O'Brien Questions Tinsley's Dependability

[UNIT]

May 8, 2008 - 10:25 am
The Indianapolis Star -

Jim O'Brien claims that his relationship with point guard Jamaal Tinsley is good, but that he isn't sure he can depend on him to run the Pacers, according to The Indianapolis Star.

"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 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?"

O'Brien campaigned to keep Tinsley on the team shortly after he was named coach last offseason, but their relationship appeared to sour soon after.

The two deny any personal misunderstanding, but their on-court relationship appears headed for the worst as well.

"It comes down to whether Jamaal is healthy enough to be part of the mix for the future," O'Brien said.  

[olsons3]

I would agree.  I feel the same way with JO.  Both are good players when healthy.  It is unfortunate that "healthy" has been the exception, and not the rule.  A coach can't center his plans around guys that you can not depend on to be in the lineup every night.  

If Tinsley stays, which I hope against (based on off-court stupidity), he should be no more than a backup, since you can't assume that he'll play more than half a season worth of games.

Everyone misses games here and there.  The season is long, and coaches play their core players too many minutes per game.  Eventually a body gets sore or injured.

A good team manager would recognize this in certain players and say, Tinsley and Oneal can play no more than 24 per night.  Sure it will limit their production per game, but could help their production for the season since they may actually appear in 75+ games instead of 45.