↓ Login/Logout ↓
Schedule/Results
↓ Roster ↓
Salaries
↓ Archives ↓
↓ About ↓

Jonas Jerebko to play more small forward

Keith Langlois of Pistons.com:

More experiments coming: Jonas at 3

This pleases me. Given the Pistons’ current lack of frontcourt production, Jonas Jerebko’s best position for this team might be power forward. He’s definitely capable of holding his own at the four, and that’s a valuable trait.

But in the long run, I still think Jerebko’s best position will be small forward. There, his excellent athleticism could allow him to impose his will rather than just holding his own.

14 Comments

  • Apr 16, 201210:42 am
    by Jman

    Reply

    So, let’s trade Prince in the offseason

  • Apr 16, 201212:00 pm
    by Corey

    Reply

    Jerebko had games his rookie season where he was physically dominant as a small forward, especially on the glass. He has small forward athleticism and almost power forward size. It’s the almost that gets him in trouble playing the 4. I think of the key bonuses to drafting a big man this year is moving Jonas to the 3, where he has a chance to become a competent starter. He’ll never be a good starter as a 4.

    Heck, even playing CV is worthwhile if they use the opportunity to move JJ to the three and make Tay work for his minutes.

    • Apr 16, 201212:04 pm
      by Patrick Hayes

      Reply

      Interesting you mention Prince. He’s been shooting a career low all season, but he’s been even worse than that in April at 37 percent this month. Really hope Frank uses these last few games to limit Prince’s minutes and see if Jerebko can play a bigger role at SF going into next season.

  • Apr 16, 201212:24 pm
    by dvs

    Reply

    I was hoping for this for a while. Especially now that CV seems to be healthy and getting a few minutes Frank should use Jonas at the 3. Wilkins has been useful, but realistically Jonas has a future with the team, Wilkins probably doesn’t. jonas at 3 also gives us some much needed size on the perimeter.
     

  • Apr 16, 20121:00 pm
    by Jeremy

    Reply

    I am applauding this move as well. He may not have the speed to keep up with some of the more athletic 3′s in the league, but he definitely has the physical presence to dominate the smaller ones (I wonder what the match up looks like in practice when Jonas goes up against the living stick figure, err, I mean Daye).

  • Apr 16, 20121:01 pm
    by frankie d

    Reply

    agree wholeheartedly with the idea that JJ could be a dominant force at SF, while he will only hold his own, against most PFs.  
    JJ could easily take his 23 minuttes per game up to 30, with most of those minutes coming at SF.
    why doesn’t he get those minutes at SF?
    just another example of headscratching roster moves.
    let me get this straight…JJ got a DNP-CD while wilkins plays 18 minutes?  essentially, he benches JJ in order to make sure that wilkins gets his 18 minutes.   and JJ can’t get minutes at SF cause wilkins has to get his 15 minutes.
    and tay plays his 35 minutes while scoring 4 points, with a -20 for the game.  and playing absolutely lazy defense.  on a crucial noah offensive rebound late in OT tay stood near the free throw line and instead of attempting to help on the boards, he hedged out to the 3 point line, to avoid having to help on the d-boards.  he clearly didn’t want to mix it up, but wanted to do something – instead of just standing there – so he runs out to the 3 point line while his teammates are outnumbered under the boards.  horrendous and lazy and it cost the team.  other guys get benched because they fail to carry out their defensive responsibilities…where is the sanction for tay?
    how come he is “gifted” his 34 minutes regardless of how he plays? 
    the first part of the above tweet was left off:
    “LFrank on using Charlie V: wanted to get 2nd unit punch due to low-scoring 2nd, 4th Qs in past vs. Chi. ”
    so let’s review…there are 6 more games to go…and the coach finally realizes that he has one of the lowest scoring teams in the league…and he thinks…”gee…maybe i can look at my bench and bring a guy in who can score…now who would that be?”
    detroit’s scoring has been bad all year.  obviously. which makes his decision to bury some of his best scorers that much more puzzling.  with a team as bad as detroit, how the heck can the coach simply bury guys who have needed skills, even if they don’t fit exactly as he’d hope they would.
    in the recent orlando game, the announcer, matt goukas was joking about the fact that frank had a very crowded dog house.  he cited daye and CV and bynum as guys who had been stuck in it for varying and long periods. 
    he wondered what it took for so many guys to get in the doghouse.  but he also wondered why it was so tough for guys to get out of the doghouse.
    burying talent without giving them a chance to redeem themselves is a losing game.
    it’s college stuff.  bobby knight stuff that might have worked with steve alford, but it’s the kind of thing that leads to mediocrity in the nba.
    this is what knight said about benching alford for one game:
    “Knight said he benched Alford to help him concentrate on seeing the whole floor better and on improving his defense…”
    sound familiar?  the games frank plays with guys are straight out of the bobby knight playbook.  after all these years, you’d think that an nba coach would understand that that stuff doesn’t work in the nba.
    we’re seeing the results of frank’s stubborness this year.

    • Apr 16, 20127:27 pm
      by apa8ren9

      Reply

      Bottom line Frankie, despite all of the complaining, Frank has done everything that you asked.  He gave Daye multiple shots, CV is playing, Macklin got a good chunk of playing time and despite what you are saying -HE HAS NOT BEEN UNFAIR TO PLAYERS.  No matter how many times you mention/imply the contrary it is not true.  You may have not liked how he did it or when he did it, but he executed HIS plan while being fair to the players, maintaining HIS message and trying to win as many games as possible with the roster he has.  Isnt that what a coach is supposed to do?

      • Apr 16, 201210:50 pm
        by frankie d

        Reply

        “Macklin got a good chunk of playing time ”
        can you identify a game where macklin got a good chunk of playing time?
        games where he has gotten a good chunk of playing time?
        whether anyone is “fair” or “unfair” is a totally subjective determination.
        what you may think is fair, i may not think is fair.
        what particular players may think is unfair, frank may think is fair.
        so for you, or anyone, to unilaterally declare that someone has been “fair” it simply means nothing.
        that is your opinion. 
        “… he executed HIS plan while being fair to the players, maintaining HIS message and trying to win as many games as possible with the roster he has.  Isnt that what a coach is supposed to do? ”
        not necessarily.  some coaches certainly feel that way.  other coaches feel that they can take a step back if that step back will ultimately benefit the team and organization in the long term.
        popovich, for instance, will often sit players for reasons that he certainly understands.  but he will knowingly put his team at a disadvantage by sitting certain players because he believes that, in the long run, his team will benefit.
        some coaches play young players, despite the fact that it may hurt them in the long run.  they sacrifice a game here or there for the long term benefit of giving their young players experience.
        i think frank is a mediocre coach.
        his record certainly indicates that he is a mediocre coach.
        the way he handles his roster indicates, imho, that he is a mediocre coach.
        so, yea, that is his way, and we see the results.  
        22 wins and what, 37 losses?
        looks like he’s done just a great job!

        • Apr 17, 20129:58 am
          by apa8ren9

          Reply

          I didnt entirely make myself clear with Macklin, I thought since you were a champion of his that you knew what I was implying.  Since you didnt then I’ll explain it to you.  He got a large chunk of playing time in the NBDL, so that he wouldnt embarrass himself when he gets time in a real NBA game.  Macklin said himself that he was out of shape, so what purpose would have been served if he played in an NBA game when coach Frankie D wanted him to play? Ive said it in previous posts that Macklin would get a shot over the last few games.
          My opinion is that it is too early to tell that Frank is a mediocre coach.  It is only his first year with the Pistons.

          • Apr 17, 20121:11 pm
            by frankie d

            LOLOLOL!
            so…playing in the d-league qualifies as the same thing as nba PT?
            okay….
            there’s a thread of sanity somewhere in that statement.
            yes, playing in the d-league lets the organization know how he will fare against nba competition.
            i’m glad you’ve come up with such a novel way of determining how well prospects will fare.
            why don’t we just send all the young guys – daye, knight, macklin, JJ – down to the d-league and let them play all year.  it seems like such a great thing.
            he was so out of shape because he wasn’t playing here. the one thing that nba vets will talk about is how tough it is to stay in game shape if they are out of the rotation.  it certainly would not be unreasonable for a rookie to fall into the trap of not being in game shape if he was only playing garbage minutes every 4th game or so.
            the pistons have mishandled macklin from the very beginning.
            if they were concerned about his conditioning, they could have sent him down earlier in the year, gotten him in shape and then had an in-shape big guy to use for a good portion of the season.
            the fact that macklin has still not played is ridiculous and an example of how dumb management has been this year.
            it’s been a fiasco.
            and 22-37 says it all.
            i got your great coach for you, right there in those numbers: 22-37…

  • Apr 16, 20125:00 pm
    by Mark

    Reply

    This is great to hear. While JJ can be effective as a backup 4 in todays NBA, I think he can be equally effective if not more as a starting 3, which obviously provides more value as a starter vs bench guy.

    I like that they are now experimenting, but also wonder why it took so long? They had so many games they wasted where we could’ve seen these type of experiments.

    I heard Roy Rogers say after the game that they were going to use these last 6 games to try all different combos. I wonder if Macklin will get a chance at all.

    • Apr 16, 20127:16 pm
      by apa8ren9

      Reply

      I have always wondered why coaches take so long and have never heard a decent answer, but coaches have repeatedly over the years waited until the last week or so of the season to do things like this. (let me qualify this –at least the ones that try to win games)  Its the same as when you wonder why the starters are in until the last 1:30 of a 25 point blowout.  It seems like that is just what coaches do.  I believe Macklin will get a chance to play but I dont expect him to get big minutes until maybe the last game or 2.

  • Apr 16, 20125:01 pm
    by Mark

    Reply

    If they stick with JJ at the 3, they could go a game or two with Macklin at back up 4 instead of CV.

  • Leave a Reply

    Your Ad Here