PDA

View Full Version : Has Croshere replaced Foster in the starting lineup



Jose Slaughter
11-09-2004, 12:23 AM
In the first 3 games Croshere is averaging 15.7 ppg & 6 boards in just over 38 minutes.

He is shooting the ball very well also. 50% from the field, 40% on his 3's & 91.7 from the foul line.

If Croshere can continue to post numbers in this range, why start Foster when he gets healthy?

Does a front line of O'Neal, Croshere & Artest work better than O'Neal, Foster & Artest?

sweabs
11-09-2004, 12:30 AM
Croshere is too small...and does not bring the same defense that Foster does.

ChicagoJ
11-09-2004, 12:39 AM
Croshere is bigger than Foster. :confused:

And Croshere's post defense is just as good as Foster's, IMO (I know UB disagrees, but that's not the point.) Croshere can't defend SFs on the perimeter, that's the knock against him, defensively. Nobody said he can't defend PFs.

I hope this is how that situation plays out.

Croshere can contribute in lots of ways; Foster is a major liability at times, especially during the fourth quarter.

Anthem
11-09-2004, 12:46 AM
The problem for me isn't the O. The problem is that this means JO has to guard the opposing big man, cause Cro ain't gonna do it.

ChicagoJ
11-09-2004, 12:49 AM
Foster doesn't do that very much either. And when he does, he's fronting the post and JO's still responsible to rotate over if the opposing big guy gets the ball.

Anthem
11-09-2004, 01:05 AM
Against Shaq, maybe. Not against Garnett.

It's all a moot point anyway, once Harrison figures out how to stay on the court.

ChicagoJ
11-09-2004, 01:16 AM
Foster's best, defensively, against Duncan and Garnett - which is fine because JO's still got to guard Olowakandi and Nesterovich since Foster can't do that, anyway.

Regardless, I agree with your point on Harrison. I'm hoping it happens this season. You know me, the eternal optimish. :p

3Ball
11-09-2004, 01:45 AM
One gives you outside shooting and the other gives you rebounding. Otherwise, they are not too dissimilar. It seems to me that Foster is a better compliment to Bender, since JB isn't going to muscle his way inside. Croshere is a better compliment to JO because he can draw the opposing center away from the lane to open things up. They are both useful, but Croshere fits better with the starting PF. Ipso facto, you start Croshere.

All that said, neither is really a star, and I feel much less NERVOUS starting Foster. Just more consistant. Therefore, you start Foster.

Clear?

Arcadian
11-09-2004, 02:00 AM
I'd rather have Foster starting. His quickness helps the team D in rotations and switches.

Suaveness
11-09-2004, 02:45 AM
I disagree, I think Foster's defense within the team defense is much better than with Croshere there. I would much rather have Foster starting.

Anthem
11-09-2004, 02:58 AM
How many more scorers do we need in the starting lineup?

I say start JO, Artest, and Jackson, and put two guys out there that you have to guard but who don't need the ball to be effective. I'd call that JO and Tinsley. Add in the fact that both are capable of doing other things very well (rebounding and directing the offense, respectively) and the fact that both are very good in the team defensive concept (quick hands/feet, closing passing lanes, decent steals numbers) and the fact that both are decent (at worst) individual defenders, and it sounds fine to me.

Then we bring more scorers off the bench... Freddy, Reggie, Bender, and Croshere.

Eindar
11-09-2004, 05:35 AM
I think with Foster being 2 or more weeks away, and JO being back Today, I think the better question is: Has Croshere replaced Pollard in the starting lineup. I say yes!

Will Galen
11-09-2004, 07:48 AM
How many more scorers do we need in the starting lineup?

I say start JO, Artest, and Jackson, and put two guys out there that you have to guard but who don't need the ball to be effective. I'd call that JO and Tinsley. Add in the fact that both are capable of doing other things very well (rebounding and directing the offense, respectively) and the fact that both are very good in the team defensive concept (quick hands/feet, closing passing lanes, decent steals numbers) and the fact that both are decent (at worst) individual defenders, and it sounds fine to me.

Then we bring more scorers off the bench... Freddy, Reggie, Bender, and Croshere.

You have JO in your starting lineup twice.

Will Galen
11-09-2004, 07:50 AM
I think with Foster being 2 or more weeks away, and JO being back Today, I think the better question is: Has Croshere replaced Pollard in the starting lineup. I say yes!

According to the Star and Pacers.com. Pollard will start if his back is ok.

Unclebuck
11-09-2004, 08:41 AM
Foster should start and I would be shocked if he didn't as soon as he is able. I could write a long post detailing all the reasons why jeff should start. But instead, let me just suggest you watch the game tonight. That will demonstrate exactly why Jeff should start

3Ball
11-09-2004, 09:06 AM
How many more scorers do we need in the starting lineup?

I say start JO, Artest, and Jackson, and put two guys out there that you have to guard but who don't need the ball to be effective. I'd call that JO and Tinsley. Add in the fact that both are capable of doing other things very well (rebounding and directing the offense, respectively) and the fact that both are very good in the team defensive concept (quick hands/feet, closing passing lanes, decent steals numbers) and the fact that both are decent (at worst) individual defenders, and it sounds fine to me.

Then we bring more scorers off the bench... Freddy, Reggie, Bender, and Croshere.

You have JO in your starting lineup twice.


That would be my starting lineup as well. You've got to double JO, and with two of them out there, that would only leave one guy to cover the other 3.

That would also answer the starting center question. JO starts as center, and you still have Jermaine O'Neal available to start at PF.

The only person that would suffer in this arrangement is the poor schmuck trying to compile the box score.

ABADays
11-09-2004, 10:12 AM
It seems to me that Foster is a better compliment to Bender, since JB isn't going to muscle his way inside.

I suppose I could live with that for the 1 or 2 games Bender MIGHT play.

Anthem
11-09-2004, 12:26 PM
:laugh: Everyone's a critic.

waxman
11-09-2004, 12:33 PM
Foster.

Youman
11-09-2004, 12:37 PM
he's done great for my fantasy league...I picked him up with J.O. & Foster out and he's been great so go Austin go Austin!!!

Peck
11-09-2004, 02:26 PM
Foster should start and I would be shocked if he didn't as soon as he is able. I could write a long post detailing all the reasons why jeff should start. But instead, let me just suggest you watch the game tonight. That will demonstrate exactly why Jeff should start

In contrast let me suggest you go back & watch the first three games of the season & see why Croshere should start.

We've argued this ad nauseam & the positions just will not change.

All I can say is that Foster has been gone & we have been ticking right along.

Whoever said that with Austin on the floor Jermaine will have to guard the bigger player. He does that anyway. Don't beleive me? Just ask him. Go back & read his interview over the summer when he was begging for another big man. He said he had to guard the post player anyway.

Foster gives you one thing that Croshere doesn't. Lateral speed to cover quick big men.

Other than that he offers nothing. Austin is a better scorer, better passer, better pick setter, is a better post defender (IMO), & is just as good a rebounder.

The fact that Foster is a great rebounder is a MYTH. He's a decent rebounder, but Croshere is just as good.

Also Croshere is a scoring option, he does not demand to score. It's just that when he is on the floor he is not a detriment on the offensive end.

ChicagoJ
11-09-2004, 03:06 PM
In this forum, on this topic, I'm inclined to agree with Peck.

Foster is just way too big of a liability at the offensive end.

Croshere isn't a great defender, but he's not a liability if he's defending PFs and some Cs.

JO was playing some C defensively even when that guy from Purdue (not gonna say his name) was here, and was the full-time defensive C last season. So that notion that Foster is needed to defend C's can be dismissed. If the C is too big for JO to guard effectively, you're not going to put skinny little Foster in front of them.

The biggest drawback on Croshere is that he needs a certain number of minutes to be effective. But when he gets those minutes consistently, he's a guy that comes through in the fourth quarter. That's right, I'm going to use another C word on here that everyone has been avoiding saying - HE'S CLUTCH. He hits FTs, he doesn't turn the ball over, he stretches the defense, rebounds effectively and AGAIN, is not a liability defending PFs and certain Cs.

Suaveness
11-09-2004, 03:15 PM
Foster may be a liability on the offensive end, but this is not an offensive team, it is designed for defense. So in that sense it isn't a problem.

grace
11-09-2004, 04:35 PM
All I can say is that Foster has been gone & we have been ticking right along.

Going with that theory I would assume that means that Jermaine should only come off the bench, Reggie and AJ should never step foot on the floor again and Scott/JB will take turns being hurt.:rolleyes:

Shade
11-09-2004, 06:07 PM
All I can say is that Foster has been gone & we have been ticking right along.

Going with that theory I would assume that means that Jermaine should only come off the bench, Reggie and AJ should never step foot on the floor again and Scott/JB will take turns being hurt.:rolleyes:



No offense to either player, but I could live with Reg and AJ staying on the bench, or only playing very limited minutes.

For my money, Gill is better than AJ anyway. He may not have AJ's offensive abilities, but he's a better pure PG, and that's the biggest need for this team.

Reg is good in spot minutes to swing momentum, but otherwise both Jax and Freddie should be getting those minutes at the 2.

I've been a bit concerned about our defense lately though, especially in the post, so I say Foster. Cro just doesn't seem to add the same presence that Foster does. It's kinda funny -- Foster, Cro, and Polly are all practically the same player.

I'm keeping my fingers crossed for Harrison to develop quickly though. :fingers:

Kegboy
11-09-2004, 06:08 PM
All I can say is that Foster has been gone & we have been ticking right along.

Going with that theory I would assume that means that Jermaine should only come off the bench, Reggie and AJ should never step foot on the floor again and Scott/JB will take turns being hurt.:rolleyes:



:laugh:

Okay, yes, Cro has played very well the first 3 games. However, you need to look at who he's played: Drew Gooden, Raef LaFrentz, and Tyson Chandler. Wow, they're scary. :sarcasm:

UB's right. We are seriously gonna miss Jeff against Minny, or any team with a good frontline, for that matter.
---
Asked afterward if O'Neal's absence contributed to Charlotte's win, Knight bristled.

"What about Primoz? They didn't have Shaq, but we didn't have Primoz," he said.

Peck
11-09-2004, 06:24 PM
Foster may be a liability on the offensive end, but this is not an offensive team, it is designed for defense. So in that sense it isn't a problem.

You have to play two sides of the floor. Defense is only good if you score going the other way.

A person who is a liability on either side of the floor is not good.

Kegboy
11-09-2004, 06:30 PM
Foster may be a liability on the offensive end, but this is not an offensive team, it is designed for defense. So in that sense it isn't a problem.

You have to play two sides of the floor. Defense is only good if you score going the other way.

A person who is a liability on either side of the floor is not good.

*cough*dennisrodman*cough*

*coughcough*benwallace*coughcough*
---
Asked afterward if O'Neal's absence contributed to Charlotte's win, Knight bristled.

"What about Primoz? They didn't have Shaq, but we didn't have Primoz," he said.

Peck
11-09-2004, 06:34 PM
All I can say is that Foster has been gone & we have been ticking right along.

Going with that theory I would assume that means that Jermaine should only come off the bench, Reggie and AJ should never step foot on the floor again and Scott/JB will take turns being hurt.:rolleyes:



:laugh:

Okay, yes, Cro has played very well the first 3 games. However, you need to look at who he's played: Drew Gooden, Raef LaFrentz, and Tyson Chandler. Wow, they're scary. :sarcasm:

UB's right. We are seriously gonna miss Jeff against Minny, or any team with a good frontline, for that matter.
---
Asked afterward if O'Neal's absence contributed to Charlotte's win, Knight bristled.

"What about Primoz? They didn't have Shaq, but we didn't have Primoz," he said.


Yes, let's do look at those players.

Do you think Jeff would have put up 15 ppg. against any of those guys????

Also how many more rebounds do you think he would get? My guess (& that's all any of us would be able to do) is that if he got any more rebounds a game it would be maybe one or two tops.

Does anybody else here beleive that Jeff Foster would have been able to help by taking over & being clutch down the stretch like Austin did in game one? Anybody???

The reason O'Neal has such a hard time scoring is because he usually has two players (sometimes three) hanging on him. That is because they know they do not have to guard Foster.

Peck
11-09-2004, 06:36 PM
Foster may be a liability on the offensive end, but this is not an offensive team, it is designed for defense. So in that sense it isn't a problem.

You have to play two sides of the floor. Defense is only good if you score going the other way.

A person who is a liability on either side of the floor is not good.

*cough*dennisrodman*cough*

*coughcough*benwallace*coughcough*
---
Asked afterward if O'Neal's absence contributed to Charlotte's win, Knight bristled.

"What about Primoz? They didn't have Shaq, but we didn't have Primoz," he said.


*coughcough*michaeljordan*coughcough*

*coughcough*larrybrown*coughcough*

ChicagoJ
11-09-2004, 07:09 PM
Damnit, my reply disappeared...

Let's debunk another myth here...

What makes a good role player? A good role player is a 'complete player' that is willing to accept a role to make the team better.

One-dimensional players do not generally make good role players. The rare occasions are usually *the very best* at the one thing they do well and are at least competent at everything else.

If you've got a one-dimensional player and you make them a role player, guess what you've got - A LIABILITY! A good team/ coach will expose that liability.

Look at the role players on the recent champions. Harper, complete player. Fox, complete player. Horry, complete player. Rodman and Ben Wallace are not known for thier offense, but both of them are far more polished offensively than Jeff, who's also nowhere near the rebounder either of them were.

This is silly.

The appropriate comparison between AC and Foster is this: AC's defense is vastly better than JF's offense. The edge goes to Croshere.

Up next, debunking the myth that the Pacers team is built for defense.

And if my original reply bounces back from cyberspace, sorry about the two posts saying essentially the same thing.

Arcadian
11-09-2004, 07:28 PM
You have to play two sides of the floor. Defense is only good if you score going the other way.

A person who is a liability on either side of the floor is not good.

Dale Davis biggest fan isn't saying that is he?

If Cro was a better fit he would have passed Fopster last year. Why did Rick go with Jeff instead of Cro when replacing Scot last season?

People are taking for granted how much quick big players help team D.

TheSauceMaster
11-09-2004, 07:34 PM
Croshere is too small...and does not bring the same defense that Foster does.

Funny people say Fred Jones is too small too :p

Anyways I think there is some games Croshere is going to be the Better option vs Foster , but so far Austin has showed he can play very well if he gets good mins. Now if we could just give him a dash of Fosters speed it might be a diffrent story , I have always liked Austin myself.

I sometimes wonder if it's hard for fans to swallow that Austin can actually play very well if given the mins ? I look back over the first 3 games and Austin made plays that ethier kept us in the game or gave us the boost to get over the hump and win , several key plays per game.

Most of Foster's point are from garbage cleanup and tip in's , which I have Austin do the same. The Diffrence is Foster has no Consistant shot outside of say 5 ft and that's being nice , Austin can drop out hit a few 3's , mid range jumpers etc.

So yes Foster is more of a one deminsional player vs Croshere , disagree all you like ..but I look at over all game both offense and defense are important to the team.

3Ball
11-10-2004, 04:19 PM
I just moved to Minneapolis a few months ago, so last night was my first chance to watch the Pacers in a while. And MAN did Gill look sharp. He's exactly the kind of energy player who could make a difference. How on earth are we going to find room for him and Freddie?

fwpacerfan
11-10-2004, 04:48 PM
Foster should start and I would be shocked if he didn't as soon as he is able. I could write a long post detailing all the reasons why jeff should start. But instead, let me just suggest you watch the game tonight. That will demonstrate exactly why Jeff should start

I'm kind of curious what you think after watching the Minnesota game UB. It looks to me like Pollard is doing a very nice job. He looks like the Pollard I remembered from Sacramento. I think the question isn't whether Foster starts over Croshere but the question is does Foster start over Pollard?

waxman
11-10-2004, 06:09 PM
Foster certainly isn't an offensive weapon....although he does have some savvy around the bucket...and he led the league in offensive boards per 48 minutes.... I wouldn't call extra posessions on offense a liability exactly.

Keep in mind....just cause you start the game doesn't mean you log the most minutes or finish it.... If at the end of the game we need defensive stops... Foster is probably your guy.... If you need scoring obviously you go with Cro.


I wouldn't have a problem starting any of our bigs really....other than Edwards of course

TheSauceMaster
11-10-2004, 06:39 PM
I disagree, I think Foster's defense within the team defense is much better than with Croshere there. I would much rather have Foster starting.

Oh really is this why were the 2nd highest Offense in the EC and 5th in the NBA with 102.75 ppg :p:p The first 4 games have all been over 100points , Reminds me of the former Bird Teams ;)

Now forgive me I actually think even with all the injuries this early our defense is equal if not better than it was last year ...Debate on :devil: