Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 51

Thread: Ok, let's look at our options.....

  1. #1
    Administrator Peck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,277

    Default Ok, let's look at our options.....

    Enough time has gone past now so that we can take an honest look at our team without looking at it through the eyes of pain or dissapointment of losing to the Pistons in the E.C. finals.

    It's now conventional wisdom that a trade will/must be made to ease the glut of players we have at the small forward spot. It has been spoken by Carlisle, Bird, Walsh, local & national newsmedia. We've even talked about it on here.

    What I want to do now is challenge that wisdom & see if that really is the best & only way for our team to take the next step.

    Obviousley the trade fodder in the press & even somewhat the management has been Al Harrington.

    Al himself helped get the ball rolling by asking that if more playing time weren't made available he would prefer a trade. Everybody assumes that by him stating "more playing time" he means starting. That's not what he said, reportedly, but I think it's a safe assumption.

    The team does seem to have a glut of players who are what I call tweeners. This is not an accident btw, Walsh started in the late 90's drafting players who could fill multi-role capabilities. He felt that that was the future of the league. Watching Garnett, O'Neal, etc. it's hard to argue against him, to a point.

    But I wonder if it's necassary to make the big changes that most people think we need.

    Could we not make a drastic change in our team structure just by altering the starting lineup?

    Instead of being forced to trade Al, who we have a lot of time & money invested into, could we not accomodate his desire to start?

    People are always telling me that it doesn't matter who starts, it's just about who finishes & gets the min. Of course I have never ever agreed with that because it absolutely matters to the players & if it didn't matter they would have no problem with the following.

    Bench Jeff Foster & Reggie Miller. Start Fred Jones & Al Harrington.

    This gives you

    C- Jermaine O'Neal
    Pf- Al Harrington
    Sf- Ron Artest
    Sg- Fred Jones
    Pg- Jamaal Tinsely

    I know some are going to come on here & talk about lack of size in that starting lineup & I agree. However, I want to point out to those people (U.B.) you keep saying it doesn't matter who starts but who finishes & plays the min.

    If this lineup became overwhelmed then a change can be made during the game. Besides, other than Fred, this is the lineup that finished a lot of games last season.

    Now the one thing this does not do is address the outside shooting that we need. Fred seems to have grown as the season has gone on & if he works on it this summer he may get even better.

    What this does do though is hold fast the fear of some (U.B.) that trading for a s.g. would affect our defense. Fred is a GREAT defender. Actually when Fred & Ron are on the floor at the same time the peremater players of the other team are usually thrown into chaos.

    Al has shown time & time again, that if he starts he goes out of his way to blend into the system. Sometimes he does this to the teams detriment, but if he knew he was starting all of the time then I think he would adjust.

    Offensive spacing I don't think will be that much of a problem either. Al does like to play on the blocks but he plays more on the wings while J.O. plays more to the front of the rim.

    This also assures that Ron sticks with the team as well (smile U.B.).

    Why is this a bad idea.

    Also back to the size thing, I am going to use the whole argument that you guys use with me about Foster. How many teams really have that many big players that Al couldn't handle? How many of those same players would Al cause problems for?

    Now the problem with this is several fold. Let's do this one at a time.

    1. Reggie Miller. His fans won't let it go. If he stays 5 more years they are going to want/demand that Reggie start & get big min. Most of you on-line came to the realization that he should probably come off of the bench. You are in the minority. Carlisle already said he sees him starting. I'll be honest with you this is the biggest obsticle to overcome & I'm not sure it can be. Reggie Miller may cost us Al Harrington.

    2. Jon Bender. This does nothing to help Jon get the solid min. he needs. Unless they relegate Foster to the 9th or 10th man spot I don't see Jon getting more than 12-15 min. a game with this lineup.

    3. Jeff Foster. Foster deserves better than this. He played well all season long & did make big improvements. But at this point in time it has to come down to what helps the team the most & right now the lineup I've given you above solves some of our problems.

    4. Austin Croshere. I'm not sure this is a problem because he's spent so many years now with inconsistant min. But this would be another year of that.

    I'm sure there are more issues that some of you will come up with.

    Ok, that is option # 1.

    Let's look at another option.

    Trade Al & filler for shooting guard & filler.

    First off, let's erase the name T-Mac out of our minds. Al ain't going to get it done. Let's just assume Al will bring somebody like Flip Murray from Seattle (I'm not saying him but along those lines).

    Thus you still have...

    C- Jeff Foster
    Pf- Jermaine O'Neal
    Sf- Ron Artest
    Sg- _____________
    Pg- Jamaal Tinsely

    This does solve some of your outside shooting problems. But we don't know about thier defense.

    The bench does become thinned out & Bender does get his chance to get more min. per game.

    Now let's look at the downside.

    1. Reggie Miller. His fans won't let it go. If he stays 5 more years they are going to want/demand that Reggie start & get big min. Most of you on-line came to the realization that he should probably come off of the bench. You are in the minority. Carlisle already said he sees him starting. I'll be honest with you this is the biggest obsticle to overcome & I'm not sure it can be.

    2. Jon Bender. He gets his shot, but what if he flops. What he shows there is nothing more to it & that he does not get it. You go from having a solid bench to now having your 6th man be very unreliable.

    3. Austin Croshere. You now have to depend on a player who has yet to show that he will be consistant. He won't hurt you, but he may not help much either.

    4. Shooting guard. The player you trade for (if it is for Al) will most likely be an up & coming player or a lesser known player. What if they don't produce. What if they can't hit the outside shot, what if they turn out to be like Ron Mercer?

    That's option # 2.

    Option # 3.

    Ron Artest & filler is traded for star shooting guard. Insert T-Mac trade here.

    Let's assume that Ron will bring a top flight player so our lineup looks like this.

    C- Jeff Foster
    Pf- Jermaine O'Neal
    Sf- Al Harrington
    Sg- T-Mac (or other star)
    Pg- Jamaal Tinsely

    This certainly helps the offense. Some will argue that our defense drops way down & without a doubt it will. However Carlisle's system can overcome the loss of any one player & not all s.g.'s are horrid defenders. Nobody will be on Ron's level, but they won't be on World B. Free's level either.

    The other side benefit to this might be something we don't know about, it might improve team chemistry. We don't know, but it has been discussed.

    Ok, the down sides to this.

    1. Reggie Miller. His fans won't let it go. If he stays 5 more years they are going to want/demand that Reggie start & get big min. Most of you on-line came to the realization that he should probably come off of the bench. You are in the minority. Carlisle already said he sees him starting. I'll be honest with you this is the biggest obsticle to overcome & I'm not sure it can be.

    2. Ron Artest defense. There can be no doubt, this will hurt.

    3. Al Harrington. He has never had to stand up to be a starter for an entire season. Will it work?

    Ok, those are just some ideas. Can we say that we really have to do option # 2 as opposed to # 1 or # 3?


    Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

  2. #2
    Grumpy Old Man (PD host) able's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    London UK
    Posts
    8,628

    Default Re: Ok, let's look at our options.....

    Very nice post Peck (as usual).

    My problems with all or most of the proposals made and even in your post is the Al starting.
    As simple as that, Al has not proven one minute that he can do a consistent, good job at PF and has himself said he would prefer the SF position, since that is his natural position.
    This would only be possible I think if we trade Ron, so you add the question: do you want to satisfy Al by trading Ron?
    Not that it would make me happy, I just feel like some, that Al is not starting material on this team.
    Indeed it weakens the bench IF JB fails, but I feel it also weakens the starting 5.

    If trading Ron leaves us with Al starting, he will want to be the SF, which leaves us indeed with a weaker bench and I for one feel that it would leave our starting 5 weaker by en large, unless indeed Tmac.

    Option 1 strangely enough is a team we have not seen together on court all season according to the 5-man +/- .

    However take Tins out and insert Aj and that unit had floor time, resulting in -10 avg, which I think is some indication that even with Tins on the floor this unit would not be that impressive.

    It also assumes that your franchise player will move to C knowing that foul trouble will be his the larger part of every game, which I think weakens us even further.

    In short, I think it is not such a great idea.

    Option 2 leaves you with the question of JB, however if he fails, perhaps Fred can move over, though that would be asking very much, Cro? again asking a lot, so yes, going with that option makes you ride quite a bit on JB, whether that is a good idea remains to be seen, of course we could also draft someone to be the backup, or see that the filler can be a backup SF.

    If the traded SG can't hit his shot then you have Fred to step in, so some cover is available at that position.

    So by far this does the least to weaken the team.

    Option 3 weakens the team on defense, that much is sure, perhaps even a lot but whether the arrival of Tmac would "solve" that is the major question.
    I can see more minutes for JB though not nearly enough to assess him in that team. Al will remain pouting because he will play less minutes then he does now, despite starting because IF JB breaks out, he will get the majority of those minutes.
    Al will likely have to move to PF during the game when Jeff is out and again, that is not his liking.

    The more we discuss these options the more i get the feeling that it is perhaps a lot better for everyone involved inclduing team chemistry, that Al moves on.
    There are few ways to satisfy his demands, and none would improve the team in the least.
    The main problem as I see it is that Al simply wants to be the man, which JO is primarily and Ron secondarily.
    In the league wide +/- per player Ron is at a respectable # 8 in VERY nice company and getting rid of a player of that statue to comfort Al is something I can not see happening.

    I heard the rumours, like most, that there "might" be issues with Ron behind the scenes, but no matter what anyone says, they are far less then last year, when the management decided not to let him go, and though his tradevalue might be lot higher now, I do not see them trading this lot of talent at 24 yrs old without getting a major asset as Tmac, which on the other hand might cause serious problems with JO.

    Jo has over the past year shaken his introvert self into the absolute team leader, his comments make that clear, his presence make that clear.

    I remember him int he final press conference ofter the Det loss clearly referring to the team as "my team", which tells me a lot. Add to that the fact that the max contract rewarded to him is not something that management has done lightly to a then 24 year old, so he is in for the ride and I can not imagine he would not be asked for an opinion which would then be taken into serious consideration.
    On the one hand it can be exciting that he can play with Tmac, but on the other hand, to many captains and or to many alphas on the same team might give very serious problems.
    Now Tmac might be the one exception to that considering his attitude to gladly allow someone else to be THE man on the team, but a guy like Allen would give you that problem most surely.

    I do not think Al is the right material to be one of the alphas on the team, though he wants to be. Adding another problem such as that might ruin more then it brings.
    Keeping Ron and adding a "role" player at SG would most likely be the best solution, something Al can bring us, and at the same time you solve the problem of Al's desires, he can try and be THE man on another team
    .
    So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

    If you've done 6 impossible things today?
    Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!


  3. #3
    Running with the Big Boys BillS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Danberry
    Age
    54
    Posts
    10,654

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Ok, let's look at our options.....

    Option 1 leaves us with little to no rebounding during the starting minutes. I don't see our "get back down the court after a shot" defensive strategy changing next year, so we really need someone at 5 or 4 who can concentrate on offensive rebounds. That's what keeps Foster in it for me, because he is the rebounder who doesn't need the offensive touches to stroke his ego.

    Option 3 bothers me because I really think Artest is our "second star" and that we should be adding to him, not just swapping him out to see what happens. In the long run, our problems with Ron are a lot less than the problems with Sprewell, Iverson, and Bryant (to name a few). I don't want to lose him unless it is clear that we upgrade offesnisvely and stay the same defensively. Anything else means we're trading down, and we all agree we don't need that.

    So, it's Option 2 for me almost by default. Of course, I've always been in the "do everything by doing nothing" school, and for me to even admit we need a major starter position filled via trade or Free Agency is a big step
    BillS

    "Every time I pitched it was like throwing gasoline on a fire. Pkkw! Pkkw! Pkkw! Pkkw!"
    - Ebby Calvin "Nuke" LaLoosh

  4. #4
    Administrator Unclebuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    32,036

    Default Re: Ok, let's look at our options.....

    Wow, so much to respond to.

    Let me address your first scenerio.

    No trades and moving AL and Fred into the starting lineup.

    That does improve the perimeter defense. Fred's lack of size is the only thing that hurts him at times. I was surprised to see Rip post him up in the ECF with great success.

    Let me get to my 2 problems with that lineup.

    1) That moves the three best perimeter shooters to the bench. (Reg, Cro, Bender) I suppose with creative substitutions you coud work around that. But unless Ron and Fred really improve their outside shooting, I think that is a problem

    2) Peck, I know you know this is coming. Several times this past season I said for whatever reason a front line of Ron, Al and J.O. was not as successful at crunch time as a lineup of Ron, J.O and Jeff. On paper you would not think so, but as the season went along Rick used AL less and less at crunch time, and used jeff more and more. I don't know why they are better with Jeff in there, but they are.

    Rick sees that, why do you think Rick started Cro in games 4 and 5 instead of AL. Yes Rick went with Al to start game #6, but Cro was on the floor at crunch time after Al got his dunk blocked.

    I think Al's best role is with the second unit as its main post player, the second unit needs one and the first unit with J.O and Ron does not

    As long as ron and J.O are on this team, hopefully for the next 10 years, I don't think Al will start or finish most games. AL is too good for that therefore, as much as I like AL and would hate to see him go, if the right trade comes along he should be traded.

    I'll comment on your other scenerios later

  5. #5
    Pacer Junky Will Galen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    10,005

    Default Re: Ok, let's look at our options.....

    I more or less agree with Able. But here's some other thoughts in no certain order.

    1] Thinking the team will get better just by changing the starting lineup is probably true, but it's a young team and will get better even if the starting lineup doesn't change. Plus keeping the team the same doesn't insure that Carlisle will make changes in the starting lineup.

    2] Larry Bird has said we will trade Al only if we can get better, if not, he's not trading Al.

    3] No doubt JO is the Pacers best center, (Just like Tim Duncan is SA's best center) but he's also our MVP and he gets beat up playing center, even in the east. It's better for him and thus the team if he plays PF.

    4] The Pacers have to many players that could start for other teams. Although the players more or less bought into getting less time this year, they are young and want to play. Free agents Anderson, and Brewer, are both thinking of leaving because of playing time. My question is how many others would leave if they had the chance?

    5] To keep the players happy the Pacers HAVE to thin out the ranks of those who think they should play more minutes or down the road the team will implode.

  6. #6

    Default Re: Ok, let's look at our options.....

    Bench Jeff Foster & Reggie Miller. Start Fred Jones & Al Harrington.

    This gives you

    C- Jermaine O'Neal
    Pf- Al Harrington
    Sf- Ron Artest
    Sg- Fred Jones
    Pg- Jamaal Tinsely
    Sorry to say. I don't like this one. Its not "rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic" but its just shuffling and still doesn't address our weaknesses, it just placates a few guys. I agree that Fred should start. The problem with benching Foster for Harrington are two-fold. One, Jermaine is at risk for early foul trouble by guarding the opposing center at the outset. Second, the second unit becomes very offensively challenged - Johnson, Miller, Bender, Croshere and Foster won't scare anyone - there is not a consistent guy in that bunch.



    Thus you still have...

    C- Jeff Foster
    Pf- Jermaine O'Neal
    Sf- Ron Artest
    Sg- _____________
    Pg- Jamaal Tinsely

    This does solve some of your outside shooting problems. But we don't know about thier defense.

    The bench does become thinned out & Bender does get his chance to get more min. per game.
    This seems most likely. Who know what Reggie will do though? If he won't sit for Jones, will he sit for any other "tier 2" guy (Richardson, Murray, Barry, etc.) ? If Fred has moved past Reggie and another SG is added would you move Reggie to the 3rd SG? Would Jones be moved to the 3rd SG? I fear that the SG spot is going to be chaotic if another SG is added.


    Option # 3.

    Ron Artest & filler is traded for star shooting guard. Insert T-Mac trade here.

    Let's assume that Ron will bring a top flight player so our lineup looks like this.

    C- Jeff Foster
    Pf- Jermaine O'Neal
    Sf- Al Harrington
    Sg- T-Mac (or other star)
    Pg- Jamaal Tinsely
    This one seems to be gathering momentum, but seems less likey. Its tough to pull off a superstar trade anyway, but this Pacer team, probably needs less tinkering and I think that trading Artest might be going to far, but we would be naive to think that LB/DW are not looking at this possibility.

    Great post as always. What are your thoughts on moving up in the draft? I think that its the teams best interest to forget trading up. Just get the best guy at #29. Anybody who disagrees with trading Antonio Davis for the 5th pick and favors trading Al for a top ten pick should explain themselves.

  7. #7
    ENABEABLER MagicRat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    7,692

    Default Re: Ok, let's look at our options.....

    If one of your options is not moving anybody, why not:

    Tinsley
    Artest
    Harrington
    O'Neal
    Foster

    Slick was pushing the idea of Ron playing the 2 during the Heat series. If it's good enough for Slick, it's good enough for me.......
    PSN: MRat731 XBL: MRat0731

  8. #8

    Default Re: Ok, let's look at our options.....

    2] Larry Bird has said we will trade Al only if we can get better, if not, he's not trading Al.

    3] No doubt JO is the Pacers best center, (Just like Tim Duncan is SA's best center) but he's also our MVP and he gets beat up playing center, even in the east. It's better for him and thus the team if he plays PF.
    Great points. Al won't be traded unless we can get someone of equal or better value, in terms of a different position however.

    And 3 is a great great point. JO gets beat up every time he plays C. This is why he and Duncan always are at PF.
    Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

  9. #9
    Member Harddrive7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Age
    47
    Posts
    1,162

    Default Re: Ok, let's look at our options.....

    1) That moves the three best perimeter shooters to the bench. (Reg, Cro, Bender) I suppose with creative substitutions you coud work around that. But unless Ron and Fred really improve their outside shooting, I think that is a problem

    Well if those are our 3 best perimeter shooters, then I think that we're already in trouble.

  10. #10
    diego
    Guest

    Default Re: Ok, let's look at our options.....

    My thoughts are as long as Reggie plays, he is starting. Not that i want to see that, but thats what will happen. Reggie will spend one more year chasing the ring as a starter. But i honestly feel he will play significantly less minutes. Almost like ok...you get to start but you are only gonna get about 15 minutes a game.

    I think the Pacers use the mid level to sign a mid tier guy that is a good shooter and use him and Freddie getting the remaining minutes. That leaves about 33-35 minutes a game for them to split based on matchups.

    I think Al will be traded, but it will be for a big man, and i really think it will be Dampier. I think Bird and carlisle like the idea of a front line of Ron, Jo, And Dampier...that is a hoss of a front line. Add to that Foster coming off the bench, thats a pretty formidable lineup.

    bender will become 6th man and play minutes at SG, SF, and possibly PF at specific match up times. Cro will get the back up minutes at PF, hence cementing his spot in the rotation. Plus Bird and Carlisle like him and his shooting ability.

    at PG, Tins is the man. Unfortuneatly i see Brewer going elsewhere as Rick is just to set on AJ as backup and AJ stays knowing no other team will play him as amny minutes as he gets here. So Brewer bolts for better opportunity. If this happens i anticipate seeing Freddie get more minutes at PG in specific situations. I still think if Freddie is ever going to start it will be at a PG spot, not a SG. As his passing ability gets better, he could make a devastating PG. Quick, good defender, can penetrate and finish at basket. I know this sounds crazy but i see Freddie's main future with the pacers as that combo guard we all thought, not as our future SG.

  11. #11
    Administrator Peck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,277

    Default Re: Ok, let's look at our options.....

    Able wrote:

    "I heard the rumours, like most, that there "might" be issues with Ron behind the scenes, but no matter what anyone says, they are far less then last year, when the management decided not to let him go, and though his tradevalue might be lot higher now, I do not see them trading this lot of talent at 24 yrs old without getting a major asset as Tmac, which on the other hand might cause serious problems with JO.

    Jo has over the past year shaken his introvert self into the absolute team leader, his comments make that clear, his presence make that clear."


    The one thing to consider is that upper management (read Walsh) probably had an idea that he was going to be getting a new middle management & coach this season so he it is reasonable to think that he wanted to see how Ron would react to a new structure.

    Also, yes, J.O. is the leader & I don't know if the team would give him a say in matters or not. They didn't with Thomas, but they probably already knew that answer.

    But seeing as how if we go on J.O. alone I think a couple of things need to be considered.

    1. Al & J.O. are friends.

    2. J.O. may have to help Al with moods because of P.T. but he doesn't have to babysit him the way he does with Ron. Remember back to last fall when he said he had to go out of his way to get closer to Ron.

    3. I think people look at Al & automatically assume he wants to be the man. That may be right, I don't know but I do know this. At the end of game 6 Ron didn't say he wanted to rebound better to help the team. He said he wanted to get the ball more. He shot the ball 17 times a games, how many more shots did he want? BTW, before the Ron Artest chorus begins to tell me that it was a statement made in frustration, let me remind them that he made the same comments at the end of game 2 & after game 4 he said he played better because he got the ball more. Is everybody certain that Ron doesn't want to be the man? Remember when he was benched do to conduct detrimental to winning? Remember what he was complaining about? It was about our inside outside game. In other words O'Neal. Are you sure that if J.O. was to have input that Artest would be his option?


    Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

  12. #12
    Administrator Peck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,277

    Default Re: Ok, let's look at our options.....

    Option 1 leaves us with little to no rebounding during the starting minutes.
    Al Harrington 6.4 rpg

    Jeff Foster 7.4 rpg

    I don't want to hear anything about rebounds per min. btw, because as U.B. has pointed out this isn't fantasy basketball. If Foster was so good then it didn't matter how good Al was, Jeff would play more min. a game.


    Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

  13. #13
    Administrator Peck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,277

    Default Re: Ok, let's look at our options.....

    Wow, so much to respond to.

    Let me address your first scenerio.

    No trades and moving AL and Fred into the starting lineup.

    That does improve the perimeter defense. Fred's lack of size is the only thing that hurts him at times. I was surprised to see Rip post him up in the ECF with great success.

    Let me get to my 2 problems with that lineup.

    1) That moves the three best perimeter shooters to the bench. (Reg, Cro, Bender) I suppose with creative substitutions you coud work around that. But unless Ron and Fred really improve their outside shooting, I think that is a problem

    2) Peck, I know you know this is coming. Several times this past season I said for whatever reason a front line of Ron, Al and J.O. was not as successful at crunch time as a lineup of Ron, J.O and Jeff. On paper you would not think so, but as the season went along Rick used AL less and less at crunch time, and used jeff more and more. I don't know why they are better with Jeff in there, but they are.

    Rick sees that, why do you think Rick started Cro in games 4 and 5 instead of AL. Yes Rick went with Al to start game #6, but Cro was on the floor at crunch time after Al got his dunk blocked.


    I think Al's best role is with the second unit as its main post player, the second unit needs one and the first unit with J.O and Ron does not

    As long as ron and J.O are on this team, hopefully for the next 10 years, I don't think Al will start or finish most games. AL is too good for that therefore, as much as I like AL and would hate to see him go, if the right trade comes along he should be traded.

    I'll comment on your other scenerios later
    On # 2, do you remember when he started using Jeff as the closer? I know it wasn't till after the all-star break but I just don't know when it was.

    Second of all your argument about Cro & Al starting at the end of the playoffs makes no sense to me in this scenario. If anything it is saying that Jeff is a problem seeing as how he barely played at all those last three games. Now we both know that is not the real answer because it was just a matter of matchups & Jeff will play more than that on any given occasion, but it just didn't help advance your arguement IMO.


    Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

  14. #14
    Grumpy Old Man (PD host) able's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    London UK
    Posts
    8,628

    Default Re: Ok, let's look at our options.....

    Peck,

    1. a well known fact
    2. it worked and they are much closer, Ron joins him on nights out nowadays, some people are harder in opening up to their collegues and new friends.
    3. One remark from a guy who has his tongue on his heart, however I can not recall him saying so after game 2 & 4, nonetheless, what he means is not so much that he gets the ball more, even though when he takes over 20 shots a game, we usually win, but I am sure he means that he doesn't want the ball in the last 3 seconds of the shotclock which now often happens, but earlier on, when playmaking is still possible, he never said he wants to shoot more, just that he wants the ball more, with AJ on the floor he often takes over the distribution, because otherwise nothing happens at all.

    And yes I remember what he was complaining about, exactly about what was changed from then on, the grinding out halfcourt, we started playing faster, less plays were called and we went on a rampage.

    Tins out took our speed out of the offense, and it showed in the result.

    Ron is not the only player who does not like the coach calling every play (something Rick did a lot again in the playoffs) but he is the only one that is openly speaking of it.

    I prefer a guy who wants the ball more to win, to a guy who wants the ball because he wants to shoot a fade-away.

    Several times Al played black hole again and it showed in the minutes he played, they were far less then in the regular season, that tells you something I would think.

    Ron had 6.3 Rpg in the po's , 5.3 in the reg season btw
    So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

    If you've done 6 impossible things today?
    Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!


  15. #15

    Default Re: Ok, let's look at our options.....

    Once again, nice post, Peck. Allow me to weight in on a couple of things. Able, I'll start with you:

    I heard the rumours, like most, that there "might" be issues with Ron behind the scenes, but no matter what anyone says, they are far less then last year, when the management decided not to let him go, and though his tradevalue might be lot higher now, I do not see them trading this lot of talent at 24 yrs old without getting a major asset as Tmac, which on the other hand might cause serious problems with JO.
    There is no "might" to it. There were considerable issues with Ron behind the scenes this year. You assume because you saw an improvement in his on-court behavior that the behind the scenes stuff diminished commeasurately. Which is simply not true. Ron is a handful, and that's putting it kindly.

    The million dollar question then would be: Is management fed up with babysitting and mollycoddling Ron? I don't know the answer to that...yet. But I've heard some things that point to yes. As I told Peck privately, I don't care how talented anyone is, life is too short to have to deal with anyone's BS indeterminately. After awhile, you just get tired of it. And both Walsh and Bird are no BS kind of guys.

    As far as Al goes, diego made a compelling argument for trading for Dampier. I'm not convinced Walsh is the kind of person to go back in time, so to speak. Just a feeling I have. Although it wouldn't be a trade that surprises me.

  16. #16
    Grumpy Old Man (PD host) able's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    London UK
    Posts
    8,628

    Default Re: Ok, let's look at our options.....

    BP, i would understand that, as i said, it would not make me happy, but on the other hand, it might give us some hope of a spectacular trade.

    I would however appreciate some examples of this BS that goes on, just to "form an opinion" so to speak.

    Al, well I still think he should go, so combining him with Ron should give us a serious shot at Tmac

    hey, there's half full bottle left somewhere.
    So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

    If you've done 6 impossible things today?
    Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!


  17. #17

    Default Re: Ok, let's look at our options.....

    I can think of a worse still senario in the off season. Indiana does consider pursuing T-mac because they are unwilling to part with Artest.
    New Jersey gets him and the Pacers become the third best team in the conference. And for the second time in 6 months a rival takes a risk and gets a big name star.

    If T-mac is avalible we have to at least talk about it. Otherwise (assuming there aren't huge behind the scene Artest issues) option two is the best course.
    "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

    "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

  18. #18
    Pacer Junky Will Galen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    10,005

    Default Re: Ok, let's look at our options.....

    Thinking more on the subject I revisited what Bird and Carlisle have said since the season ended and I don't think rearranging the lineup is a very good option.

    First Carlisle said, "This is an unbalanced roster."

    He's right. We mostly have young guys that want to play and need to play to improve. So my question is what is a balanced roster? I would say an 8 man rotation is optimum, with five guys up front and three in the back court. The five players up front need to cover three positions. Best would be a player who can backup 4 & 5, and a player who can backup 3. In the back court we need a combo guard to backup both guards. The bench to be balanced needs to be half veterans and half young guys.

    Bird said, "With the players we have, we have a chance to make our team stronger. . . If we make a couple of moves, we have a legitimate chance to get out of the Eastern Conference. Everybody else's roster seems to be set. We have assets here and logjams in certain areas. If we make the right moves, we can separate ourselves from everybody else."

    "A couple moves," Bird said. I think most would agree that what we need is another big guy up front, and Reggie's replacement. Since Walsh said Reggie's replacement is not on the team now, that rule's out both Jones boys and Artest starting at guard.

    Okay, let's look at what we need by roster.

    1] PF...Starter
    2] SF...Starter
    3] C....Starter
    4] SG..Starter
    5] PG..Starter
    6] Rotation player at 4 & 5.
    7] Rotation player at 3.
    8] Rotation player at 1 & 2.
    9] Veteran
    10 Veteran
    11 Veteran
    12 Young guy
    13 Young guy
    14 Young guy
    15 young guy

    Now lets break it down a bit more. Let's take the C & PF positions, optimum would be a 3 man rotation, but we don't really have what we need. At PF we have JO, who can backup center. At center we have Foster. Right now the only player who can back up both is Croshere. What it boils down to is we need someone bigger than both JO and Foster to be part of this rotation.

    Elsewhere up front we have Artest playing the small forward position and Al backing him up. This is perfect except Al doesn't want to be a backup. Moving Bender here as 6th man looks good.

    In the back court we have Tinsley and an aging Reggie. Fred is an undersized combo guard.

    The problems we need to solve to have an optimum balanced rotation are we need a big guy in the 4-5 rotation, we need Reggie's replacement, and to a lessor extent we need a bigger combo guard. Once we have a balanced rotation then the rest of the roster needs to be balanced with vets and young players.

    Sitting still with this roster is not the way to go, the problems need to be addressed.

  19. #19
    Wasting Light Hicks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,585
    Mood

    Default Re: Ok, let's look at our options.....

    Option 1 leaves us with little to no rebounding during the starting minutes.
    Al Harrington 6.4 rpg

    Jeff Foster 7.4 rpg

    I don't want to hear anything about rebounds per min. btw, because as U.B. has pointed out this isn't fantasy basketball. If Foster was so good then it didn't matter how good Al was, Jeff would play more min. a game.
    You're trying to make it sound more simple than it actually is.

    Al plays more minutes than Jeff, not because he's a better rebounder, but because he's a better basketball player; he brings more collectively to the table than Jeff. THAT is why he gets more minute. And with more minutes, you have more chances at grabbing rebounds, and he STILL doesn't get as many as Jeff.

    No way does anyone convince me Al is in Jeff's league as a rebounder. In 7 more minutes, Al grabs 1 less rebound.

    And we need someone to grab the boards in the starting lineup, and Jeff's the man for that.

  20. #20
    Administrator/ The Real Jay ChicagoJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Chicago
    Age
    44
    Posts
    17,000

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Ok, let's look at our options.....

    Thinking more on the subject I revisited what Bird and Carlisle have said since the season ended and I don't think rearranging the lineup is a very good option.

    First Carlisle said, "This is an unbalanced roster."

    He's right. We mostly have young guys that want to play and need to play to improve. So my question is what is a balanced roster? I would say an 8 man rotation is optimum, with five guys up front and three in the back court. The five players up front need to cover three positions. Best would be a player who can backup 4 & 5, and a player who can backup 3. In the back court we need a combo guard to backup both guards. The bench to be balanced needs to be half veterans and half young guys.

    Bird said, "With the players we have, we have a chance to make our team stronger. . . If we make a couple of moves, we have a legitimate chance to get out of the Eastern Conference. Everybody else's roster seems to be set. We have assets here and logjams in certain areas. If we make the right moves, we can separate ourselves from everybody else."

    "A couple moves," Bird said. I think most would agree that what we need is another big guy up front, and Reggie's replacement. Since Walsh said Reggie's replacement is not on the team now, that rule's out both Jones boys and Artest starting at guard.

    Okay, let's look at what we need by roster.

    1] PF...Starter
    2] SF...Starter
    3] C....Starter
    4] SG..Starter
    5] PG..Starter
    6] Rotation player at 4 & 5.
    7] Rotation player at 3.
    8] Rotation player at 1 & 2.
    9] Veteran
    10 Veteran
    11 Veteran
    12 Young guy
    13 Young guy
    14 Young guy
    15 young guy

    Now lets break it down a bit more. Let's take the C & PF positions, optimum would be a 3 man rotation, but we don't really have what we need. At PF we have JO, who can backup center. At center we have Foster. Right now the only player who can back up both is Croshere. What it boils down to is we need someone bigger than both JO and Foster to be part of this rotation.

    Elsewhere up front we have Artest playing the small forward position and Al backing him up. This is perfect except Al doesn't want to be a backup. Moving Bender here as 6th man looks good.

    In the back court we have Tinsley and an aging Reggie. Fred is an undersized combo guard.

    The problems we need to solve to have an optimum balanced rotation are we need a big guy in the 4-5 rotation, we need Reggie's replacement, and to a lessor extent we need a bigger combo guard. Once we have a balanced rotation then the rest of the roster needs to be balanced with vets and young players.

    Sitting still with this roster is not the way to go, the problems need to be addressed.

    Great comments. I agree with almost everything in there. Eight-man rotation. Combo guard. Need more size and an oustide threat.

    I'd consider filling out the roster as:

    PF - O'Neal
    C - Dampier (trade Al + change)
    SF - McGrady (trade Ron + Bender + F. Jones EDIT Okay, I'll keep Jones)
    SG - Reggie (by default)
    PG - Tinsley
    combo guard - Brent Barry (MLE)
    PF/ C - Croshere EDIT or Foster depending on matchups
    G/F - Sato (draft) (one-year apprenticeship as the backup)
    EDIT Tenth-man - Brian Cardinal
    Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
    Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
    Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
    Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
    And life itself, rushing over me
    Life itself, the wind in black elms,
    Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you


  21. #21
    Pacer Junky Will Galen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    10,005

    Default Re: Ok, let's look at our options.....



    Great comments. I agree with almost everything in there. Eight-man rotation. Combo guard. Need more size and an oustide threat.

    I'd consider filling out the roster as:

    PF - O'Neal
    C - Dampier (trade Al + change)
    SF - McGrady (trade Ron + Bender + F. Jones)
    SG - Reggie (by default)
    PG - Tinsley
    combo guard - Brent Barry (MLE)
    PF/ C - Croshere
    G/F - Sato (draft) (one-year apprenticeship as the backup)
    I could live with that lineup! <said tongue in cheek>

    However I think you are giving to much to get TMac. Ron is almost his equal when you consider the defence Ron plays. Giving up another player to match salary's would be ok, but not both Bender and Fred.

    I'm gonna do my own roster!

  22. #22
    diego
    Guest

    Default Re: Ok, let's look at our options.....

    Again I will reiterate, Reggie will start again next year. Simply because DW is too loyal and all along they said Reggie will start as long as he plays. Unless Reggie says he doesnt want to, i expect him to be next years starter.

    That being said is the reason i think Dampier is the person we are going after. We need to get bigger up front. Dampier, JO, and Artest makes us one of the biggest and most talented frontcourts in not only the east but the league.

    I dont think we will get Richardson as he is their main scoring threat and they are looking for a PF that can combo with him. Al would give them a line up of Claxton, Richardson, Dunleavy, Al, Pollard/Foyle/someone. Not bad for them.

    Now as for the deal i would like to throw the idea of Al and Pollard for Dampier and Cheaney...then throw ins to make it work. I liek Cheaney and he is not the SG of the future but he provides a good player there for a coupel seasons while Reggie is still here. Cheaney is a career 46% shooter and 31% 3 point shooter which isnt great from behind arc, but he has a great mid range shot which is deadly. Which we dont have anyone on this team that has. He is 6'7" 217, so he can guard bigger guards and SFs without a big mismatch so Ron could cover a SG if needed and not lose much at the defensive SF spot.

    The pacers would then have Reggie playing 15 minutes a game and Cheaney and Freddie playing the other 33 minutes or so. This would allow Foster to play back up center which IMO is better as he is matched up against other teams backups and he can dominate inside ont he boards even more.

    So lineup is
    Tins
    Reggie
    Ron
    JO
    Damp

    Backups:
    AJ
    Cheaney/Freddie
    Bender/Cheaney
    Cro/Bender
    Foster/Primoz


    I like that lineup. I think we need to face the fact that Reggie is not retiring and he will remain starter another year but with much less minutes, more of a you deserve it type thing...much liek Mullin did when he played under Bird. If hes feeling it, maybe more, but if not, he comes out and lets others play. Then at end if you need a big shot, he is fresh and able to come in and finsih out a game. So since we are not going to get a TMAc or such, we need a shooter and Cheaney can fill that role.

  23. #23
    Pacer Junky Will Galen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    10,005

    Default Re: Ok, let's look at our options.....

    Okay, how about this roster?

    1] PF...Starter .......................JO
    2] SF...Starter .......................Ron
    3] C....Starter .......................Dampier (Trade, AL & Pollard)
    4] SG..Starter .......................Reggie
    5] PG..Starter .......................Tinsley

    6] Rotation player at 4 & 5......Mark Blount (S&T Foster & Brezac)
    7] Rotation player at 3. ..........Bender
    8] Rotation player at 1 & 2......B.Barry (MLE)

    9] Veteran ............................Croshere
    10 Veteran ............................Johnson
    11 Young guy ........................Cardinal (S&T, AL & Pollard)
    12 Young guy ........................Pietrus (Trade, AL & Pollard)
    13 Young guy ....................... #29 pick & Fred for a higher SG pick.

    Lose JJ or nobody to Charlotte in the expansion draft.

  24. #24
    Boom Baby'er ABADays's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The Coliseum
    Posts
    6,248

    Default Re: Ok, let's look at our options.....

    aaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!
    The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

  25. #25

    Default Re: Ok, let's look at our options.....

    Okay, how about this roster?

    1] PF...Starter .......................JO
    2] SF...Starter .......................Ron
    3] C....Starter .......................Dampier (Trade, AL & Pollard)
    4] SG..Starter .......................Reggie
    5] PG..Starter .......................Tinsley

    6] Rotation player at 4 & 5......Mark Blount (S&T Foster & Brezac)
    7] Rotation player at 3. ..........Bender
    8] Rotation player at 1 & 2......B.Barry (MLE)

    9] Veteran ............................Croshere
    10 Veteran ............................Johnson
    11 Young guy ........................Cardinal (S&T, AL & Pollard)
    12 Young guy ........................Pietrus (Trade, AL & Pollard)
    13 Young guy ....................... #29 pick & Fred for a higher SG pick.

    Lose JJ or nobody to Charlotte in the expansion draft.
    Okay.

    You have blown up our roster. We don't need that. We need to get a key piece or two...we don't need to rebuild

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •