PDA

View Full Version : Is Jeff Done?



Trader Joe
10-09-2010, 04:44 PM
Well?

I appreciate all the times he's given us, but he was completely ineffective last night against Orlando. I don't think he has anything left in the tank.

I imagine we will go with a small lineup tonight against Houston with Danny at the 4. I think we should remove him the rotation. Unfortunately, I will probably consider any minutes Jeff gets this season to be wasted minutes.

ChristianDudley
10-09-2010, 04:46 PM
After his contract is up, I would assume he'd retire from playing, but probably not from basketball completely.

Hicks
10-09-2010, 04:47 PM
Really? Seven minutes of preseason video and we have this thread? Really?

Trader Joe
10-09-2010, 04:48 PM
Really? Seven minutes of preseason video and we have this thread? Really?

Was he effective last year when he played? At all?

I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt that it was injuries, but he did not improve last night over time the way Tyler did.

This thread isn't just about last night, it's been floating in my head since last season, but I wanted to see if he maybe we'd see some spark from him now that he was healthy, but I'll be honest, he didn't even look like he was enjoying himself out there last night.

31andonly
10-09-2010, 04:52 PM
I'm sure there'll be enough moments again this season in which I'm proud and thankful to have this guy on my team.

The second preseason game...:rolleyes:

Deadshot
10-09-2010, 04:53 PM
I really don't mind if Jeff takes it easy right now. Dwight was what finished him last year. Give him time, he's coming back from a serious injury. He might not play in the capacity that we've seen him at before, but he'll be another big body we can put on the floor at some point this season.

Trader Joe
10-09-2010, 04:57 PM
Ok, apparently everyone missed the terrible season Jeff had last year even before he was hurt.

Guess I'm just jumping the gun. He was the exact same Jeff Foster we've always known when healthy last season or something like that. Sorry, I suggested that perhaps Jeff should be used as one of our suits this season.

Major Cold
10-09-2010, 04:58 PM
There were times last year when Foster and Tyler played solid frontcourt defense together. Now if the questions was:

If Jeff has another injury plagued season, coupled with a smaller role, will he retire after this year? Then I think it would have been taken better.

BRushWithDeath
10-09-2010, 05:08 PM
Yes. And the answer was the same 2 years ago.

spazzxb
10-09-2010, 05:20 PM
i think he is still trying to work off the second ugly burger.

1984
10-09-2010, 05:22 PM
Well?


I hope not. Now the Roy has cemented himself as the starter Jeff can become the role player he was always meant to be. It would be unfortunate to lose him when we actually have depth at the center position.

I for one will not rule a player as "done" until he has played a portion of the season.

1984
10-09-2010, 05:24 PM
Yes. And the answer was the same 2 years ago.

It's hard to be the type of player Jeff is while playing next to a stretch four like Murph. I think your statement is not accurate.

vnzla81
10-09-2010, 06:37 PM
Yes. And the answer was the same 2 years ago.
You can also say the same thing about Dunleavy, he is been done for a long time, at best he should be a bench player not an starter.
I actually think that Foster,Dun and Posey are done.

Kemo
10-09-2010, 06:55 PM
What is it with Dwight Howard injuring our players??

last year it was Foster.. now it is McRoberts .. I mean WTF?!?

BlueNGold
10-09-2010, 07:16 PM
At 33, soon to be 34, Foster is on the backside of his career, but that does not make him done. Also, basing this on one game during the preseason is way too early to make that call. However, this season will tell us a lot about him. His game may not age gracefully...and when he's done I think it will be obvious to us all.

BlueNGold
10-09-2010, 07:17 PM
Also, Dunleavy may have a really good season. I don't equate an injury with being done. Not for a 30 year old player who appears to now be 100% healthy.

Eleazar
10-09-2010, 07:51 PM
Jeff is defiantly in the last few seasons of his career, but just because he isn't what he used to be doesn't mean he can't be a good back-up. Yes, he may start slow because he missed so much of last year, but comparing his progress to someone almost 10 years younger than him is absurd. Jeff is at the age where it takes longer to both heal from an injury and to return to form. If he hasn't shown any improvement by the time the season actually starts then I will be worried. Until then I still think he can still give us one more decent year.

Trophy
10-09-2010, 08:18 PM
Jeff is still great to have because of his experience and the fact that he can do all of the little things.

Pacerized
10-09-2010, 09:16 PM
That's not a reasonable question at this point. Jeff is a vet that shouldn't even be playing much in the preseason, just as JOB is using him now.
You don't think Danny has lost his scoring touch already just because of a couple of meaningless preseason games.

Trader Joe
10-09-2010, 09:17 PM
I'm not just basing this off the preseason...he was terrible last year before he got hurt.

Hicks
10-09-2010, 09:40 PM
Well, you didn't say that going in. You said "...he was completely ineffective last night against Orlando. I don't think he has anything left in the tank," which makes it look like you're reacting to yesterday's game before anything else.

speakout4
10-09-2010, 09:40 PM
I'm not just basing this off the preseason...he was terrible last year before he got hurt.
I would be interested in knowing how many teams would like to have this guy with his salary, experience, skills, and contract. We don't need Jeff to be a starter anymore.

pacer4ever
10-09-2010, 10:03 PM
I would be interested in knowing how many teams would like to have this guy with his salary, experience, skills, and contract. We don't need Jeff to be a starter anymore.

all the teams that think they can make the playoffs. i wanted him out there more 2nite at least he gives energy. Which every NBA team needs a guy who has a nonstop motor

PacersPride
10-09-2010, 10:10 PM
i dont think he is done, and he is one of my favorite pacers on this team. however, he is not going to get 30+ minutes a game any longer, in spot minutes he can be very effective. and if completely healthy maybe more.

dont underestimate fosters leadership for this young team.

speakout4
10-09-2010, 10:43 PM
i dont think he is done, and he is one of my favorite pacers on this team. however, he is not going to get 30+ minutes a game any longer, in spot minutes he can be very effective. and if completely healthy maybe more.

dont underestimate fosters leadership for this young team.
Foster is the least of this teams concerns. Let him be for now and make a decision on him next season whether to give him a new contract strictly as a backup..People now need to think of him as a role player. I like him for ~12-15 minutes/game.

Trader Joe
10-09-2010, 10:47 PM
Well, you didn't say that going in. You said "...he was completely ineffective last night against Orlando. I don't think he has anything left in the tank," which makes it look like you're reacting to yesterday's game before anything else.

Agreed, I should have been more clear in the original post.

Trader Joe
10-09-2010, 10:48 PM
all the teams that think they can make the playoffs. i wanted him out there more 2nite at least he gives energy. Which every NBA team needs a guy who has a nonstop motor

Jeff doesn't have a non-stop motor anymore.

BringJackBack
10-09-2010, 10:55 PM
I think he's lost his consistency, and he's fragile, but he's good for 15 minutes off the bench. After watching our backup centers last year, I don't care if Jeff plays with a back brace, I still want him to be my backup center.

Trader Joe
10-09-2010, 11:05 PM
I'd be fine with that, but right now we're playing him at the 4? I hope that stops once Josh and Tyler are both healthy. I don't think Jeff and Roy work together at all, way too easy to double team Roy.

Unclebuck
10-09-2010, 11:16 PM
jeff looked good tonight in Houston. he was rebounding well, and moving his feet very well on defenser. he looked like jeff to me. Just can't expect him to do it for long stretches

Brad8888
10-09-2010, 11:33 PM
jeff looked good tonight in Houston. he was rebounding well, and moving his feet very well on defenser. he looked like jeff to me. Just can't expect him to do it for long stretches

Agreed. With Jeff in the game, the Pacers were able to hang with the Rockets due to his eating the Rockets alive on the offensive glass if nothing else.

joeyd
10-10-2010, 01:05 AM
I'm not just basing this off the preseason...he was terrible last year before he got hurt.

I'm not understanding what you are basing this statement on. Foster is a defensive presence, specifically a rebounder, and is an especially effective on the offensive boards. He was leading the team in that category, I believe, when he was injured. An analysis of the numbers from last season, when compared to his career average, reveals no significant differences in his key categories. I would be thrilled if he could pick up where he left off last season. Even with Roy's expected improvement, I would not be surprised, if Foster leads the team in ORB/minute and TRB/minute for the time he plays. Tyler was also right up there in ORB last year before his ear infection. When I think of the offensive rebounding possibilities and the potential for improvement over last year with everyone healthy, it gives me cause for optimism. Jeff, even at 12-15 minutes per game, gives me cause for optimism.

BringJackBack
10-10-2010, 01:17 AM
jeff looked good tonight in Houston. he was rebounding well, and moving his feet very well on defenser. he looked like jeff to me. Just can't expect him to do it for long stretches

I thought he looked good too.

When Jordan Hill blew right past Foster when he first came in I thought, "Oh ****, its all over." Then he got like 5 ORB.

He still got it. Jeff may not be as consistent anymore, but he's still reliable as a backup center.

I hope that he doesn't have anymore back problems and we can sign him for one more year at the minumum to give him a chance to have one good season with a good team assuming everyone gets better and everyones healthy.

I swear, Foster had the worst decade he could possibly have with our Pacers. He starts out and gets no time with a very good team, that team blows up for reasons that I will not bring up, and then is subject to criticism because the team isn't good.

Jeff has been our solid rock.

Wage
10-10-2010, 01:36 AM
Magic 8 Ball says..... "check back later."

MLB007
10-10-2010, 02:46 AM
Was he effective last year when he played? At all?

I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt that it was injuries, but he did not improve last night over time the way Tyler did.

This thread isn't just about last night, it's been floating in my head since last season, but I wanted to see if he maybe we'd see some spark from him now that he was healthy, but I'll be honest, he didn't even look like he was enjoying himself out there last night.

Well I'd call this game pretty effective.

12/2 @Sac
L 110-105 27 3-7 .429 0-0
-- 0-1 .000 0 1 1 4 10 8 18 3 6

That's 18 rebounds by the way.
And you DO know he had a bad back all year, even before he stopped playing.
Going to take a bit to get back in the flow I reckon.

Mr_Smith
10-10-2010, 08:07 AM
I'm not counting Jeff out yet, its only one game...Hopefully when he plays more, we can see him do those little things again which made him valuable (put backs, offensive rebounds, etc).

BRushWithDeath
10-10-2010, 10:23 AM
Jeff doesn't have a non-stop motor anymore.

There's such a fine line between a non-stop and non-start motor now a days.

Trader Joe
10-10-2010, 10:26 AM
There's such a fine line between a non-stop and non-start motor now a days.

Well, you know with advances in technology and what not...

Justin Tyme
10-10-2010, 02:34 PM
I would be interested in knowing how many teams would like to have this guy with his salary, experience, skills, and contract. We don't need Jeff to be a starter anymore.


And I hope one of those teams would like to have the Foster you just described... and soon.

Foster played 17 games last year for 6 mil which comes out at about $353,000 per game. Bird giving Foster a 12.6 mil extension was a major blunder of epic proportions. I said that when he gave Foster the extension.. b4 his injury. Bird way overpaid for an aging 1 trick player with an injury filled history. How many games will Foster be out this year due to injury with a 6.6 mil salary owed him??

One of those teams that would like to have a guy like Foster, PLEASE step up quickly while he's still healthy enough for the Pacers to trade!

MLB007
10-10-2010, 06:27 PM
And I hope one of those teams would like to have the Foster you just described... and soon.

Foster played 17 games last year for 6 mil which comes out at about $353,000 per game. Bird giving Foster a 12.6 mil extension was a major blunder of epic proportions. I said that when he gave Foster the extension.. b4 his injury. Bird way overpaid for an aging 1 trick player with an injury filled history. How many games will Foster be out this year due to injury with a 6.6 mil salary owed him??

One of those teams that would like to have a guy like Foster, PLEASE step up quickly while he's still healthy enough for the Pacers to trade!

Jeff is a double digit rebounder on a team that gets hammered on the boards AND just traded the other best rebounder on the team.
You should try looking at the WHOLE picture. :p

beast23
10-10-2010, 07:09 PM
Jeff is a double digit rebounder on a team that gets hammered on the boards AND just traded the other best rebounder on the team.
You should try looking at the WHOLE picture. :pJeff is also the elder veteran on a team that begs for example and leadership. Even if Jeff is only able to provide 15 minutes a game of rebounding and very good defense, that will serve as an excellent example for our young front court players of how those aspects of the game should be played.

Considering that he is on the final year of his contract, the positive influence he will have on our young players will be well worth the money.

Justin Tyme
10-10-2010, 07:46 PM
Jeff is a double digit rebounder on a team that gets hammered on the boards AND just traded the other best rebounder on the team.
You should try looking at the WHOLE picture. :p


I've been looking at the WHOLE picture for years!!!!!!

Lets look at Sir Foster's stats.

Career... 5 pts & 7 rebounds at 21 min a game.
08-09 ... 6 pts & 7 rebounds at 25 min a game. Played 74 games.

Sure there are games in the past where gets double digit rebounds, but there are more games he gets less than the 7 rebs he averages. Thus the 7 per game average. Only 3 of those 7 rebounds are offensive rebounds. (I thought it was higher than that.)

He shoots a career average 61% FT. IOW, he misses 2 for every 3 he hits.

Foster misses more bunnies in a season than Elmer Fudd does. His "D" is average at best and at 34 it isn't going to get any better. He's been working on a mid-range game that has never materialized for 10 years. He'll be 34 in a few months and posters are talking about him just playing 15 minutes a game this season while making 6.6 mil. Sorry, but Foster is overpaid for what he can contribute. Reality is that Foster's greatest asset to the Pacers is his expiring contract or in a trade... not what he he'll produce on the court.

Justin Tyme
10-10-2010, 07:54 PM
Jeff is also the elder veteran on a team that is begs for example and leadership. Even if Jeff is only able to provide 15 minutes a game of rebounding and very good defense, that will serve as an excellent example for our young front court players of how those aspects of the game should be played.

Considering that he is on the final year of his contract, the positive influence he will have on our young players will be well worth the money.


He's in a the final year of a contract that shouldn't have been. The influence Foster will have on younger players isn't worth 6.6 mil, anymore than the influence he had on them last year at 6 mil.

Anthem
10-10-2010, 08:03 PM
Jeff is a double digit rebounder
No, he's not.

I like Jeff. But he's not a double-digit rebounder.

Mackey_Rose
10-10-2010, 08:24 PM
As a long time Pacer fan I appreciate the years of service he has given both to the team and the community, but his time has come and gone. It's time for both parties to move on to other things.

Putnam
10-10-2010, 08:31 PM
Jeff is a double digit rebounder



No, he's not. I like Jeff. But he's not a double-digit rebounder.


Well, gee. Foster has pulled in 10 or more rebounds 182 times in his career.


I consider myself a virile adult male though I've only fathered four children.




.

Mackey_Rose
10-10-2010, 08:36 PM
Well, gee. Foster has pulled in 10 or more rebounds 182 times in his career.

It's time for this franchise to look to the future. Foster's effectiveness is in the past.

beast23
10-10-2010, 10:08 PM
As a long time Pacer fan I appreciate the years of service he has given both to the team and the community, but his time has come and gone. It's time for both parties to move on to other things.
I agree that Jeff Foster is not the player right now that he was 5 years ago.

However, I don't believe the time has yet come for both parties to move on. That will actually transpire in about 7 months. There is no way Bird moves Foster, he is far too loyal to those that have shown long-term loyalty to him... and Larry and Jeff go back a lot of years.

Many of you are right that Jeff could probably be included in a trade at the trade deadline, but by then the Pacers will probably only owe about 2 to 2-1/2M on his contract. That's a drop in the bucket to be spent to enable Jeff to retire a Pacer.

I've seen statistics on points and rebounds mentioned. The Pacers have always elected to keep Jeff, knowing that he would never be a decent scorer. They did know that he would always be a very good rebounder... which can be evaluated somewhat through statistical means. So, that really means that Jeff has been retained a Pacer through the years for things that are not measured through statistics. The intangible things. Knowing how go defend the low post. Knowing how to defend the PnR. Knowing how to set screens (or at least better screens than anyone other than Dale Davis). Keeping balls alive on the boards. Deflections in the paint. These are things Jeff still does, although probably not as well as he once did. But these are things that a lot of our younger players don't do.

What I want is for the Pacers to win as many games as possible. And, I am pretty certain that my thinking would align with that of the Pacer brass if I were to say that in order to win as many games as possible this season with the personnel we currently have, that Jeff Foster would play an important role in maximizing that.

It's kind of funny, really. Some of the folks that want Jeff gone are some of the same folks that want our youngsters and rookies to be played over the older vets at all costs. That reminds me of a lot of the younger employees that I have mentored through the years. They blame the older employees for their own lack of upwards mobility.

Pacerized
10-10-2010, 10:21 PM
We can all look back at Jeff's career stats. In his best season he averaged 9.1 boards in 25 min, in 07/08 he averaged 8.7 boards in 24.5 min., so his average is distorted somewhat by having several years where his minutes were way down. Jeff has never had a season where he's been a double digit rebounder but if given the minutes he easily could have. He's always been an above average defender.
I don't know how he'll recover this year so it's difficult to project what he'll bring. If he fully recovers then I think you could see a year like he's had in the past or possibly his best year yet, in which case he'd earn his money.
If he only plays 15-20 min. per game and averages 6-7 boards, I'd still say he's earned his money and I hope we sign him to a lower contract until he's ready to retire. If he's used for 7-10 minutes per game he obviously won't be earning his money.
I want to see our young players given heavy minutes but there's nothing wrong with having a few vets get some time in the mix as well. Jeff is the perfect player to fill that role and I think Posey may also be a good fit. If not we'll have to bring in some other vets to balance things out, or plan to lose for a few more years.

joeyd
10-10-2010, 10:55 PM
My thoughts were more or less expressed eloquently by Pacerized. Let's not blame a guy for negotiating for all that he could. And while Jeff is not a double-digit rebounder if you look at his rebounds per game, he would be a double-digit rebounder if rebounding stats were adjusted per 48 minutes. Nearly every team has or has had a "specialist." I view Jeff as a specialist with other intangibles thrown in for good measure (e.g., leadership, team player).

MLB007
10-11-2010, 12:45 AM
No, he's not.

I like Jeff. But he's not a double-digit rebounder.

At 30 minutes he is.

Putnam
10-11-2010, 08:44 AM
There's a lot of different ideas floating here:


Jeff is on the downside of his career, but he's probably still got some good games left in him. There's no reason to fear that he'll keep Hansbrough and McRoberts on the bench, because Foster is going to need lots of rest. If he plays 30 minutes one night, he'll probably sit the next . . . if not the next five. I don't suppose he'll play 30 minutes even once, though.

The Pacers problem is still a dearth of talent -- not a bottleneck of talent.

Foster won't finish his career with > 10 rebounds per game. But that points to the deficiency in career averages as a measure. As noted above, Foster has pulled down 10 or more rebounds over 180 times in his career. That's a lot. We'll remember him for his rebounding prowess, his hustle, and for being the token milk-drinker on the bad-guys rosters of the dark days.

He'll retire as a rebounding phenomenon, and it would be nice if he retires a Pacer. Bird likes his players better than the fans do, and Bird will probably do right by Foster. And anyway, letting Foster's contract end with the Pacers is also good for the team.

duke dynamite
10-11-2010, 09:07 AM
That was his first game back. I'll give him a few more before I recommend he throws in the towel.

ChicagoJ
10-11-2010, 10:14 PM
Well, you didn't say that going in. You said "...he was completely ineffective last night against Orlando. I don't think he has anything left in the tank," which makes it look like you're reacting to yesterday's game before anything else.

Given that he wasn't impressive at all last season, I assumed people would understand Joe's first post as saying, "do we even have any evidence right now that he can still play the game at the NBA level?"

Referencing a handful of good defensive plays from last season is really quite a reach for dismissing the entire premise.

I'm sure he's given his best efforts to the Pacers. Just as true, however, was the fact that the team needed somebody different than Jeff to play a more physical role all those years. Not Jeff's fault he was soft, but Jeff's softness was a problem for the rest of the team. And since he's not as quick anymore, we're seeing that he can be fragile when he does try to play physical ball.

At his peak, his career high in minutes was 26 mpg. He was in the starting lineup, but not really playing the role (minutes) of a starter. Is he even showing a reason that he should be a ninth or tenth man this upcoming season? (I have no idea, I've got too much going on right now to tune into the preseason games.) That's a fair question.

ChicagoJ
10-11-2010, 10:22 PM
We can all look back at Jeff's career stats. In his best season he averaged 9.1 boards in 25 min, in 07/08 he averaged 8.7 boards in 24.5 min., so his average is distorted somewhat by having several years where his minutes were way down. Jeff has never had a season where he's been a double digit rebounder but if given the minutes he easily could have. He's always been an above average defender.

That's just not true. His coaches understood that he was a useful rebounder in limited minutes. He also was subject to the law of diminishing returns. His Rebounds-per-minute were probably maximized at 22-25 mpg. Play him less (when he was in his prime) and you were not maximizing his contributions. Play him more, and his limitation are on display for everyone to see. And... one of those limitations was that he got rebounds because of great quickness, not great strength or great positioning. His "knack for the ball" generally entailed his ability to pursue it/ chase it down faster than most other PFs or Cs. You stretch his minutes to 30, 32 per game and I'll bet he's still not a double-figure rebounder and his RPM stat falls back to the rest of the pack. And he's burned too many minutes and his quickness suffers.

If it were so easy to just extrapolate players so they could achieve their "per-36" numbers in the real world...

joeyd
10-12-2010, 01:55 AM
Given that he wasn't impressive at all last season, I assumed people would understand Joe's first post as saying, "do we even have any evidence right now that he can still play the game at the NBA level?"...Referencing a handful of good defensive plays from last season is really quite a reach for dismissing the entire premise... Is he even showing a reason that he should be a ninth or tenth man this upcoming season?

I'm still not understanding some comments that are being posted. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but opinions are usually supported by facts. Looking at Jeff's game-by-game stats last year, he had one game in which he had 18 total rebounds in 27 minutes played (10 were ORB). This would equate to 32 rebounds over 48 minutes, and by all but those with the highest standards (Dwight Howard-type standards), this would tend to rebut the comment that "he wasn't impressive at all last season." Yes, this was one game, but if you look at all of the games he played last season, if you average the rebounds per 48 minutes, he would have been over 10 rebounds in 10 of the 16 games.

These stats fuel my opinion that there is still something left in the tank and that Jeff could still excel defensively.

Pacerized
10-12-2010, 09:28 AM
That's just not true. His coaches understood that he was a useful rebounder in limited minutes. He also was subject to the law of diminishing returns. His Rebounds-per-minute were probably maximized at 22-25 mpg. Play him less (when he was in his prime) and you were not maximizing his contributions. Play him more, and his limitation are on display for everyone to see. And... one of those limitations was that he got rebounds because of great quickness, not great strength or great positioning. His "knack for the ball" generally entailed his ability to pursue it/ chase it down faster than most other PFs or Cs. You stretch his minutes to 30, 32 per game and I'll bet he's still not a double-figure rebounder and his RPM stat falls back to the rest of the pack. And he's burned too many minutes and his quickness suffers.

If it were so easy to just extrapolate players so they could achieve their "per-36" numbers in the real world...

I'm not talking about playing Jeff 48 minutes. In his best season he averaged 9.1 boards in 25 min. Do you really think he couldn't have increased from 9.1 to 10 boards no matter how many minutes he played. I'd disagree, give him 30 minutes and he'd average over 10 boards even if his rebounds per minute did drop a little.

SMosley21
10-12-2010, 09:40 AM
Basing this on 7 minutes of a preseason game and "last year', in which he played 15 minutes per game over the course of 16 games that he was fighting off a back injury, and still managed to average 5 rebounds and 3 points per game. Sounds reeeeeal reasonable there buddy. :rolleyes:

vnzla81
10-12-2010, 09:46 AM
Is funny to see how many people still live in the past, Jeff Foster was a good rebounder and was a good defender, he is not that anymore let it go people.

Unclebuck
10-12-2010, 09:55 AM
I contend that Jeff is still an excellent defender and an excellent rebounder. The problem is he cannot stay healthy and is not physically able to play extended minutes. I hope he can play in about 50 games this year (maybe sit out most back to back games) and when he does play - play him around 12 minutes. if that will keep him healthy, he can be a huge help to the team - he can still play very effectively

SMosley21
10-12-2010, 10:40 AM
Is funny to see how many people still live in the past, Jeff Foster was a good rebounder and was a good defender, he is not that anymore let it go people.

It's also funny to see how a select few people on here claim to be Pacers fans yet have nothing but negative things to say about the team at every possible chance.

vnzla81
10-12-2010, 11:04 AM
It's also funny to see how a select few people on here claim to be Pacers fans yet have nothing but negative things to say about the team at every possible chance.

I'm sorry, I forgot I was in the Indiana pacers homers webside my bad :rolleyes:

BillS
10-12-2010, 12:29 PM
I'm sorry, I forgot I was in the Indiana pacers homers webside my bad :rolleyes:

Oh, for Pete's sake.

Like the people who defend anything about this team and this coach aren't practically tarred, feathered, and run out of town on a rail.

Of all the possible rejoinders this has to be the forum equivalent of "well, you're just a bunch of poopy-heads."

ChicagoJ
10-12-2010, 12:35 PM
I contend that Jeff is still an excellent defender and an excellent rebounder. The problem is he cannot stay healthy and is not physically able to play extended minutes. I hope he can play in about 50 games this year (maybe sit out most back to back games) and when he does play - play him around 12 minutes. if that will keep him healthy, he can be a huge help to the team - he can still play very effectively

I contend that Jermaine is still an excellent player. The problem is he cannot stay healthy and is not physically able to play extended minutes. I hope he can play in about 50 games this year (maybe sit out most back to back games) and when he does play - play him around 20 minutes. if that will keep him healthy, he can be a huge help to the team - he can still play very effectively

Fixed.

Eleazar
10-12-2010, 12:44 PM
I contend that Jeff is still an excellent defender and an excellent rebounder. The problem is he cannot stay healthy and is not physically able to play extended minutes. I hope he can play in about 50 games this year (maybe sit out most back to back games) and when he does play - play him around 12 minutes. if that will keep him healthy, he can be a huge help to the team - he can still play very effectively

That is about exactly where I stand with Jeff. He can still be effective in limited time as a back-up, but unless he is playing exceptionally well his limit is going to be around 15 minutes.

vnzla81
10-12-2010, 12:48 PM
I contend that Jermaine is still an excellent player. The problem is he cannot stay healthy and is not physically able to play extended minutes. I hope he can play in about 50 games this year (maybe sit out most back to back games) and when he does play - play him around 20 minutes. if that will keep him healthy, he can be a huge help to the team - he can still play very effectively

Fixed.

Nice

joeyd
10-12-2010, 12:52 PM
Is funny to see how many people still live in the past, Jeff Foster was a good rebounder and was a good defender, he is not that anymore let it go people.

Instead of criticizing people without facts to support yourself, why don't you just try to refute the stats I posted a few entries above this one. Bottom line is that his stats were comparable last year to those of his career. If one used your criteria (none, from what I can see) to evaluate talent for this year, then the Heat must be stupid for thinking that LeBron will be anything close to what he was last year. It's funny how some people criticize others for living in the past, when all they are doing is looking at immediate past performance, which is what teams do to a great extent.

BillS
10-12-2010, 01:39 PM
I contend that Jermaine is still an excellent player. The problem is he cannot stay healthy and is not physically able to play extended minutes. I hope he can play in about 50 games this year (maybe sit out most back to back games) and when he does play - play him around 20 minutes. if that will keep him healthy, he can be a huge help to the team - he can still play very effectively

Fixed.

I know the point of this was to be a smarta**, but you point out some differences:

1) 12 minutes per game is a FAR cry from 20 minutes per game.
2) JO does not now and has never seen himself as a role player, and wishes to be paid accordingly.

Trophy
10-12-2010, 01:57 PM
When Jeff is officially done, I wouldn't mind adding him to the coaching staff.

His experience and defensive mindset would be good to coach.

Hopefully we have a different head coach adding Jeff to his staff.

SMosley21
10-12-2010, 02:37 PM
I'm sorry, I forgot I was in the Indiana pacers homers webside my bad :rolleyes:

So unless someone bashes the team constantly and never has a good thing to say about the team or any of it's players, that person is a homer? :shakehead

vnzla81
10-12-2010, 02:58 PM
So unless someone bashes the team constantly and never has a good thing to say about the team or any of it's players, that person is a homer? :shakehead

Was I bashing the team when you answered to my post? No, I was commenting on Jeff Foster and that I think he is done, do I think you are a homer because you got offended for me saying what I think about one of the homers favorite player hell yes, please tell me what positive things you want me to talk about and I would take it into consideration.

SMosley21
10-12-2010, 03:10 PM
Was I bashing the team when you answered to my post? No, I was commenting on Jeff Foster and that I think he is done, do I think you are a homer because you got offended for me saying what I think about one of the homers favorite player hell yes, please tell me what positive things you want me to talk about and I would take it into consideration.

Your logic is completely ridiculous.

By the way, I was referring to basically every post you make on PD when I referenced the bashing that you and a few others on here do.

If you have nothing positive to say or feel about the Pacers, why post here? Why pretend to be a Pacers fan? Could it be that you're just a message board troll? :idea:

Mackey_Rose
10-12-2010, 03:19 PM
Your logic is completely ridiculous.

By the way, I was referring to basically every post you make on PD when I referenced the bashing that you and a few others on here do.

If you have nothing positive to say or feel about the Pacers, why post here? Why pretend to be a Pacers fan? Could it be that you're just a message board troll? :idea:

I think it is entirely unfair to say someone isn't a fan because they choose to acknowledge the negative more than you.

vnzla81
10-12-2010, 03:22 PM
Your logic is completely ridiculous.

By the way, I was referring to basically every post you make on PD when I referenced the bashing that you and a few others on here do.

If you have nothing positive to say or feel about the Pacers, why post here? Why pretend to be a Pacers fan? Could it be that you're just a message board troll? :idea:

So I could only be a true Pacers fan if I only post positive things? Uh?

Trader Joe
10-12-2010, 03:31 PM
Basing this on 7 minutes of a preseason game and "last year', in which he played 15 minutes per game over the course of 16 games that he was fighting off a back injury, and still managed to average 5 rebounds and 3 points per game. Sounds reeeeeal reasonable there buddy. :rolleyes:

It's like some of you are offended that I would even suggest that Jeff Foster might not be a useful player to a young developing team anymore.

docpaul
10-12-2010, 03:34 PM
The data suggest that Fosters per 36 numbers are holding pretty consistent. Yes, he's had injuries which have significantly impeded his ability to play.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/f/fosteje01.html

What I see on this thread is a contingent who believes he's "done" because he's old and "breaking down".

I also see another contingent who point to his continued production and wonder whether a healed Foster is an "as productive" defender.

I think you guys are arguing cross purposes from different perceived angles. There's more fundamental agreement here than disagreement.

The question really is: is he able to get past his injuries?

He says he's feeling as good as he did prior to the injury, so I'm of the opinion that he'll be as productive per 36, but simply won't play as many minutes, which moves him into an "ideal off the bench" role, which he'll meet or exceed expectations for a backup given his skill set. :)

Trader Joe
10-12-2010, 03:35 PM
Your logic is completely ridiculous.

By the way, I was referring to basically every post you make on PD when I referenced the bashing that you and a few others on here do.

If you have nothing positive to say or feel about the Pacers, why post here? Why pretend to be a Pacers fan? Could it be that you're just a message board troll? :idea:

Unfortunately, I realize this thread came at a time where everyone is up O'Brien's backside (over 3 losses in the preseason no less, I mean seriously people who are we the New York Yankees?) and even I, who cannot stand most of Obie's coaching techniques, have had to step up and defend him.
I don't want it to be seen as "bashing" Jeff or the Pacers as I do think it's a legitimate question to ask.

Trader Joe
10-12-2010, 03:36 PM
Maybe, I'm weird but I've always felt per 36 numbers were more useful when assessing young, developing players, and they certainly seem to serve less of a purpose when it becomes clear someone isn't physically capable of even playing 20 minutes a game anymore.

docpaul
10-12-2010, 03:40 PM
Maybe, I'm weird but I've always felt per 36 numbers were more useful when assessing young, developing players, and they certainly seem to serve less of a purpose when it becomes clear someone isn't physically capable of even playing 20 minutes a game anymore.

Shrug... it's just a crude reflection of production/time... I think most are in agreement that Foster is "done" from the perspective of playing large minutes, but not every man on a 15 person roster can play in that capacity. :) However, while he's playing limited minutes, I think he still has the potential to be effective on the boards and overall defensively with the time he has.

It's the circle of life, eh? :) Players have a period of time where they're learning, they have a period of prime production, and then as they get older, they serve in an increasing backup/tutor/mentor role.

The problem in this discussion is that people remember what he did in the past, and if he isn't capable of that role today, then he's no longer valuable. I think it's more nuanced then that.

Hibbert
10-12-2010, 03:58 PM
I'm sure he's given his best efforts to the Pacers. Just as true, however, was the fact that the team needed somebody different than Jeff to play a more physical role all those years. Not Jeff's fault he was soft, but Jeff's softness was a problem for the rest of the team. And since he's not as quick anymore, we're seeing that he can be fragile when he does try to play physical ball.


In what way is Foster soft? He has been a beast in the league for years. Not too many other players come to mind when you combine energy, hustle, and scrappy play. Just recently in a poll done by S.I. Jeff Foster was voted the 10th NBA's dirtiest player. This poll was done by 173 current NBA players. Where do you get Jeff Foster is soft?

vnzla81
10-12-2010, 04:00 PM
In what way is Foster soft? He has been a beast in the league for years. Not too many other players come to mind when you combine energy, hustle, and scrappy play. Just recently in a poll done by S.I. Jeff Foster was voted the 10th NBA's dirtiest player. This poll was done by 173 current NBA players. Where do you get Jeff Foster is soft?

Soft as not been able to stay healthy

Trader Joe
10-12-2010, 04:02 PM
In what way is Foster soft? He has been a beast in the league for years. Not too many other players come to mind when you combine energy, hustle, and scrappy play. Just recently in a poll done by S.I. Jeff Foster was voted the 10th NBA's dirtiest player. This poll was done by 173 current NBA players. Where do you get Jeff Foster is soft?

Does a dirty player now equal a tough player? I disagree with that, and I also disagree with the notion that Jeff is dirty.

Hicks
10-12-2010, 04:12 PM
I think it is entirely unfair to say someone isn't a fan because they choose to acknowledge the negative more than you.

How long have you been reading PD?

We have a few folks who seemingly do nothing other than take shots at the team. And if I'm exaggerating, it's not by much. I wish they'd leave, if that's all they're going to come here to do. It gets annoying.

And I'm not addressing that to anybody who brings more than negativity to the table. There's just some posters who that's literally all that comes to mind when I think about them. Log in, make biting commentary, log out. If that's not you, then this message isn't directed at you.

vnzla81
10-12-2010, 04:20 PM
How long have you been reading PD?

We have a few folks who seemingly do nothing other than take shots at the team. And if I'm exaggerating, it's not by much. I wish they'd leave, if that's all they're going to come here to do. It gets annoying.

And I'm not addressing that to anybody who brings more than negativity to the table. There's just some posters who that's literally all that comes to mind when I think about them. Log in, make biting commentary, log out. If that's not you, then this message isn't directed at you.

I don't think I am as negative as he is making me look, I'm sorry man but at this moment there are not many positive thing to talk about, trust me sometimes I wish we had a good team so we could be positive most of the time.

docpaul
10-12-2010, 04:35 PM
I don't think I am as negative as he is making me look, I'm sorry man but at this moment there are not many positive thing to talk about, trust me sometimes I wish we had a good team so we could be positive most of the time.

Gosh, from my vantage point... being stuck with players that we know aren't part of a winning equation is a reason to be pessimistic.

Living in stasis or moving backwards = reasons to be pessimistic
Forward progress and supporting growth of the team = reasons to be optimistic

Comparatively speaking, helping young talent emerge and deriving value from emerging expiring contracts feels like bliss. :)

I'm getting totally impatient too, but it seems to me that you're so deeply on the darkside, that you wouldn't be able to see the light at the end of the tunnel if it was white hot. :)

Justin Tyme
10-12-2010, 04:41 PM
I think it is entirely unfair to say someone isn't a fan because they choose to acknowledge the negative more than you.


I wholeheartly agree. Just b/c a fan points out something or somethings that isn't positive, no matter how many times they do it, doesn't cast a question on them being a true Pacers fan. To accuse one of being a troll b/c they have some negative issues with what's going on with their Pacers is nothing but laughable!

We all wish nothing but positives could be said about our beloved Pacers, but unfortunately with the way the Pacers have been the last 3 years, it's far easier to see negatives than positives due to there being FAR more negatives than positives. Thus more negativism than positivism at times on certain issues posted. Unfortunately, it's human nature.

joeyd
10-12-2010, 05:35 PM
I love to see threads with contrasting points of view. That's what make this such a great board. But to me, it's how the views are presented. There is nothing wrong with people sharing opinions. But when opinions are presented as if they were facts, or if they are based on inaccurate ideas or statements, or even if they are not very thoughtful posts, then this becomes an issue for some people, myself included.

Foster's stats speak for themselves and warrant his likely inclusion on the final roster. And he appears to be healthy. I find it extremely short-sighted that folks cannot appreciate what he brings to the team, and are so inclined to write the guy off.

Hibbert
10-12-2010, 06:28 PM
Does a dirty player now equal a tough player? I disagree with that, and I also disagree with the notion that Jeff is dirty.

I have seen Jeff deliver some pretty rough fouls throughout his career. He also was given the nickname Feisty Foster to due his hustle and aggressiveness. I don't disagree with the players in the NBA that have actually played against him, I can see him as a dirty type player. He would get under my skin if I had to face him on the court.
Dirty does not exactly mean your tough no but in some cases it can. You don't think he is a tough player either I assume?

ChicagoJ
10-12-2010, 11:01 PM
I'm not talking about dirtiness. That doesn't impress me. And I'm sure Jeff is willing to mix it up and get physical in certain situations - like rebounding.

But I've seen Jeff Foster front the post against almost every center because he can't hold his position. He's a speed player, not a strong player. Never was a strong player. Even when Carlisle was here, he rarely defended the post. After Brad left, we were stuck with two guys that were better suited for the weakside (Jeff and JO) so we either played Jeff in front (and gave up lob passes to dunks/layups at the rim or played JO in the post (and broke down his legs.)

Neither player was strong enough to get the job done. But JO is treated like a villain because he tried to play in the post and failed, while Jeff is treated like a hero for his soft-*** front-the-post defense. He didn't even try to play actual post defense. Well, every once in a while he did. Most legit post players could get great position on him. (And for the record, I agree that Rick did the right thing with Jeff by having him front the post, but that's just soft, period. I've never had a problem with Rick's gameplans, just his communication skills.)

BillS
10-13-2010, 11:50 AM
But JO is treated like a villain because he tried to play in the post and failed, while Jeff is treated like a hero for his soft-*** front-the-post defense. He didn't even try to play actual post defense. Well, every once in a while he did. Most legit post players could get great position on him. (And for the record, I agree that Rick did the right thing with Jeff by having him front the post, but that's just soft, period. I've never had a problem with Rick's gameplans, just his communication skills.)

You really can't be telling me that we should have expected JO and Foster to play the same type of defense, can you?

You also can't be telling me that you thought JO thought of himself as a man who was soft on post defense, right?

One of the huge differences is that Foster plays the way he is expected to play and the way he sees himself playing, while JO was expected due to his body type to play in a different way and had the swagger of a hard post defender while being unable to back it up.

Mr.ThunderMakeR
10-13-2010, 11:57 AM
I think Jeff usded to be one of the best players in the league at shutting down Tim Duncan. I remember Duncan having a lot of bad games against us and getting frustrated by Foster's defense. That requires pretty good post defense.

ChicagoJ
10-13-2010, 10:30 PM
I think Jeff usded to be one of the best players in the league at shutting down Tim Duncan. I remember Duncan having a lot of bad games against us and getting frustrated by Foster's defense. That requires pretty good post defense.

No. He fronted him. That's a matchup that drove Duncan nuts. And its not post defense, either. There were also times, when Pop would get the ball into Manu's hands, that Duncan would score on Foster three or four plays in a row because Manu could put more zip on the entry pass than Parker could. (Parker's lob was easy for Jeff to disrupt.) It was a matchup that we had some success with, but Duncan would still get his 22 and 12 in the end.

And the reality is this,

I think JO is a lot tougher than Foster because he at least tried to dig in and try to establish defensive position and push the offensive player out of the paint. Foster was willing to give up position to play in the passing lanes, which is a high-risk, high-reward "gimmick" defense. I think both of them did exactly what their coaches asked them to do - the coaching staff knew JO was willing to try even though it cost him his knees. Maybe Jeff was willing to try, too. Maybe the coaching staff was smart enough to know that he wasn't tough enough to be successful at it, period, so they went with the gimmick "D".

Day-V
10-13-2010, 10:33 PM
Yes.