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/blog/ball_dont_lie/post/Dahntay-Jones-is-exactly-who-we-knew-he-was-sad?urn=nba,213127

I didn't write this. I am not Kelly Dwyer. I used to think Kelly was hilarious and insightful ... his 2000 Pacers preview article back on NBATalk.com was the funniest bit of sports journalism I've ever seen (it was presented as "Presidential Debate style", with Reggie and Isiah Thomas arguing about the confusing state of the Pacers as they dismantled an NBA Finals team but still had their two best players... I digress...) But this piece, even with several valid points is not well-written.

Sadly, I think Kelly spends too much time trying to be "Bill Simmons to the non-Boston world". There are some decent points in there but they don't really make it out. Its worth a skim, but probably not a full, indepth read.

90'sNBARocked
01-13-2010, 03:37 PM
It just makes me rue the fact that the Indiana Pacers are a mismanaged organization that really doesn't have a clue



Well, it is a biggie. Because it's symbolic of Bird's constant obsession with lifting his Pacers toward the middle of the pack, at all costs.


Because Bird thinks you are. Bird thinks you're just a step away. How else do you explain these win-now moves? Dahntay Jones. No big trades. Not trading Troy Murphy(notes) at his peak, the ultimate sell-high moment. Drafting a 24-year old.



pretty much the sediment here unfortunatley :censored:

ChicagoJ
01-13-2010, 03:44 PM
I actually thought this was spot-on:


After years of inept offensive play alongside the occasional flagrant foul ("defense!," said the cable TV announcers)...

So many people confuse flagrant fouls/ hard fouls with actual defense...

90'sNBARocked
01-13-2010, 03:47 PM
I actually thought this was spot-on:



So many people confuse flagrant fouls/ hard fouls with actual defense...


Tyler?

duke dynamite
01-13-2010, 03:53 PM
This article makes me feel like less than an inch small.

Unclebuck
01-13-2010, 03:53 PM
OK, I guess if that article makes the writer happy, so be it. I am less than impressed.

imawhat
01-13-2010, 03:55 PM
I actually thought this was spot-on:



So many people confuse flagrant fouls/ hard fouls with actual defense...

That's not the problem. The problem is that too many people (er, one) confuse offense with defense.

Gamble1
01-13-2010, 03:56 PM
I didn't realize we brought him in to be a offensive threat. Seriously he wasn't even suppose to be the starter. A solid backup sure but not the starting sg/sf.

Writers like this get confused with fixing a team. There are no quick fixes in the NBA.

McKeyFan
01-13-2010, 04:09 PM
I think Dahntay is getting a terrible, raw deal.

He led this team to several victories, following the mandate to make it a more defensive oriented team.

JOB strayed from that vision, and we have lost nearly every game since.

Dahntay Jones has not gotten worse. Our team has.

Brad8888
01-13-2010, 04:20 PM
The only part that is well written is the part that basically says that Dahntay is Dahntay, and that Bird went and got him because he supposedly defended well and could shoot 3's, which is exactly what O'B wanted.

Well, turns out that Dahntay can't hit threes like advertised (no surprise there, otherwise Denver would have played him more than 17 minutes and would not have let him go), so now O'B won't play him because he can't space the floor, and his defense is predicated on grabbing, pushing, and getting in the heads of opponents, and because of that he gets into foul problems and hurts the performance of the team by sending the opponents to the line more than they otherwise would get there.

Maybe we can trade him during the offseason as filler with one of our desireable expirings. It would take quite a bit to make up for him, but hopefully some teams really like Troy.

ChicagoJ
01-13-2010, 05:30 PM
That's not the problem. The problem is that too many people (er, one) confuse offense with defense.

You may be right. That particular distinction is a bigger problem for announcers who don't understand the difference between "commiting flagrant fouls" and "playing good defense" and the posters in InternetLand that repeat the confusion but think they know what they are talking about.

ChicagoJ
01-13-2010, 05:43 PM
OK, I guess if that article makes the writer happy, so be it. I am less than impressed.

Its not well written. I said that in the O.P. But there are some solid points inside the rubble.


1. The good thing, for my reputation solely, is that Jones has fallen off. It's a bad thing, everywhere else. You'd think it'd be a horrible thing for the Pacers, but as bad as they are, it hasn't really mattered much.

2. There's nothing that Dahntay is doing this season that is in any way unrepresentative of his career arc, per minute.

3. He's playing exactly as he should. He's playing like Dahntay Jones, and that's enough to receive DNP-CDs for a team that is winning less than a third of its games.

4. Because Bird thinks you are. Bird thinks you're just a step away. How else do you explain these win-now moves? Dahntay Jones. No big trades. Not trading Troy Murphy at his peak, the ultimate sell-high moment.

5. And Dahntay Jones finally reveals himself as exactly who we thought he was. Nothing against Dahntay, because he works his tail off, but he's Dahntay Jones. For some reason, Larry Bird thought Dahntay Jones could become Dahntay Jones!

So we could continue harping on how badly written (it is a blog post, not a "real" article, as far as I can tell, so the standard should be lower).

But I'd rather see a discussion around those five points. Tell me why Kelly is wrong? Tell me why you are unimpressed with those five points. I get tired of watching PD turn into the "Critique the professional writers' writing skills" Digest. Let's talk about basketball/ the Pacers instead.

90'sNBARocked
01-13-2010, 05:46 PM
Its not well written. I said that in the O.P. But there are some solid points inside the rubble.





[COLOR=black]

So we could continue harping on how badly written (it is a blog post, not a "real" article, as far as I can tell, so the standard should be lower).

But I'd rather see a discussion around those five points. Tell me why Kelly is wrong? Tell me why you are unimpressed with those five points. I get tired of watching PD turn into the "Critique the professional writers' writing skills" Digest. Let's talk about basketball/ the Pacers instead.

I dont think he is that far off

travmil
01-13-2010, 05:55 PM
So Bird must have called Kelly and told him "man I thought dahntay would be better and I was really hoping he'd be the free agent pickup that vaulted us into the playoffs". Either that or Kelly is pulling assumptions out of his ***. Again.

90'sNBARocked
01-13-2010, 06:02 PM
So Bird must have called Kelly and told him "man I thought dahntay would be better and I was really hoping he'd be the free agent pickup that vaulted us into the playoffs". Either that or Kelly is pulling assumptions out of his ***. Again.

Its just his perception thats all

PaceBalls
01-13-2010, 06:06 PM
pretty much the sediment here unfortunatley :censored:

The sediment or the sentiment? I can see both words being appropriate.

90'sNBARocked
01-13-2010, 06:07 PM
The sediment or the sentiment? I can see both words being appropriate.

good point

PaceBalls
01-13-2010, 06:16 PM
DJones is the odd man out because of our coach... dammit scratch that.
DJones is the odd man out because of our offensive system ;)

I think he is a great pick up and I love his game. I expect him to be part of our championship run in 2-3 years :p

But really, he is a tough dude, a natural leader, he is better at offense than I thought he was. He is the kinda player you need to steady the ship. I don't see why you hate the guy so much. And furthermore, his benching on our horrible team is not a knock on him at all but a reflection on the value of potential offense verses solid defense with our team.

90'sNBARocked
01-13-2010, 06:19 PM
DJones is the odd man out because of our coach... dammit scratch that.
DJones is the odd man out because of our offensive system ;)

I think he is a great pick up and I love his game. I expect him to be part of our championship run in 2-3 years :p

But really, he is a tough dude, a natural leader, he is better at offense than I thought he was. He is the kinda player you need to steady the ship. I don't see why you hate the guy so much. And furthermore, his benching on our horrible team is not a knock on him at all but a reflection on the value of potential offense verses solid defense with our team.

O Brien has no pattern to his substitutions. This has got to have players like Dahanty Jones secretly saying "WTF did I do or not do to deserve this"

No wonder chemistry is at an all-time low

Suaveness
01-13-2010, 06:20 PM
We're asking too much of him. He's not supposed to be one of your top 3 players.

CableKC
01-13-2010, 06:20 PM
The only part that is well written is the part that basically says that Dahntay is Dahntay, and that Bird went and got him because he supposedly defended well and could shoot 3's, which is exactly what O'B wanted.

Well, turns out that Dahntay can't hit threes like advertised (no surprise there, otherwise Denver would have played him more than 17 minutes and would not have let him go), so now O'B won't play him because he can't space the floor, and his defense is predicated on grabbing, pushing, and getting in the heads of opponents, and because of that he gets into foul problems and hurts the performance of the team by sending the opponents to the line more than they otherwise would get there.

Maybe we can trade him during the offseason as filler with one of our desireable expirings. It would take quite a bit to make up for him, but hopefully some teams really like Troy.
I'm busy, so I didn't have the chance to read the entire article....but are you saying that Bird got him because he could shoot the 3pt shot?

or

Are you saying that the writer said this?

If there was such a requirement to be able to shoot the 3pt shot....I have no idea why Bird would think this...much less sign him to a long-term contract.....only because Inferno has never shown that he could hit the 3pt shot. On average for his entire career, he has tried less then .2 attempts every game and never really hit any of them.

I can totally see that Bird brought him in as a Defensive specialist roleplayer....and that whatever offensive skills he brings...no matter how much it doesn't fit into JO'Bs desire to "spread the floor"...is simply icing on the cake.

I honestly think that Inferno was brought in to "help now" but to be considered a part of the core of Players that will be ready to play for the next Coach starting in the 2011-2012 season ( or hopefully earlier ). Simply put....if his Offensive game doesn't fit JO'Bs style...why sign him to a long-term contract?

To me, I understand that Inferno's inability to not "space the floor" ( simply because he can't hit the 3pt shot ) and "tunnel vision" maybe sufficient reason for JO'B to not play him as much....but I still think ( just like many of us think about McRoberts ) that he does enough on the floor on the defensive end and has shown that he can contribute to warrant SOME minutes. 6 minutes, ZERO minutes and a DNP-CD is IMHO unacceptable given the apparent emphasis on defense.

EDIT - I found the part about Inferno and his 3pt shooting:


The Pacers need defenders, he told himself. They need guys who relished the playoff edge, as Dahntay did last spring. They need guys who can occasionally hit the three-pointer, as Dahntay sometimes can, as Jim O'Brien loves, while bringing the sort of defensive intensity needed for a team that was 19th in defensive efficiency last season (assuming Larry looks at per-possessions stats).
Inferno has never IMHO shown that he was anywhere close to be a decent 3pt shooter. I haven't really paid attention to any of his game in Denver....but his miniscule 3pt attempts over the course of his career tells me enough to know that if having a Player that can hit the 3pt shot....that you don't look to someone like Inferno to take one. If Bird really thought this and hoped/:pray: that Inferno could develop into a Bruce Bowen type player ( like a 3pt shooting perimeter defender grows on trees ), then Bird really did make a huge mistake. But I don't get the sense that Bird looked at having a 3pt shooter a requirement to go along with the perimeter defender that he was hoping for....I'd guess that this is more of a requirement of JO'B. I agree with travmil and UB on this article......I don't agree with all of the points that Dwyer brought up....but it really comes off more as an attack on Bird at the expense of Inferno.

90'sNBARocked
01-13-2010, 06:22 PM
I'm busy, so I didn't have the chance to read the entire article....but are you saying that Bird got him because he could shoot the 3pt shot?

or

Are you saying that the writer said this?

If there was such a requirement to be able to shoot the 3pt shot....I have no idea why Bird would think this...much less sign him to a long-term contract.....only because Inferno has never shown that he could hit the 3pt shot. On average for his entire career, he has tried less then .2 attempts every game and never really hit any of them.

I can totally see that Bird brought him in as a Defensive specialist roleplayer....and that whatever offensive skills he brings...no matter how much it doesn't fit into JO'Bs desire to "spread the floor"...is simply icing on the cake.

I honestly think that Inferno was brought in to "help now" but to be considered a part of the core of Players that will be ready to play for the next Coach starting in the 2011-2012 season ( or hopefully earlier ). Simply put....if his Offensive game doesn't fit JO'Bs style...why sign him to a long-term contract?

To me, I understand that Inferno's inability to not "space the floor" ( simply because he can't hit the 3pt shot ) and "tunnel vision" maybe sufficient reason for JO'B to not play him as much....but I still think ( just like many of us think about McRoberts ) that he does enough on the floor on the defensive end and has shown that he can contribute to warrant SOME minutes. 6 minutes, ZERO minutes and a DNP-CD is IMHO unacceptable given the apparent emphasis on defense.

Unless he was injured , I agree 110%

Gamble1
01-13-2010, 06:23 PM
Chicago J,
The writers points are very near sighted and one sided. IMO, all he wants to do is justify a past criticism which doesn't look at the emergence of healthy players to the rotation which made D jones the odd man out.

Its not like Luther Head, Rush, Watson and Dun are any better right now at the sg position. ITs a coaches choice not a player playing his way out of the rotation. Thats where his points fall out of realm of reasoning into the murky waters of stupidity.

As far as Bird not pulling the trigger on Murphy, well who is to say that we got a good offer? Seriously, you think Bird would have held on to Murphy if a star player was offered? I didn't think so but some how this writer makes a valid point?

CableKC
01-13-2010, 06:40 PM
Unless he was injured , I agree 110%
Like many games as of late.....I haven't been paying attention...he wasn't injured was he?

My guess is not.

I'm :pray: that this benching is more a result of JO'B trying to get a point across to Inferno that if he wants to play...he has to be less "tunnel vision" and more of a "team" Player....cuz when he does play like that...it bogs down the offense ( which is a valid reason ). If not...and JO'B is simply not playing him cuz now he has his security blankets back that can hit 3pt shots...and the reason he's not playing is cuz he can't hit the 3pt shot...then I'm going to be irritated.

Fine, I get it....with a healthy lineup....Inferno doesn't really warrant playing 28+ mpg.....if all he is asked to be is the defensive specialiast that can attack the basket from time to time while drawing fouls.....that should translate into a rotational RolePlayer. On top of that....I get that Inferno isn't able to effectively contribute on a JO'B-RUN offense ( note that I specifically have to say JO'B Offense and not any offense )....but is his contributions on the defensive end so insignificant that he doesn't warrant some playing time?

Peck
01-13-2010, 06:44 PM
1. The good thing, for my reputation solely, is that Jones has fallen off. It's a bad thing, everywhere else. You'd think it'd be a horrible thing for the Pacers, but as bad as they are, it hasn't really mattered much.

I'm not sure he makes any sense here, so he is saying no matter what Jones does it does not matter in the overall record? If he was playing great or good would the record indicate it? If it would then his statement makes no sense as Dahntay's play would matter.


2. There's nothing that Dahntay is doing this season that is in any way unrepresentative of his career arc, per minute.

I'm not sure where we are going with this either. Did he think that we thought we were going to sign a low priced free agent and he would turn into LeBron James? We are getting exactly what we paid for. I don't think anyone looked at Jones last season and said "man this guy could score 18 ppg given the chance". They looked at him and said fierce competator, hard nosed defender and an overall effort guy.

I don't see where this is a suprise to anyone.


3. He's playing exactly as he should. He's playing like Dahntay Jones, and that's enough to receive DNP-CDs for a team that is winning less than a third of its games.

I strongly disagree with this statement but this is purely all opinion at this point. Mike Dunleavy has not been setting the world on fire lately and let's be honest here even if he were 100% healthy Mike is just short of a turnstyle on defense.

This is all about coaching here and the coach's prefered style of play. Dahntay does not space the floor very well and this particular coach values that above all others. He can say he values defense all he wants (BTW what coach does not say that?) but at the end of the day from his wing players he wants them to be able to easily and fluidly step back and drop a 3.




4. Because Bird thinks you are. Bird thinks you're just a step away. How else do you explain these win-now moves? Dahntay Jones. No big trades. Not trading Troy Murphy at his peak, the ultimate sell-high moment.

I'm confused again, is he calling Dahntay a win now move? Or is that sarcasm, I can't tell?

However you are not going to get me to argue against trading Troy Murphy so I think we are as one on this topic.


5. And Dahntay Jones finally reveals himself as exactly who we thought he was. Nothing against Dahntay, because he works his tail off, but he's Dahntay Jones. For some reason, Larry Bird thought Dahntay Jones could become Dahntay Jones!

Again this is just hyperbole for the sake of hyperbole. Dahntay Jones was paid exactly what a veteran player in the NBA who is a role player is paid. It might have been for a longer period of time than one might like but as he even said himself it is a reasonable contract that makes him easy to move down the road as part of another deal.

Also while you don't draft for need, you really do try and sign free agents for need and last season it was concluded by everone from Bird to Boomer that we needed to improve our defense. Well D. Jones was the best perimeter defender they could find and filled a need.

This season has not gone as planned and there are any number of reasons you can state that will make sense but Bird did have every intention of trying to make the playoffs this year. To that end he wanted to add a tough defensive minded veteran wing defender who was a good character off of the court but had a little bit of attitude on the court. As far as I can tell he found it.

Sadly though with our coaching staff that is not the top priority.

SkipperZ
01-13-2010, 06:55 PM
So Bird must have called Kelly and told him "man I thought dahntay would be better and I was really hoping he'd be the free agent pickup that vaulted us into the playoffs". Either that or Kelly is pulling assumptions out of his ***. Again.

Why else do you give a player like Dahntay Jones a 4 year contract. Larry doesnt have to call anyone and tell them anything. This could be easily inferred from his actions. All of Larry's moves in the past 3 years have been geared towards making the playoffs now.

FOUR years.

i have no problem with Dahntay Jones aside from a couple dirty plays here and there. Its just that he belongs on the Nuggets or Spurs or Celtics. Not the indiana pacers.

ChicagoJ
01-13-2010, 06:58 PM
Thank you.


I'm not sure he makes any sense here, so he is saying no matter what Jones does it does not matter in the overall record?It didn't matter in the overall record. We've stunk whether he's been on the court or not.


If he was playing great or good would the record indicate it?Well, no.


I'm not sure where we are going with this either. Did he think that we thought we were going to sign a low priced free agent and he would turn into LeBron James? We are getting exactly what we paid for. I don't think anyone looked at Jones last season and said "man this guy could score 18 ppg given the chance". They looked at him and said fierce competator, hard nosed defender and an overall effort guy.

I don't see where this is a suprise to anyone.

PD does not seem to agree with you. There is still some "we found our second or third best player at the bottom of the FA heap" sentiment going on. Come on.


-snip-
I'm confused again, is he calling Dahntay a win now move? Or is that sarcasm, I can't tell?

Yes. Dahntay's value in this league is as the "he's the guy that can lift a 55-win team into the Final Four". Like he did in Denver. He's not a particuarly good fit on a talent-depleted team like the Pacers because he's also a talent-depleted effort player. Yes, we need effort. But we're losing games because the talent level is low. Bird made a "win-now" move with a lottery-bound roster. That's silly.


Dahntay Jones was paid exactly what a veteran player in the NBA who is a role player is paid. It might have been for a longer period of time than one might like but as he even said himself it is a reasonable contract that makes him easy to move down the road as part of another deal.

And hopefully he's tossed into whatever deal(s) we can make at the deadline. He's not a cornerstone piece and his future is not particuarly bright. There's still a chance for Bird, but he's got to work 365 days of the year, not just on draft day. He's got a chance to move some of these guys -- and the guys haven't exactly earned maximum value but getting equal value (EDIT, or "any" value, for that matter) for them is okay too.

ChicagoJ
01-13-2010, 07:17 PM
Chicago J,
The writers points are very near sighted and one sided. IMO, all he wants to do is justify a past criticism which doesn't look at the emergence of healthy players to the rotation which made D jones the odd man out.

Regardless, was the past criticism valid or not? The hype was that Jones would bring the defense that got this roster to the playoffs. At least two people on the planet disagreed then and now (Kelly and me). It doesn't matter that "nobody" could lead this roster to the playoffs. Don't waste any money on an already-at-thier-ceiling veteran. Take a gamble on a young player. We should have found two more Solomon Joneses instead of Dahntay and Watson.

Granville Fleming
01-13-2010, 09:16 PM
the thing that is discouraging is that he was brought here for defense and at least in our system, i'm not that impressed.

Pacerized
01-13-2010, 09:29 PM
If Larry thought at worst Jones is easily traded, he's right.
At worst Jones is an above average defender and solid bench player making 2.5 mil. for 3 years after this. I don't see a problem with his contract.

Anthem
01-13-2010, 11:32 PM
Don't waste any money on an already-at-thier-ceiling veteran. Take a gamble on a young player. We should have found two more Solomon Joneses instead of Dahntay and Watson.
I'm not sure how many young guys you can work into the rotation, honestly.

I have liked and continue to like the idea of getting solid professional veterans to round out the team... guys that understand how the league works and can exemplify professionalism to the kiddies.

Look at Hibbert, for example. The two guys you're not interested in are the two guys he credits the most with his strong play.

ChicagoJ
01-13-2010, 11:47 PM
I'm not sure how many young guys you can work into the rotation, honestly.

An 8th/9th man is barely making it into the rotation anyway. What's the difference?

Now, if the idea is that Dahntay is great to have on the team during practice, then that's a completely different story.

Gamble1
01-14-2010, 12:22 PM
Regardless, was the past criticism valid or not? The hype was that Jones would bring the defense that got this roster to the playoffs. At least two people on the planet disagreed then and now (Kelly and me). It doesn't matter that "nobody" could lead this roster to the playoffs. Don't waste any money on an already-at-thier-ceiling veteran. Take a gamble on a young player. We should have found two more Solomon Joneses instead of Dahntay and Watson.
Hmmmmm... I can't speak for anyone else but I thought that Watson, D Jones, S Jones and a recommitted effort from Granger on the defensive end would help us get into the playoffs. I didn't look at D. Jones a defensive savior but just a guy who could give Rush and Granger a breather on the defensive end.

Seriously did anyone post that they thought we were getting the next Ariza or Posey or Artest for 1.7 million a year. I don't think so.

To your point that we should have taken a risk on young players... do you have a list. I mean its hard enough for teams to evaluate talent in the draft let alone some guy who has been riding the pine in NBA. I mean should we take a already young inexperienced team and just make sure that we have a complete lack of veteran leadership. Who does that? The Nets....

ChicagoJ
01-14-2010, 01:04 PM
I mean should we take a already young inexperienced team and just make sure that we have a complete lack of veteran leadership. Who does that? The Nets....

We've still got veterans... Murphy, Dunleavy, Granger, Ford, Foster. Now, they may not give much leadership, but I'm pretty sure this is not the youngest team in the league.

Yep... we're 12th-youngest.

http://rpiratings.com/NBA.html

At least we aren't NJ!! They're slightly older and worse than us. Talk about no upside. Ouch.

Several of the teams "younger" than us are ahead of us in the standings.

Mourning
01-14-2010, 01:24 PM
Maybe we can trade him during the offseason as filler with one of our desireable expirings. It would take quite a bit to make up for him, but hopefully some teams really like Troy.

WOW! :wtf: Talking about a one-dimensional (meaning: negative) view of a player. I actually like Dahntay a lot and I think he's doing pretty good.

Gamble1
01-14-2010, 02:46 PM
We've still got veterans... Murphy, Dunleavy, Granger, Ford, Foster. Now, they may not give much leadership, but I'm pretty sure this is not the youngest team in the league.

Yep... we're 12th-youngest.

http://rpiratings.com/NBA.html

At least we aren't NJ!! They're slightly older and worse than us. Talk about no upside. Ouch.

Several of the teams "younger" than us are ahead of us in the standings.
You say that we should have passed on D. Jones and Watson while obtaining younger unproven players because there "might" be a diamond in the rough. Seriously who does that in the NBA. Name one team that has built themselves into a perennial playoff team with such a strategy. We are 12th in age and 7th in experience. So with your approach I take it we should be like ranked 1-2 in the NBA in experience because we "might" find some talent with the solomon jonesss of the world.

Lets look at most experienced teams.

Denver Nuggets
Boston Celtics
San Antonio Spurs
Los Angeles Lakers
Orlando Magic
Dallas Mavericks

I take that list over the youngest and most inexperieced list.

Lets also all together forget that Indy will not support an approach like that. What little fans we have we would lose and with them the franchise.

Unclebuck
01-14-2010, 03:05 PM
I think the approach of getting only young players and building that way has been proven to fail. Teams that tried it eventually change course and eventually acquire veterans. The Bulls tried it and it failed, they bailed on Brand and and then also Curry and Chandler. Right now the Grizzlies are trying it and we'll see how that works out. The Thunder are being somewhat successful at it but in order to move from being a .500 team to a 50 win team they will need to acquire some proven NBA winning veterans..

ChicagoJ
01-14-2010, 04:20 PM
I'm saying get a young player on a one-year contract and try him in that role. If he fails, so what. If he develops, Bonanza! This is the equivalent of putting a second-round draft pick into the rotation. That's exactly what we are doing with AJ Price and Solomon Jones. Adding Dahntay did not change "the veteran status" of this team any more than it changed the overall talent level of this team. Adding Solomon did not change the "young/inexperienced status" of this team any more that it changed the overall talent level of this team.

Its not like Dahntay is doing all that much positive that can't be replaced.

Or just sign Dahntay to a one-year contract. Nobody else was going to offer him a multiyear deal. And the reason is obvious by now.

This team needs an improvement in its top-five overall players. For Rush, Hibbert and Tyler, that will (may?) come with experience. Will they develop far enough to take this team deep in the playoffs? Stay tuned. Its too early to tell. Bringing in either a veteral eighth/ninth man or an inexperienced eighth/ninth man doesn't change this team at all.

We're talking about an inexpensive backup swingman. There are plenty of those in the market every summer.

OrganizedConfusion
01-14-2010, 06:13 PM
I think the approach of getting only young players and building that way has been proven to fail. Teams that tried it eventually change course and eventually acquire veterans.

What about the Hawks, Nuggets, Jazz, and Blazers? These teams have had success building around a solid young core.

ChicagoJ
01-14-2010, 06:50 PM
What about the Hawks, Nuggets, Jazz, and Blazers? These teams have had success building around a solid young core.

Forget that, look the local blueprint - the 1987-1993 Pacers. Yes, they plateaued at 0.500 for a while and did make important roster moves from that young core, but that was the foundation of the mid/ late 90s contending Pacers teams.

Perhaps the game has gotten more physical since then. Perhaps expansion has diluted each team's talent base. So what? Those things don't change the validity of how to build a team through the draft. Especially a small market team that is never going to attract major free agents and is not a major player in making trades.

Gamble1
01-14-2010, 06:51 PM
I'm saying get a young player on a one-year contract and try him in that role. If he fails, so what. If he develops, Bonanza! This is the equivalent of putting a second-round draft pick into the rotation. That's exactly what we are doing with AJ Price and Solomon Jones. Adding Dahntay did not change "the veteran status" of this team any more than it changed the overall talent level of this team. Adding Solomon did not change the "young/inexperienced status" of this team any more that it changed the overall talent level of this team.

Its not like Dahntay is doing all that much positive that can't be replaced.

Or just sign Dahntay to a one-year contract. Nobody else was going to offer him a multiyear deal. And the reason is obvious by now.

This team needs an improvement in its top-five overall players. For Rush, Hibbert and Tyler, that will (may?) come with experience. Will they develop far enough to take this team deep in the playoffs? Stay tuned. Its too early to tell. Bringing in either a veteral eighth/ninth man or an inexperienced eighth/ninth man doesn't change this team at all.

We're talking about an inexpensive backup swingman. There are plenty of those in the market every summer.
Well here is where I disagree with you. The signings of D Jones and Watson have improved our veteran status on this team. I'll give you an example from last nights game. Price against Nash defensively was terrible but Watson against Nash was a much better play from a coaching stand point down the stretch. If we had nothing but unproven 2nd round talent subbing in then we would have lost that game.

I mean how many 2nd round FA signings really pan out to be anything but the 9th man off the bench. 1/50? You want to take 6 or more 2nd round talent level guys and hope they turn into a decent signing. I am telling you fans and the media would laugh at Brid for doing that.

ChicagoJ
01-14-2010, 07:00 PM
I'd still take Jarrett Jack over the goofballs we signed to try to replace him -- if mental toughness, veteran status and leadership were the goals.

That wasn't the goal. The goal was to get a cheaper roster, and signing three guys instead of one allowed us to have a full roster for less money.

Dahntay Jones was a first round pick (20th), and he's barely been an eighth man in the NBA. Once you get outside of the top ten/fifteen (in a deep draft), they're all long-shots.