GATER, what are the stipulations of contracts? Can they be re-negotiated? Can they be changed? Can they be extended for a lesser amount before the original ends? Austin's contract ends in 3 years. What could be done? He averaged 15.2 points and 6.0 rebounds in the six-game loss to the Lakers. Not long thereafter, he signed a reported seven-year, $51 million contract extension. Taylor signed a 6-year contract worth $48,750,000.00 on Aug 7, 2001. Will be a free Agent in 2007. Cato signed a 6-year contract worth $42,000,000.00 on Sep 23, 1997. Will be a free Agent in 2006.
Way to blow thing out of proportion... Did I say that? I was implying that 10 ppg is not impossible with more minutes. There IS a limit to every player. I was pointing out the discrepancy in minutes. That is what I was trying to show. He's done 15PPG (playoffs) before and 10PPG (regular season with 23 mpg). So, 10PPG not out of the question with 27 minutes per game.
DavidS - All probably a moot point now, but within the CBA, a contract is a contract. Taylor and Croshere both have 3 years remaining and Croshere costs 570k less. Croshere has a player option of $8.9m for 2005-06 which he'd be foolish not to take. Once either contract expires, they can be negotiated up or down within the limits based upon the amount of time a player has been in the league (up = max/years played / down = vet minimum). IMO, neither Taylor nor Croshere will be making $8.5m/year on the first year of their 2007-08 contract.
He is playing for the best team in the East and has all these solid players to draw the defense and the guy, a power forward no less, still can only muster 40% shooting. This could have been more true last year when they had Miller so J Oneal almost always played the 4, but now he plays a lot of 5 too. Further, Croshere is a tweener and can play some three. The problems is Croshere can't get serious PT backing up either forward spot. He can't even give Al Harrington a run for his money, let alone challenge Oneal or Artest for PT. In truth Mo Taylor is our regular 4, Cato simply starts. And Mo Taylor is better on both sides of the ball as a true power forward than Croshere. The only advantage Croshere has is a little more ability to play the 3 and an adequate 3-point shot when he has plenty of room to take it, but Mo is better in eveything else that has to do with being a 4 (defending the WC 4s, low post offense, blocking out for rebounds with a strong body). What Mo gives us is far more important than the extra 3-4 feet on Crosheres set shot that he can pretty much only take when wide open. Yes, but it has to be a move that brings something substantial to the table as a low-post player and defender (typical mold of a ture 4) which Croshere does not.
Yes, that sucks. I agree....but... I just can't see this being a "talent" issue. I just can't. It has to be an "attitude" issue. Of course that may be a problem within itself. But if he was to hustle here as a starter, I say get him. We're runing out of options. Zach? Sheed (no more)? Bosh?
Concerning Austin Croshere's field goal percentage, his ADJUSTED field goal percentage which takes into account HIS 3 POINT FIELD GOAL PERCENTAGE is 49.5%. His points per shots is 1.26. Maurice Taylor has an adjusted FG percentage of 48.7%. Mo's points per shots is 1.13. Maybe the Pacers were smart to turn that trade down.
There is a reason he has gotten no PT for multiple coaches the last couple of years, he just is a very limited player and Indy's 2nd tier/backup guys like Foster, Harrington (before this year) and maybe even the similarly underperforming Bender are better. As I said this is more of a negative reflection of Croshere than a positive reflection of those guys--it wasn't like J Oneal was the only guy taking his PT. Mo would certainly gather more PT on that team as only Oneal has a better post oriented offensive game off Indy's front line since Miller was traded. Yes Croshere has more range than Mo--and when he is wide open he has an OK three ball (I think about 35% for his career), but do we want a 4 who is less adapt at posting up, less adept at shooting mid-range shots, and less capable at defending WC 4s? Croshere's talent just isn't there. Mo has limits too, but far more strengths and Mo seems to have a better sense of his limits. A lot of NBA players have 10-15 good games, cash in big time, than waste away once the league figures out the only thing they can do. I think this is what happened in Croshere's case. I don't believe any GM in the league would actually turn down Mo for Croshere, GM speak out of the side of their mouth all the time so I wouldn't read into 2nd hand comments supposedly said out of Indy.
Yes, this is exactly what I think has happened. It's an attitude problem...not talent. I mean how could one get 15ppg in the playoffs against the Lakers at their peak? It's not a fluke. Yes, he played his butt off and then "cashed in." That's the bad part. It's a character issue, not talent. I remember when I first saw Sam Cassell play...there was just something about this game that made me feel that he was better than any other PG we've ever had. Although not great numbers for the short time he was with us, it didn't matter. That's why it's hard to prove it to you (or anyone at the time) about AC. I just saw something in him that was special; a knack for playing the game; a natural talent. This is what I see in AC. He's just not playing up to his potential. He has all the tools. I feel it. I just can't prove it (arg!). I just think he's unwilling to play hard....simple as that ($) But he has real talent. I felt the same thing about Darko Milicic, Mehmet Okur, Chris Bosh and Andrei Kirilenko ROOKIE YEAR. The first time I saw them play, there is just something about the way they play that shows good signs that they will develope into very good players. Psssst..... Darko Milicic will be better than any of the one that I mentioned above. And he's the worst statistically right now. It wont matter. Darko WILL be an ALL-STAR one day. The hardest part about scouting is being able to see what's "inside" of someone. What will they do once they do land the big contract: Will they work harder or less?
I don't think so, I think it is a talent thing. He got those points against the Lakers because the Lakers were very weak at the 4 that year plus Croshere was the last guy they worried about from that Indy team. It didn't take teams long to figure out the guy could really only hurt you if left completely wide open or completely forgot to box him out for the offensive rebound. Once teams figure out to keep a guy close enough to guard his 3 plus a body for rebounding, he had no other offensive game to speak of to keep teams honest and they could focus on taking advantage of his slowness for a 3 and his lack of legit 4 strength in the low block. I think an analogy with Matt Maloney is similar. Some might argue attitude, but I think it was talent. Sure Matt could make you pay when opponents had to guard Hakeem, Barkley and Clyde, but honestly his NBA talent was marginal and he got the most out it IMO. Same with Croshere, he just has a lot more aspects of his talent/game that can be exploited than he could do the exploiting once teams took him the slightest big serious and that makes for a sub-par NBA player.
I never saw it in Matt. Matt Maloney is not equal to Kirk Hinrich, for example. One is role player, the other is near-all-star, or all-star. I guess we'll have to wait for AC's career to be over. If I can remember your username, I'll bring it up when AC is traded to another team. We'll have to wait and see... He'll get back to 15/10 or better. But not until he's traded.
