PDA

View Full Version : Why we'll win game 6



able
05-19-2005, 09:20 AM
Time to be more blunt, but despite that gnawing feeling that says that we're done, I have this overriding sense of "we'll WIN" and there are many reasons for it:

1. we lost two in a row, AFTER we WON two in a row, as everyone said before game 4, winning 3 in a row against a team of that caliber is almost impossible, wel lthat goes two way, we are not in the habit of losing two or more in a row, therefore we will win.
2. "Reggie's last game" it has a certain magic to it, players will just bite their tongues one more time, run the extra screen one more time, hit the boards that little harder.
3. Even "created" slumps don't last that long. Once they start shooting they will start falling, the law of averages just demands it.
4. The crowd will be there for the team, more perhaps then in game 4, adn they were loud!
5. Rick may not have made the in-game changes he perhaps should have made, but between games I am sure he will come up with something to improve our offense.
6. We wil crash the boards, knowing that rebounds give scoring chances (offensive and defensive, only ball possesion can let you score).
7. Detroit won two in a row, BIG they will not expect the Pacers to try another fight, and even if they do, they will have in mind that game 7 is in the Palace.
8. we are just plain good :D


there ya have it, no caveats, we WILL WIN.

shags
05-19-2005, 09:26 AM
Very good points.

As a Piston fan, I'm definitely worried that the Pistons won't take this game seriously enough. They need to treat this like a Game 7, and understand the type of intensity the Pacers will bring and the kind of desperation they will play with. It's important to close this out, but the Pacers are going to play great tonight, so it's going to be tough.

Jon Theodore
05-19-2005, 10:41 AM
Yes we will win. THANK YOU

WEST
05-19-2005, 11:03 AM
I don't think the Pistons will come out over confident. Everyone thought that might happen in game 5 and look what happened. They will not not take the Pacers lightly in game 6. I think on the otherhand the Pacers will play alot better and with more energy than they have the last few games. I think this will be an extremely close and exciting game.

Diamond Dave
05-19-2005, 11:28 AM
I have to ask about #2, when does that become pointless? At some point we always run into "Reggie's last game", if the players can always muster enough to win it for Reg then should we not win a championship. Sorry guys, I think the Pacers know they're done. Just like Tim said, they are just waiting to die now.

indytoad
05-19-2005, 11:38 AM
Pacers won't win this game. In fact, it's not even going to be close.

IndyToad
Step out the car meow

3ptmiller
05-19-2005, 11:42 AM
Pacers won't win this game. In fact, it's not even going to be close.

IndyToad
Step out the car meow

:mad:

rabid
05-19-2005, 12:19 PM
Pacers won't win this game. In fact, it's not even going to be close.

IndyToad
Step out the car meow

I'm not feeling too good about it either. Detroit is 7-0 in closeout games over the last two years for a reason. They smell blood.

Here's hoping I'm wrong...

DisplacedKnick
05-19-2005, 01:54 PM
I think the Pacers win tonight - and I think it for no rational reason.

My reasons are:

1) No way the Pacers shoot that bad AGAIN - Detroit's a great defensive team but they aren't impregnable

2) Tinsley is more than due for a good game and he's your key

3) This is the big one and has no rationality. Every time this season when it looked like the Pacers were dead - like they'd taken that one last shot that would put them out of their misery - they came up with something nobody thought they had in them. The post-brawl winning streak with 7 or 8 guys in uniform. The response to the JO shoulder injury. The response to the Tinsley injury. The response to the Boston blowouts.

I think they have one more of those in them and I think we'll see it tonight. I'd still put Detroit at 5:1 favorites to win the series, but I'd give 3:2 on the Pacers tonight.

They look like they're done. But every other time they've looked like that this season, they haven't been.

Kstat
05-19-2005, 01:58 PM
As someone else mentioned before, the Billup-Rip-Ben Pistons are at their BEST when they can finish a team off. They're undefeated (7-0) over the last 3 years in this situation.

Also, they know the more games they lose, the more they allow shaq to rest. They want this series to be over ASAP. They're also not going to overlook Reggie Miller in his final game.

Lastly, the common theme around here seems to be, "they played so bad, so by rule they're due to play well tonight." That's a very dangerous mentality to have. They're going to have to MAKE things go better for them. Its not going to happen on its own.

BillS
05-19-2005, 02:07 PM
Detroit is 7-0 in closeout situations just means that they aren't likely to let down coming into this game.

It is no more of a guarantee than the fact that prior to last series Indiana had never won a series after losing the first game.

I'm more encouraged by the way the Pacers have played with their backs against the wall <i>this</i> year, and think it will have more of an effect than multi-year past performance stats.

Diamond Dave
05-19-2005, 02:09 PM
As someone else mentioned before, the Billup-Rip-Ben Pistons are at their BEST when they can finish a team off. They're undefeated (7-0) over the last 3 years in this situation.

Also, they know the more games they lose, the more they allow shaq to rest. They want this series to be over ASAP. They're also not going to overlook Reggie Miller in his final game.

Lastly, the common theme around here seems to be, "they played so bad, so by rule they're due to play well tonight." That's a very dangerous mentality to have. They're going to have to MAKE things go better for them. Its not going to happen on its own.

As much as I hate it, its all true. The Pacers are not shooting well do to bad luck, that happens once in a series maybe twice. The Pacers have made it tradition. So I have no reason to believe that tonight we will hit our shots tonight. The Pistons D has some to do with that, but honestly we just don't have a whole lot of great shooters on this team.

PaceBalls
05-19-2005, 02:43 PM
Game 5 was the only game I felt the Pistons totally dominated. Game 1 sure was ugly, but towards the end of the game the Pacers looked like they were in command.

Problem is the Pistons seemed to have figured out most of the myriad of lineups we can throw at them by now. If Tinsley and the Pacers can just run more of that beautiful Highscreen pick n roll play... its gonna take alot of luck and sound play calling, along with some miller magic to win tonight.

brichard
05-19-2005, 02:46 PM
As much as I hate it, its all true. The Pacers are not shooting well do to bad luck, that happens once in a series maybe twice. The Pacers have made it tradition. So I have no reason to believe that tonight we will hit our shots tonight. The Pistons D has some to do with that, but honestly we just don't have a whole lot of great shooters on this team.

Do you really feel that way?

I admit that I have not seen the last two games, but I did see us get blown out by the Celtics and in turn blow them out. Each time we were creamed the defensive effort was there from the Celts, but we also were shooting extremely poorly.

If all our shots were not falling b/c they were contested, then I will agree that the defense of the Pistons is to blame. But I have a hard time believing we did not get some wide open looks from the 3-pt line. And we have to face it, part of our ability to win games is hitting the long ball. It isn't the only reason and we can't rely on it exclusively, but against a team like the Pistons we have to shoot better than 20%.

I do think Detroit took away some of the easy stuff, but it sounds to me like they were giving us the outside shot. With guys like Stephen Jackson, Fred Jones, Reggie, AJ, Austin, and James Jones... we have at least 6 guys who can make that shot. Granted some more than others, but to shoot it as coldly as we did was just uncommon.

And that is what I don't expect to see again, missed wide open shots. Will we continue to struggle in the paint... yes. But, one of the things to loosen the lane up is to actually hit a shot outside the paint. The colder we shoot from the outside the easier we make it for the Pistons to defend us.

One thing I would like to know is this, is there any way of drawing fouls against Sheed and Ben? I know people got mad at Tins going in there and JO shooting so much, but can't somebody draw a freaking foul on them? It may be that they play defense that well, or it may be the respect of the officials, but it would be huge if we could actually sit one of those guys down.

The Pistons have certainly had our bigs (Foster, O'Neal) in foul trouble, so it would be nice to have that reversed.

If we do win this game and there are little fouls called on the Wallaces, that is what Rick should go to the media with. He should tell his team it is all strategy and to keep their heads out of their keesters, but that political move may be worth it's weight in gold. As much as I hate the thought of him whining...

Kstat
05-19-2005, 02:59 PM
I admit that I have not seen the last two games, but I did see us get blown out by the Celtics and in turn blow them out.

I'm flattered you think the Pistons are no better than the Celtics :laugh:



I admit that I have not seen the last two games

That might play a SMALL part in this post.....


But I have a hard time believing we did not get some wide open looks from the 3-pt line.

Oh, you got some open looks. But you're not going to beat the LA clippers on threes alone, let alone us. Your shooters aren't that good, outside of two, maybe three guys.


I do think Detroit took away some of the easy stuff, but it sounds to me like they were giving us the outside shot. With guys like Stephen Jackson, Fred Jones, Reggie, AJ, Austin, and James Jones... we have at least 6 guys who can make that shot.

I see four guys on that list that I would be perfectly happy at giving them an open three every posession.


And that is what I don't expect to see again, missed wide open shots. Will we continue to struggle in the paint... yes. But, one of the things to loosen the lane up is to actually hit a shot outside the paint. The colder we shoot from the outside the easier we make it for the Pistons to defend us.


The more you take threes, the less you make us respect you inside, the more we can easily trap you on the perimeter.

ANY time in the playoffs that you've had good shooting nights, its because Oneal is creating those open looks by drawing attention.


One thing I would like to know is this, is there any way of drawing fouls against Sheed and Ben? I know people got mad at Tins going in there and JO shooting so much, but can't somebody draw a freaking foul on them? It may be that they play defense that well, or it may be the respect of the officials, but it would be huge if we could actually sit one of those guys down.

Pretty riskey game to play. If you don't draw fouls, those blocked shots are going to turn into easy transition baskets.

We also have this guy....his name is McDyess.....I hear he's pretty good too....


The Pistons have certainly had our bigs (Foster, O'Neal) in foul trouble, so it would be nice to have that reversed.

We did that by going at them in the post, and by ben simply drawing a lot of holding fouls on the boards. There's no trick to it, we just kept going at them in the paint.


If we do win this game and there are little fouls called on the Wallaces, that is what Rick should go to the media with. He should tell his team it is all strategy and to keep their heads out of their keesters, but that political move may be worth it's weight in gold. As much as I hate the thought of him whining...

I don't understand this part at all.

DisplacedKnick
05-19-2005, 03:02 PM
I know people got mad at Tins going in there and JO shooting so much, but can't somebody draw a freaking foul on them? It may be that they play defense that well, or it may be the respect of the officials, but it would be huge if we could actually sit one of those guys down.



Pre-injury JO used to go inside a LOT more to draw a foul than score - 391 FTA's in 44 games. Not sure where that would rank him in the league but pretty high.

Since the injury he doesn't do that. I don't blame him for that AT ALL. But it is a fact that he's trying to avoid contact.

Diamond Dave
05-19-2005, 03:17 PM
I do think Detroit took away some of the easy stuff, but it sounds to me like they were giving us the outside shot. With guys like Stephen Jackson, Fred Jones, Reggie, AJ, Austin, and James Jones... we have at least 6 guys who can make that shot. Granted some more than others, but to shoot it as coldly as we did was just uncommon.



Jax, yes he can shoot and score. The overall best at both on this team. Thats why he is having so much success.

Fred, I don't consider him a great shooter or even a good shooter. He is a decent scorer and he can occasionally (I know his hand is broken so he gets a pass) hit the three. But I have yet to see any mid-range game from him.

Reggie, obviously, but his defense is dismal thus neutralizing himself plus he is a shooter only not a scorer.

AJ, basically the same as Reg but better D. He has helped significantly in this series.

Austin, :bananadea

JJ, a very large brightspot but does not play enough right now and I think the pressure of this series has affected this series.

brichard
05-19-2005, 03:56 PM
Kstat,

Sometimes you approach a thread with purpose and intelligence, but this is not one of those times. It is good to have posters of other teams around b/c it does give good perspective. And I generally appreciate your sense of humor, the comment on the Reggie "No Rings" post had me laughing out loud in my car just thinking about it.

But, the better your team is doing, you do have a tendency to be a bit of an .....we'll say eccentric personality. You have greatly exaggereated anything I said in my post and I'll address some things here:


I'm flattered you think the Pistons are no better than the Celtics :laugh:

I never said the Celtics were on par with the Pistons defensively. However, they did present some major problems for us at times. And they are better at some things then the Pistons are defensively. Their athleticism and speed were at the very best when they pressured AJ. This is meant as no disrespect to the Pistons, and that is why I have all but conceded that they own the paint. Clearly that was not the case vs. the Celts.


That might play a SMALL part in this post......
I didn't see, but I did HEAR and READ. I listened to Slick and Mark, and quite frankly I've seen this before. I have seen periods against the Pistons where JO couldn't shoot. I've read the thoughts from people who's perspective I trust on this forum. I've watched the Pistons play the Pacers for 2 years, so I don't think you beamed down anybody from the mother ship to play the last two games. The Bi-Polar tendency of the Pacers is nothing new to this series

Oh, you got some open looks. But you're not going to beat the LA clippers on threes alone, let alone us. Your shooters aren't that good, outside of two, maybe three guys. I see four guys on that list that I would be perfectly happy at giving them an open three every posession.

Somebody did the math for game 4 showing the difference in score if the Pacers hit an average amount of three pointers, let alone some of their outside shots. You may be interested in knowing that we would have won. But since we couldn't locate the basket and lost it is a moot point. And I've never said that we should rely on the three point shot. To me, a team like the Suns relies on that shot. They have enough good shooters where that is okay. We don't need to become Phoenix, but we do need to hit a few. Not only for the points, but to make Detroit respect our shooters. This is actually a compliment to Detroit. Since we are having a tough time scoring in the post, where we have relatively few scorers, we can't afford to be ice cold outside. You may breathe easy watching Austin chuck a 3 pt. shot, but I for one can't stand to see another JO shot miss from close in. And who do we have to fill in for him? The offensive magic of Pollard, Davis, and Foster? Please, I'd rather have Reggie go with guns blazing any day of the week.

People are real prone to amnesia. Were you real happy letting Austin shoot in the 2004 playoffs? Did you know that Fred went 4-5 in game 7 vs. the Celts? Everything has its opposite, and the law of averages typically trues up over time. We may defy logic and have another horrid shooting game, but I'm hoping/praying we don't. The Pistons are the reason we are not scoring in the paint, but they are not the reason we are missing wide open shots.


The more you take threes, the less you make us respect you inside, the more we can easily trap you on the perimeter. ANY time in the playoffs that you've had good shooting nights, its because Oneal is creating those open looks by drawing attention. Pretty riskey game to play. If you don't draw fouls, those blocked shots are going to turn into easy transition baskets.
We also have this guy....his name is McDyess.....I hear he's pretty good too....We did that by going at them in the post, and by ben simply drawing a lot of holding fouls on the boards. There's no trick to it, we just kept going at them in the paint.I don't understand this part at all.

So what are your thoughts here than Kstat? Should we continue to pack it in to an ineffective O'neal? Should we just lay down and say the Pistons own us? I'm serious, what are you trying to say? We have to do something. As it has been said before, one of the definitions of insanity is to continue doing the same things and expecting a different result. And if one thing Reggie has proven in his career... he can eventually get open. And it isn't b/c JO is lighting it up, it is b/c he is running off screens like a pinball.

We can beat Detroit on a given night, we've done it 4 times this year, and twice it has happened in the playoffs (since you don't count the regular season.) Although we were owned the last two games, you are still only up one game in the series.

brichard
05-19-2005, 04:05 PM
Jax, yes he can shoot and score. The overall best at both on this team. Thats why he is having so much success.

Fred, I don't consider him a great shooter or even a good shooter. He is a decent scorer and he can occasionally (I know his hand is broken so he gets a pass) hit the three. But I have yet to see any mid-range game from him.

Reggie, obviously, but his defense is dismal thus neutralizing himself plus he is a shooter only not a scorer.

AJ, basically the same as Reg but better D. He has helped significantly in this series.

Austin, :bananadea

JJ, a very large brightspot but does not play enough right now and I think the pressure of this series has affected this series.

I think that we are so thirsty for scoring that Jax has become a bit of a mirage. According to Pacers.com, here are the shooting stats for the series:

Indeed, the Pacers have suffered a collective slump against Detroit. Jermaine O'Neal is shooting .345 from the field, Jackson .338 and Miller .380. The team is shooting .230 from the 3-point line, with Miller and Jackson a combined 11-of-52 (.212).

If .338 is considered successful, than I'd hate to see him playing poorly. :)

Diamond Dave
05-19-2005, 04:10 PM
I think that we are so thirsty for scoring that Jax has become a bit of a mirage. According to Pacers.com, here are the shooting stats for the series:

Indeed, the Pacers have suffered a collective slump against Detroit. Jermaine O'Neal is shooting .345 from the field, Jackson .338 and Miller .380. The team is shooting .230 from the 3-point line, with Miller and Jackson a combined 11-of-52 (.212).

If .338 is considered successful, than I'd hate to see him playing poorly. :)

That is a very good point. And that is why this off-season I think it is necessary to get some more offense on this team. Also Jackson stats are also a mirage as many of his shots come off drives in which he goes up gets fouled hard, misses the shot, but goes to the line and makes some FTs. So his FG% goes down but his PPG goes up and so does his effectiveness.

brichard
05-19-2005, 04:13 PM
Also Jackson stats are also a mirage as many of his shots come off drives in which he goes up gets fouled hard, misses the shot, but goes to the line and makes some FTs. So his FG% goes down but his PPG goes up and so does his effectiveness.


Is that true? I always thought that when a person missed a shot b/c of a foul that it did not count as a miss, but rather it was listed in the FT column. I may be a complete idiot on this, but it doesn't seem like a fellow should be penalized on his FG% when he takes a trip to the line.

btw, I was surprised to see the stats on Jax myself. It is hard to believe he is shooting worse than JO for the series. :eek:

Diamond Dave
05-19-2005, 04:18 PM
I'm pretty sure it is. Its really stupid like football where a wide out catches a 40 yard bomb and they call Pass Interference. The team still gets to move the 40 yds, but the WR and QB don't get to add it to their stats.

MagicRat
05-19-2005, 04:22 PM
If you're fouled in the act of shooting and you miss, it doesn't count against your FG%....

Part of Jackson's problem has been being fouled while in the act of shooting and not getting any calls..........

Diamond Dave
05-19-2005, 04:28 PM
If you're fouled in the act of shooting and you miss, it doesn't count against your FG%....

Part of Jackson's problem has been being fouled while in the act of shooting and not getting any calls..........

I did not know that, I thought it was the other way. :blush:

Still Jax FG% is down due to what MR said.

DisplacedKnick
05-19-2005, 04:37 PM
I took a look at playoff stats and thought his pts/FGA would be the highest on the team besides Foster (for someone who took any amount of shots). It wasn't. Don't know who was highest but Reggie's #'s were better.

Unclebuck
05-19-2005, 04:46 PM
In order for the Pacers to win tonight. It will be an aberation. What I mean the pisotns will have to play a poor game, Pacers will have to play well, hit some threes, feed off the crowd.

Sorta like game #5 of the finals against the Lakers.

Edit: things that don't make sense. If a pass is made that leads to a shooter geting fouled, I think the guy who made the pass should get an assist as long as the guy makes at least one free throw

NorCal_Pacerfan
05-19-2005, 04:48 PM
Pacers will win tonight and go on the win the series in 7.

DisplacedKnick
05-19-2005, 06:05 PM
UB - I don't believe that. I think if both teams play their theoretical "best" games, the Pistons would probably win 7 or 8 of 10 by an average of about 6 points or so.

IOW, if the Pacers play well, I don't think Detroit needs to play bad - just not their best. The Pacers are capable of playing with Detroit enough so all it would take is about a 5-minute Detroit lapse at some point to pull out a win. Or if someone really got hot - Jackson and Reggie are the two best candidates there.

But Tinsley is the key (I always have trouble saying this because everyone has to contribute). For Indy to have a chance he has to play much better than he has the past 2 games - not necessarily spectacular, but at least solid.

brichard
05-19-2005, 06:15 PM
I took a look at playoff stats and thought his pts/FGA would be the highest on the team besides Foster (for someone who took any amount of shots). It wasn't. Don't know who was highest but Reggie's #'s were better.

Here is the link for the second round stats:

http://www.nba.com/pacers/stats/2004/conf_semi_stats.html

Isaac
05-19-2005, 06:19 PM
Sorta like game #5 of the finals against the Lakers.

one of the best games the pacers have EVER played. I was lucky enough to be there for that game. The best 33 point blowout I have ever seen.

DisplacedKnick
05-19-2005, 06:21 PM
For those looking for omens I offer this:

The Pacers have played two games at home. On one of those two game days - game 3 - it rained. This happens to be the game they won.

And what did it do in Indianapolis today?

Hints:
- The sun didn't shine much
- It didn't snow
- There wasn't an earthquake
- The streets were wet

The conclusion to be drawn from this scientific evidence is irrefutable.