PDA

View Full Version : 4-1 Since Artest's Last Game



Los Angeles
12-17-2005, 11:11 PM
I know the competition hasn't been that intense, but facts are facts - we can win without Ron Artest.

Kstat
12-17-2005, 11:15 PM
....you didnt prove that last year?

Unclebuck
12-17-2005, 11:17 PM
LA. Did you watch the past two games. Yes they won, but their performance left a lot to be desired

BlueNGold
12-17-2005, 11:18 PM
We were missing a whole lot more than Artest last year. I noticed we played our best ball without Jax on the floor. Danger was awesome. Now they just need to un-glue DH from the bench. What the heck was he doing on the bench with Jermaine having to contend with Jerome James?

Ragnar
12-17-2005, 11:23 PM
Granger had a great game. he needs to be in the starting lineup.

Could the reason Harrison and Fred did not play is because there is a trade involving them in the works? Because we could have used Harrison for at least a little bit tonight. I know they said Fred had a sprained ankle but that could be smoke.

Pacesetter
12-17-2005, 11:23 PM
It's been a good little stretch. I'm proud of my guys! They're giving me the warm fuzzies playin this way!!!!

14-8. I'll take it!!! :cool:

Go Pacers!!!!!!!!!!

hoopsforlife
12-17-2005, 11:23 PM
I know the competition hasn't been that intense, but facts are facts - we can win without Ron Artest.

Yes, we can win without Artest about 50% of the time. We are a very average team right now.

Los Angeles
12-17-2005, 11:23 PM
....you didnt prove that last year?
That's the point. Even through suspensions and injuries, Artest was held up as the messiah of Indiana's Championship hopes. Others (myself included) voiced the truth - Artest PREVENTS title runs. This team is going through more than you should ask any team to go through and are facing teams hungry for opportunities to kick teams while they are down to improve their records.

And guess what? Indiana is winning, despite it all. Just wait untill the new guys come and things settle down. I'll take our chances in seven games vs any team but two (Det and SAS) and we could even perform miracles and surprise those two.

That's right mother****ers!!!!

I'm :sunshine: again!!!!

:woohoo:

Los Angeles
12-17-2005, 11:27 PM
LA. Did you watch the past two games. Yes they won, but their performance left a lot to be desired
No, I'm going to actually have something meaningful to say about the games once I get home and watch them. ;)

Of course it left something to be desired. I think it's down-right assinign to expect this rag-tag bunch to play like the Spurs. But facts are facts - they're fighting through it and getting the W's in spite of adversity.

BlueNGold
12-17-2005, 11:29 PM
Granger had a great game. he needs to be in the starting lineup.

Could the reason Harrison and Fred did not play is because there is a trade involving them in the works? Because we could have used Harrison for at least a little bit tonight. I know they said Fred had a sprained ankle but that could be smoke.
Freddy was definitely injured. I am not sure why David is not playing. I think many people are wondering. Fouls should not cause someone to get DNP's all year. I cannot think of a basketball reason for him to get no court time. I doubt he is being traded b/c his salary is so incredibly low. DOES ANYONE KNOW (OR HAVE ANY IDEA) WHY DH IS NAILED TO THE BENCH?

Ragnar
12-17-2005, 11:30 PM
I forgot about Fred hurting himself in the last game but I remember now.:blush:

indytoad
12-17-2005, 11:37 PM
Freds ankle looked bad last night, but I sure hope DH isnt involved in a trade.

I think he has talent, it is raw talent, but I think he has talent that we can benefit from.

Talent isn't much good if the coach won't play you...

Maybe he doesn't want three inexperienced guys on the floor?

IndyToad
How's it going to end?

Unclebuck
12-17-2005, 11:44 PM
I think DH is right where he should be

indytoad
12-17-2005, 11:45 PM
While I really dont like DH as much as soon here do, I think Rick should at least give him a chance. And its not like RC has never been criticized for not playing younger players.

But he is playing Granger. And it could be argued that we need even more help at center than we do at SF.

IndyToad
Hide behind that lightpole

BlueNGold
12-17-2005, 11:49 PM
I think DH is right where he should be
UB, please explain why you think that. He clearly has much potential.

Los Angeles
12-17-2005, 11:49 PM
Of these players, who do you bench to give Harrison minutes:

Foster
Croshere
JO

BlueNGold
12-17-2005, 11:54 PM
Of these players, who do you bench to give Harrison minutes:

Foster
Croshere
JO
When the other team has a large C in the game, JO should not be expending energy to guard the other player. Foster is fine for that purpose in most cases, but he is not 100%....and he does not have the size to keep people out of the paint...does not block shots..does not intimidate.

indytoad
12-17-2005, 11:56 PM
Of these players, who do you bench to give Harrison minutes:

Foster
Croshere
JO

Neither Foster nor Croshere played much tonight (15 and 23 minutes apiece) while JO played 43. Harrison couldn't have fit in there anywhere? If he can't even get spot minutes in that kind of situation, something's up.

IndyToad
Old carrot top

Unclebuck
12-18-2005, 12:00 AM
UB, please explain why you think that. He clearly has much potential.



He has looked terrible this season. His defense, whether it is team defense, where he has no clue as to what the team concepts are, or his one-on-one defense which has also been horrible. Twice when he was defending Dampier, DH just stood there as Damp went right around him. I honestly questioned DH's eye sight after that game. It looked like he was not even trying.

Right now the Pacers are hanging together with silly- puddy, the last thing they need is to put someone out there who obviously does not have his head on right.

Los Angeles
12-18-2005, 12:02 AM
Neither Foster nor Croshere played much tonight (15 and 23 minutes apiece) while JO played 43. Harrison couldn't have fit in there anywhere? If he can't even get spot minutes in that kind of situation, something's up.

IndyToad
Old carrot top
You're right. something IS up. We just don't know what that THING is. Here are a few of the many possibilities:

1) Harrison is sucking big-time in practice.

2) Carlisle liked going small-ball in this situation.

3) Carlisle doesn't like how his team plays when Harrison is in.

4) Rick is being ordered to bench Harrison because he is being moved out.

I think the 4th one is the least likely of these.

Suaveness
12-18-2005, 12:02 AM
I thought we were 4-2 without Ron?

Los Angeles
12-18-2005, 12:04 AM
I thought we were 4-2 without Ron?
I was counting consecutive games. Did I F that up? I'll change the title if I did.

Los Angeles
12-18-2005, 12:04 AM
Regardless, as long as Ron is still a member of the team, we're all losers.
:lmao:

BlueNGold
12-18-2005, 12:06 AM
He has looked terrible this season. His defense, whether it is team defense, where he has no clue as to what the team concepts are, or his one-on-one defense which has also been horrible. Twice when he was defending Dampier, DH just stood there as Damp went right around him. I honestly questioned DH's eye sight after that game. It looked like he was not even trying.

Right now the Pacers are hanging together with silly- puddy, the last thing they need is to put someone out there who obviously does not have his head on right.
He has not been on the floor enough due to fouls, IMO. He may need to adjust to the speed of the game as well. I would not be surprised if your reasoning is correct, though. ...but they keep raving about his athleticism and potential to be the future C. It is just frustrating to see someone with that much potential...who is healthy...needs experience...languishing on the bench.

Unclebuck
12-18-2005, 12:07 AM
I was counting consecutive games. Did I F that up? I'll change the title if I did.


Ron missed a game earlier this season and the Pacers lost, so they are 4-2 in games Ron has not played

Gamble
12-18-2005, 12:28 AM
If someone hasn't said it before i'll say it, 4-2 against who? We let
the knicks kick our butts on the rebounds and that has a little less
to do with the 3 spot.

Arcadian
12-18-2005, 12:40 AM
Our play wasn't that good with Artest. Certainly not that of a contender. Let's just be done with him and build try to build a contender without him.

Los Angeles
12-18-2005, 12:53 AM
Ron missed a game earlier this season and the Pacers lost, so they are 4-2 in games Ron has not played
Gotcha.

But we're 4-1 since his "wrist ailment" and 2-1 since the "public request".

That's enough for me.

3Ball
12-18-2005, 02:20 AM
....you didnt prove that last year?

Last year we proved that we were better than all but 2-3 teams in the Eastern conference without Ron (but with Reggie and Dale). Here's the truth: if Ron sits out this year, we're going to be lucky to get as far as we did last year, and there's no way we beat the Pistons in a 7 game series. There's just not enough talent. If all Donnie can land is a ok role player or an aging vet, then he might as well not bother.