Why make this statement???

[Unclebuck]

Re: Why make this statement???

Peck, you are going to blow my cover.

But what Peck says is correct. Respect for the position of coach. Criticizing the coach is always the easiest thing to do (I know it has gone beyond that at this point this season)

Typically what I try to do is present the other side. When someone says JOB is an idiot for going small. I think it worth pointing out that at times going small is good (or hey, at least lets discuss the issue rationally) . When Jim says the younger players need to earn their playing time or that they need to learn to win as they earn their playing time. While everyone is having heart failure over those comments, I like to point out that they make a lot of sense and if the coach was anyone other than JOB you wouldn't be ready to jump out the window. lets at least discuss these coaching issues rationally - that has pretty much stopped months ago.

[Justin Tyme]

Re: Why make this statement???

I think right now he is in defiant mode with the fans, believe me I think he knows what most people think but just doesn't care.

Couldn't agree more. It seems his mindset is his way is right, and everyone else is wrong. He must feel he's smarter and superior to others that don't see it his way.

[Since86]

Re: Why make this statement???

Do you, UB, now feel compelled to try and rationalize everything he does though?

I understand the counter argument to McRoberts, I really do. This is his second stop, and while I think he's serviceable, he doesn't do anything that makes him stand out. If we just focus on him, and him alone, there wouldn't be a month's worth of arguing about him.

But the whole situation boils down to, who would you rather prefer play the 4. Josh or Mike?

There's nothing wrong with telling people they should try and be more civil, i.e. not calling Jim stupid etc. But at the same time, IMHO you try and rationalize the undefensible.

[Unclebuck]

Re: Why make this statement???

Do you, UB, now feel compelled to try and rationalize everything he does though?

I understand the counter argument to McRoberts, I really do. This is his second stop, and while I think he's serviceable, he doesn't do anything that makes him stand out. If we just focus on him, and him alone, there wouldn't be a month's worth of arguing about him.

But the whole situation boils down to, who would you rather prefer play the 4. Josh or Mike?

There's nothing wrong with telling people they should try and be more civil, i.e. not calling Jim stupid etc. But at the same time, IMHO you try and rationalize the undefensible.

I think everything Jim does has a rational explanation - I honestly believe that and I try to present that rational explanation. That doesn't mean I agree with Jim on everything - far from it.

It would be better if we discussed Josh McRoberts without regard to Jim O'Brien - it seems as though everything we discuss is tinged by Jim and that causes the discussion to get really heated. I often try to steer away from Jim and just discuss the actual issue.
I love discussing basketball issues - Discussing Jim O'Brien stopped being enjoyable at least 4 months ago.

As to your question - would I rather have Mike or Josh pay the 4. Honestly that isn't a big issue with me either way - I don't have a strong opinion. I can see it both ways. But when almost everyone in the forum is saying play Josh at the 4, and Jim plays Mike or D. Jones, I like to point out the advantages of doing so

[Since86]

Re: Why make this statement???

I'm sure you've said either directly or indirectly, and I've just forgotten, but please tell me you work in some capacity with a PR firm?

[Unclebuck]

Re: Why make this statement???

I'm sure you've said either directly or indirectly, and I've just forgotten, but please tell me you work in some capacity with a PR firm?

No I don't. Insurance Company. Are you saying I'm in the wrong line of work?

[Since86]

Re: Why make this statement???

Ummm, maybe not, depending on what you do for the company. My dad is an insurance agent, I constantly hear him talk his way through situations.

[Jay@Section12]

Re: Why make this statement???

I think I'm older than you. It's close for sure. You are grasping at straws with this angle.

Bob Hill was a better coach than JOB. JOB is in Versace land or George Irvine land, and you are defending him.

I'd love to hear you explain how those 2 got the short end of it and should have been kept around too.

At least back then when Stipo got hurt, SMITS PLAYED. We didn't hear "well let's just go small ball because Rik is no good".


Not only that, but Rik even said in a recent article that he feels that being thrown to the wolves HELPED HIM learn the game quicker and improve sooner.

JOB's response to that was to play Rasho 1200 minutes and Roy 1000. Do you want to make the case that Roy would be equal or worse now if he'd played 1700 minutes last year and Rasho played 500?

And the difference is, Bo (and even Q-tip head) adjusted their gameplans for the roster they had. Its still popular to call Bo a "soft, offensive-minded" coach because that's the roster he had. While Larry Brown was re-making the Pacers into a tougher, defensive minded roster, Bo Hill was taking the Spurs to 61 wins and the WCFs. So that's always been a false argmument anyway.

I thought Carlisle had personality/ relationship problems, but I never complained about his x's and o's and complimented him numerous times (especially during the 61-win season but after that as well) for adapting to his roster.

O'Brien doesn't have a particuarly good roster to work with in the first place - right now (I still believe Tyler, Rush, Hibbert, Price can "grow into" being a better roster.) But he compounds the problem by forcing them into a gameplan that doesn't fit the roster (and its a gameplan that I don't like, either.)

[Naptown_Seth]

Re: Why make this statement???

Think how you would feel if you heard Laker fans demanding Phil play Morrison more,

You really have no idea what you are talking about, and you don't even realize it either.

Ammo has 3229 minutes in his career including 2326 his ROOKIE YEAR ALONE.

Chris Quinn has 2849 minutes in his career, with a high of 1340 his 2nd season.

McRoberts has 537 CAREER minutes. Not even half what either of your two worthless player examples got in ONE SEASON.

JOE FREAKING ALEXANDER HAS MORE CAREER MINUTES than Josh, and that was all his rookie year in Millwaukee.

And Josh is playing for a crap team in desperate need of bigs right now. The backup PF is 6'6" DJones or DGranger. The backup center is Solomon Jones and he's not getting PT either.

Comparing getting Ammo more "let's take a look time" behind Kobe in LA to Josh playing behind Troy Murphy is ridiculous.

Plus, Josh is 22, Ammo is 25 and Quinn is 26.


It's not the same at all and I can't respect the opinion of anyone that says it is. AFTER Josh gets his 1400 minute season, then another 800 and is clearly going nowhere, everyone will stop talking about why he is no longer playing.

Josh hasn't been proven anything yet, and for a team that DESPERATELY needs front line help.


This isn't Quinn or Ammo, this is New Orleans refusing to play Collison after Paul got hurt.

[Putnam]

Re: Why make this statement???

Bob Hill was a better coach than JOB. JOB is in Versace land or George Irvine land, and you are defending him.

Yay! More love for Bo Hill!

[Justin Tyme]

Re: Why make this statement???

[QUOTE=Unclebuck;968992]

Discussing Jim O'Brien stopped being enjoyable at least 4 months ago./QUOTE]



Hmmm, about the time the season started.

[Justin Tyme]

Re: Why make this statement???

No I don't. Insurance Company. Are you saying I'm in the wrong line of work?

I thought you were Jimmy's pitch man. J/K

[Naptown_Seth]

Re: Why make this statement???

As to your question - would I rather have Mike or Josh pay the 4. Honestly that isn't a big issue with me either way - I don't have a strong opinion. I can see it both ways. But when almost everyone in the forum is saying play Josh at the 4, and Jim plays Mike or D. Jones, I like to point out the advantages of doing so

This should be great...

Neither shoots a good 3, neither is a strong post defender (for DJ it's the height issue, he can work a SG in the post fine). Dun is tall enough to be good rebounder, but he's not a great footwork rebounder and has zero hops. Neither run transition faster than Josh, Dun is slow period and DJones just doesn't have the stride Josh does.

But other than all that, how is it a team is better off with them at the PF instead of Josh?



The "Josh debate" isn't about Josh, and I'm not the only one to make this point even in the last few pages. This is 100% a JOB debate. This is Roe v Wade, where the case becomes the debate point that represents the larger issue.

If it were only the Josh PT it would still be odd for a team that needs bigs not to be playing him, but it could be overlooked.

But it's also Roy last year, and Rush (remember the month or so of 5-8 mpg/DNP mid-year when Dun returned), and Price now, and DJones and Solo.

It's TJ Ford going from full starter to total DNP back to full starter. It's 2 PG starting all the time, but then no PT for the 3rd PG in spite of this (70 mpg for your top 2 PGs, ditto last year).

It's snide comments about Roy, Rush, and Josh, but nothing about Troy or Dun. It's positive comments about players that imply future playing time followed by no playing time.

It's about "see, I told you, we lose without small ball" followed by a string of small ball losses without any "whoops, guess I was wrong about that".


Do you realize what happens if they draft Favors this year? He'll be the only non-injured top 10 pick to get 300 minutes for the year, and promptly be labeled a bust.



No one cares about the losing right now. This guy isn't just in the slowest car out there, he's driving it into the wall, in reverse, through the infield, and against traffic and telling us all along that it's not his fault.

He's not making the most of what he's got, he's making the least of it.

[Naptown_Seth]

Re: Why make this statement???

BTW guys my man Uncle Buck has been taking a beating on here (deservedly so ) but let's not lose sight of one thing.

U.B. is not a JOB supporter, although he has made the mistake of allowing himself to look like one.

He is opposed to the over the top reactions to every loss from early in the season.

If you actually listen or read what he is saying you will see he does not think O'Brien should be here.

He is just trying to be a couple of things

1. Devils advocate.

2. Keep the level of respect for the position. In other words you may not like the office holder but you should respect the office.

Besides what would the day be without Uncle Buck making BrushwithDeath lose his mind. Before that it was WetBob who absolutely hated U.B.

Well the issue is that the guy holding the position has no respect for the position. We are the ones demanding some respect for it by JOB, so UB is missing the point there if he's asking us to "be nice".

JOB's attitude has been really horrible. He's not just stubborn, but snide and caustic. Rick might have come off as cold, but he was typically polite and lightly positive. He was really good about bringing out true positives on players, not just BSing and not throwing them under the bus.

We forget that Rick was the calm one after the brawl. While Larry Brown was losing his mind, Rick was the one staying calm and on track with keeping the team together.

I can't even imagine JOB here during the brawl.

[Sookie]

Re: Why make this statement???

I think everything Jim does has a rational explanation - I honestly believe that and I try to present that rational explanation. That doesn't mean I agree with Jim on everything - far from it.

It would be better if we discussed Josh McRoberts without regard to Jim O'Brien - it seems as though everything we discuss is tinged by Jim and that causes the discussion to get really heated. I often try to steer away from Jim and just discuss the actual issue.
I love discussing basketball issues - Discussing Jim O'Brien stopped being enjoyable at least 4 months ago.

As to your question - would I rather have Mike or Josh pay the 4. Honestly that isn't a big issue with me either way - I don't have a strong opinion. I can see it both ways. But when almost everyone in the forum is saying play Josh at the 4, and Jim plays Mike or D. Jones, I like to point out the advantages of doing so

Okay, so please..this isn't sarcastic reply or anything, just..if you see a rational explanation, please answer.

1. Why did Price lose his spot in the rotation? In the situation the Pacers are in, when we only want one of our point guards, why isn't that point guard playing?

And now, that TJ is starting to really stink and not care, and Earl is getting tired, AND JOB is starting both of them, why isn't Price getting any time?

Because, I don't see a rational explanation.

2. Why the comments about Josh? On the same night that you compliment BRush for his defense, and the next night praise Danny for his efforts..and then not play Josh in any competitive time at all.

3. Why has Hibbert been pulled from the starting lineup?


Look, honestly, if JOB's crazy rotation was winning games, and we were in the playoff race, then yes, I can see where there could be a rational explanation, but in this context? Really?

We're rebuilding. And we know that the Pacers organization wants to at least keep Hibbert and Price. We aren't winning anything this season, so what in god's name is the rational explanation for those two to be steadily losing minutes. Particularly when the guys that the Pacer's organization doesn't want (earl, Tj, Dun, Troy, Head) are getting plenty of minutes? Rational explanation?

Honestly, I think the explanation is simply this.
1. JOB doesn't like any player that can't hit the three. It's why, of the younger guys, Brandon gets the most time. Why he doesn't like Josh getting minutes, why he's quick to pull Hibbert.
2. In the choice of Vets vs Rookies, JOB always feels that vets are better. Despite no matter how much evidence to the contrary (and there is a lot in the cases of Price vs. TJ and Earl) I think, of all the younger guys, just from what JOB says, he actually likes Price the best. Price does exactly what JOB wants (pushes the ball, finds threes in transition, best shooter) JOB has never made a negative comment about Price, like he has Josh, Hibbert, and Brandon. The problem he has, is unlike Josh, Hibbert, and Brandon...Price has two vets at his position in the rotation. It's also why, the younger guys have to "earn" their playing time (apparently, out playing vets in practice and in games doesn't earn the time..so I'd like to know what would ) where as vets do not. They get it by default.
3. JOB's still trying to win, so he sticks strongly to his beliefs.

Problem is, his beliefs are not rational, are not contributing to winning OR developing the younger guys. And are a negative to the team as a whole.


The most positive thing about this season though, is that I do think the team likes each other. Particularly, those who are supposed to be part of the core group. They still cheer for each other, and help each other out. There are some exceptions there, but I think as a whole, they like each other. It's JOB they can't stand.