Croshere Unlikely To Make The Roster

[Dunthreevy]

http://basketball.realgm.com/src_wireta ... ough_cuts/

There's a lot of things that are not in my control," he said. "I'm worrying about things I do have control over. I think I've shown in my three weeks here that I'm good enough to play in the NBA and help teams. I think this team has a chance of making the playoffs. I think a veteran would help."

Is he really this delusional? He must have different game footage in his mind than what he's actually done on the court in preseason. He's averaged 5 points per game in preseason and shot the ball at a remarkably low percentage (33% FG, 26% 3PT, 64% FT). Freakin Josh Davis has put nearly identical numbers in 6 minutes less playing time per game.

Since we invited Croshere to camp I wasn't happy about the decision, nor his attitude. When he originally said "i don't think the Pacers would be wasting my time bringing me in" I just about fell out in laughter. "wasting your time"? I don't exactly see a slew of teams lining up to have Austin Croshere on their roster. Croshere is trying to bank on his previous time here in Indy and get a roster spot because fans liked him when he was here (I was NEVER one of those that did). We have absolutely no need for Austin Croshere on this roster.

Veteran leadership? We have Jeff Foster, Mike Dunleavy, T.J. Ford, and Danny Granger finally assuming that role. A capable hustle guy to bring in at the 4 spot if we're in a pinch? We have a much younger, more athletic version of Croshere, and a hometown favorite in Josh McRoberts. We could talk about his defense but Maceo Baston plays exponentially better defense than Croshere. If by some chance Bird lets one of those 2 guys go and signs Croshere, I for one will not be happy about it.

[mizzoupacers]

All I can do from Missouri is try to read the tea leaves, but my guess is that Cro is out. He just isn't likely to make a big enough impact this season or any future season to justify adding his salary while paying someone else to go away.

[SuperReggie31]

Yep, they just made it official:

http://my.nba.com/thread.jspa?threadID=5800012371

I think this stinks knowing we have a guy on our roster who will do nothing for us while we just two quality, hardworking/ team-oriented players.

However, I can see us bringing Austin back when (if it ever happens) Tinsley is dealt. Hopefully it'll be soon.

[Charcoal Filtered]

Cannot say I am going to be worried about any player that was not going to be a member of the rotation.

It was nice that they brought Austin back, but this will mean little to our W column.

[Dunthreevy]

Yep, they just made it official:

http://my.nba.com/thread.jspa?threadID=5800012371

I think this stinks knowing we have a guy on our roster who will do nothing for us while we just two quality, hardworking/ team-oriented players.

However, I can see us bringing Austin back when (if it ever happens) Tinsley is dealt. Hopefully it'll be soon.

Define "quality".



Seriously though, I see why some fans want Austin on the roster. He's something to remind us of the days when you could be proud to say you're a Pacers fan. In all honesty though, he would be a complete waste of the veteran's minimum if we signed him. If we're going to spend any money at all it shouldn't be an over the hill marginally talented guy that won't make any impact on our roster.

[chatard5]

Man you are ripping on Croshere. When he played for us in the past he played very well, in my opinion. He wasn't worth his contract, but I'd take him over McRoberts. I would take anyone over McRoberts, I don't know why we have him. They were preseason #s, they can be very deceiving, they weren't good but it was in a few games, and was in preseason. I think he's a nice guy and we should've kept him.

[mizzoupacers]

The McRoberts bashing is interesting to me. Now, I'm not from Indiana, and I know next to nothing about the guy. But what I see in him is legit power forward size, athleticism, and at least enough skill to have once been one of the most highly touted players his age in the U.S. Plus he is willing to work for the NBA minimum salary. Plus there are no "character" issues that I'm aware of.

Hmmm...young, cheap, low-maintenance, has looked pretty good in preseason games, and fits right in at the team's position of greatest need if he can be developed...why would McRoberts not be exactly the kind of player the Pacers should keep stashed on the end of the bench?

[HookShotHibbert]

They were preseason #s, they can be very deceiving, they weren't good but it was in a few games, and was in preseason. I think he's a nice guy and we should've kept him.

Preseason numbers may be decieveing, but for a marginal veteran without a guaranteed contract and who has already been overpaid once for his services, you would think his numbers should be decievingly high. And as far as him being a nice guy, I haven't heard that were giving roster spots to every nice guy in camp. I am sure Josh McRoberts is just as nice!

[count55]

The McRoberts bashing is interesting to me. Now, I'm not from Indiana, and I know next to nothing about the guy. But what I see in him is legit power forward size, athleticism, and at least enough skill to have once been one of the most highly touted players his age in the U.S. Plus he is willing to work for the NBA minimum salary. Plus there are no "character" issues that I'm aware of.

Hmmm...young, cheap, low-maintenance, has looked pretty good in preseason games, and fits right in at the team's position of greatest need if he can be developed...why would McRoberts not be exactly the kind of player the Pacers should keep stashed on the end of the bench?

I'm not sure about "bashing"...I think the earlier poster was referring to Tinsley when he said that there was a guy on our roster who would give us nothing, not McRoberts.

Anyway, I agree with the young, cheap, low maintenance part. However, I disagree about "the kind of player the Pacers should keep stashed on the end of the bench." I've discussed this elsewhere, but I think the 14th/15th spots are better served for cheap veterans who can sit for a long time, then contribute immediately in an emergency. I think it's a horrible spot for someone you want to develop.

The 14th/15th guy generally won't play. The only real way to develop players is by playing them. Therefore, with rare exception, the 14th/15th guy never develops. If you're serious about a young guy being a part of your future, then he should be no worse than 9th to 12th in the rotation...seeing at least marginally steady playing time. This is where I see Rush & Hibbert. Young guys below that are generally just filler, and that's where I see McBob and Graham.

All that being said, I think McRoberts earned his roster spot. However, I don't really see a future for him. He's on a min contract, and I would still rate his chances of being on the roster next year somewhere south of 50/50.

[HookShotHibbert]

Hey count, I understand your point about the difference between a veteran or young guy on the end of the bench, but the difference in this case is, McRoberts is D-league eligible. Even though he may be on the end of the Pacers bench, he may develop his skills as a huge contributor on the Mad Ants.

[count55]

I can see that, but I'm not a big fan of the D-League. If we had an actual farm system that was devoted to the Pacers, I'd buy into it. However, I'm not overly fond of players going and playing in a different system with a bunch of players whose sole agenda is to make it to the NBA. I don't think 20-30 minutes a night in the D-League is anywhere near as productive as even 5 minutes playing within the real team and the real system. I also get concerned about injuries, etc.

I see very little value in the D-League, as currently constituted, and I probably would never send a player there.

[mizzoupacers]

Agreed that D League sucks as a developmental resource. But disagree on what constitutes a sensible player for the end of the bench. If you are a legit contender, then sure, having vets at the end of the bench who can contribute right away in case of emergencies makes sense. For teams like the Pacers, though, it makes little sense. It means, at best, the difference between a 40-win season and maybe a 41-win season. For that you are paying extra money for guys who aren't going to make a meaningful difference and certainly don't have future value.

Being the fourteenth man is not ideal for a developing player, just as it's not ideal for any player. But you can't develop guys you do not retain rights to. If McRoberts does the things he's supposed to as the fourteenth man, then presumably he will get a chance next year to do what he is supposed to as an eleventh or twelfth man. And maybe he takes another step from there the year after that.

Don't get me wrong, I don't see McRoberts as anything but a long shot to ever become a significant contributor to the Pacers. But given the team's current situation, it makes more sense to me to pay minimum wage to a young guy who perhaps could grow into a meaningful future role, than to pay extra for a vet who is highly unlikely to do anything worthwhile. At least that's the way I see it.

Man, time for the season to start so that I am no longer reduced to making mountains out of mole hills just to have something to talk about.

[Dunthreevy]

Don't get me wrong, I don't see McRoberts as anything but a long shot to ever become a significant contributor to the Pacers. But given the team's current situation, it makes more sense to me to pay minimum wage to a young guy who perhaps could grow into a meaningful future role, than to pay extra for a vet who is highly unlikely to do anything worthwhile. At least that's the way I see it.

Man, time for the season to start so that I am no longer reduced to making mountains out of mole hills just to have something to talk about.

True

and

True

I honestly can not see how paying Croshere more money to sit on the same spot on the bench as McBob would be good in any conceivable way. As I said before McBob has pretty much the same skill set as Croshere had... 10 years ago. I see no reason to keep Croshere around because he's a "nice guy". We've now got a team full of nice guys so I don't think one more (that will barely see the court) is going to do much for us other than hurt our cap number slightly more.

[count55]

The "more" or "extra" for a veteran here is created by the fact that McBob was guaranteed and AC was not.

Since the NBA reimburses teams the difference between a the min contract of a 2 year vet ($798) and the min contract for any player with three or more years (in AC's case, $1,261), the actual difference in salary (to the Pacers) would've been only about $85k (excluding the guaranteed/non-guaranteed situation).

As I said elsewhere, there was no right or wrong decision here. Cutting AC made sense because he had failed to make a good enough case for them to pay him and cut a guaranteed contract. McBob appeared to have earned a roster spot, so, good for him, but I saw nothing that would indicate that he's ever going to be contributor in the NBA.

My preference, regardless of the teams situation, would go towards veterans because I think they're more capable of contributing both on the floor and in the locker room. However, these roster slots on the team are largely meaningless. I think that the young players you have on the team should be ones you're serious about developing, and any other young guys just create more noise.

It is a shame that Droopy's basically just a dead roster spot because I'd love to have an extra PG until Travis comes back.

[realfung]

Damn, Croshere is like Pacers' long time sub-franchise player..
You think about Croshere, you think about Pacers.

[carmelbrownqueen]

Croshere just signed with the Bucks.

[Gremz]

^^I wish him all the best, it's a shame we couldn't fit him in, but perhaps it might be for the best if some of the new role players can prove their worth....I'm pointing at you McRoberts!