RealGM

link

Interesting.

Since I think Tinsley is all but untradable already, I don't think O'Brien's comments do anything to jeopardize possible trades this summer. Nope, I'm resigned to seeing Tins on our roster again next season. I interpret this story more as O'Brien telling Tinsley that the team has decided to move on without him, and that if he wants to salvage his NBA career, he'd better get his **** together fast and hope there's still a chance he can earn his way back in to the team's plans.

The comments on the draft are interesting too...I totally agree that with as many holes as the Pacers have, and with (probably) nothing better than the eleventh pick, we should just get the best guy we can, rather than reach for a mediocre point guard (for example). I'd rather stockpile talent and put ourselves in position to make future moves than saddle ourselves with someone who just isn't good enough to help us or any other NBA team. But, who knows if our front office thinks the same way about this draft as O'Brien.

Two paragraphs here that are some of the bulk of the article....

"To say as a coach we're going to go with him as our point guard despite the injuries, you can't do that," O'Brien said during a phone interview Wednesday. "I would love to see him healthy, but that has not been the track record. It's very, very difficult to depend on him when, physically, he's been undependable. When he's on the court, we know what we're going to get. He's a great assist guy, he runs the fast break great. But based on the track record of physical ailments, how much can you depend on him?"

"I think that if there's somebody available that can fill a need, Larry will certainly fill that need," O'Brien said. "But what if you get to the 11th pick and say our need is point guard, and after the 10th pick it's clear that all the point guards we want are gone? Maybe the 18th-best player on the board is a point guard. I don't think you take the 18th-best player the board; I think you take the absolute best player available because the 11th pick is not going to change around our franchise next year. You're still trying to develop a group of players or assets that can grow this franchise."

WHAT Jamaal not dependable? Jeesssh, what you want the guy to play more than 30 games?

Tinsley Can't Be Counted On

In related news....
-Grass is green
-The Sky is Blue
-Larry Bird is White

PacerGuy wrote:

Tinsley Can't Be Counted On

In related news....
-Grass is green
-The Sky is Blue
-Larry Bird is White

Exactly why O'Brien's public comments will have no measurable impact on the Pacers' efforts to trade Tinsley.

It IS news, at least to me, that someone in the Pacers' organization is now openly saying this stuff about Tinsley. We never saw public comments like this about Tinsley in the past.

Yes, but the difference is these comments are now being made by people within PS&E. We have made these observations known for years. But it makes me feel quite a bit better about O'Brien as the coach that he isn't convinced Jamaal is the PG of the Pacers' future. Last summer, most, including O'Brien were willing to roll the dice with Tinsley again. Most of those same people now believe nothing will ever change. O'Brien is now saying what others (including Rick) have not ever said which is that "Tinsley won't be our guy."

They are just now figuring this out.... ? lol

water is wet

I'm glad the Pacers are finally acknowledging that the Jamaal Tinsley as starter era is over, I really don't think I could've taken another year of them trying to sell the kool-aid to us again.

"I think that if there's somebody available that can fill a need, Larry will certainly fill that need," O'Brien said. "But what if you get to the 11th pick and say our need is point guard, and after the 10th pick it's clear that all the point guards we want are gone? Maybe the 18th-best player on the board is a point guard. I don't think you take the 18th-best player the board; I think you take the absolute best player available because the 11th pick is not going to change around our franchise next year. You're still trying to develop a group of players or assets that can grow this franchise."

I like this strategy, and I wholeheartedly agree with it. It seems like if DJ Augustin is on the board, and no other big name slips that we'll take him, no?

PacersRule07 wrote:
I like this strategy, and I wholeheartedly agree with it. It seems like if DJ Augustin is on the board, and no other big name slips that we'll take him, no?

Depends on if they're as torn as we are on this board. Some of us think he's about the 10th best player in the draft, while others of us think DJ's about the 20th-25th best player in this draft.


For some reason, I just keep seeing Batum going a little later than our pick and just get the heebie-jeebies that we'll take another SF.

Scoot McGroot wrote:-= original quote snipped =-




Depends on if they're as torn as we are on this board. Some of us think he's about the 10th best player in the draft, while others of us think DJ's about the 20th-25th best player in this draft.


For some reason, I just keep seeing Batum going a little later than our pick and just get the heebie-jeebies that we'll take another SF.

I think Batum is more of a SG. All this Augustine talk has me worried. I'm starting to hope someone in front of us takes him just so our front office won't feel the pressure to. If we want to take him with another first round pick in the later picks, please do. Just not at 11. I think by him saying that it shows Augustine is lower on their draft boards. He never would said anything otherwise because there is no way someone takes him before 11.

Maybe NBA GM's think DJ is a top 10 guy, but Westbrook is the 20th or so prospect? Maybe that's what Obie was saying? We have no idea what they've judged.

Well, Chad Ford and Draftexpress have him around our pick, so I'm guessing he's more of a 8-15 pick than a 20-27 pick, but that's just purely speculation.

All I know is that I'm going to complain either way. =)

Unfortunately.....IMHO....all the things JO'B said about Tinsley is also true for JONeal.

It would have been nice if Wells asked the "hardball follow-up" question on whether JO'B could say that we should continue to go with JONeal as our PF ( if not our Franchise Player ) who is as injury-prone ( or has missed as many games for one reason or another ) as Tinsley over the last couple of seasons.

I am guessing that one of the reasons is because we have so much invested in JONeal then compared to Tinsley. But in the end....it's easier to throw a player that is owed $21 mil in guaranteed $$$ under the bus then it is to thrown one that is owed $44 mil.

I can see that the key difference in not having to be dependant on JONeal as one of our Starting Big Men is that we have Murphy and Foster to do their best impression of JONeal when he is out with injuries....whereas we only have Diener to backup Tinsley. But I could still argue that there are better ways to spend the $22mil in salary that he is owed in the 2008-2009 season.

PacersRule07 wrote:I like this strategy, and I wholeheartedly agree with it. It seems like if DJ Augustin is on the board, and no other big name slips that we'll take him, no?

If Westbrook or Love was already off the board......I would take Spreights before I take Augustine at the 11th spot. I do not doubt that Augustine would ( at least ) be a solid Backup PG....but I just don't see him being that good.

At least with Spreights, I can see him filling a need and should be more NBA-Ready then players like Jordan or McGee,

Besides picking a guard in this draft, one player that has my eyes wide open is Jordan. The guy is a Dwight Howard clone, i swear.

Clones these days die after 2+ hours of life.