View Full Version : Question for UB (with help from KSTAT)

01-19-2006, 11:28 AM
I am quite bored with the trade discussions (I think we have had MANY more than TPTB have had) and needed a new topic so this is my question. Which will be followed by several more as I respect your opinion and knowledge of the game UB. KSTAT I will need your expertise on the Pistons as my perspective of them may not be what it should be or is.

Are you ready UncleBuck?

In the 3 or 4 years that I have been reading here (and at Rats) I have read that you like your game to be based inside out. Is this true?

Also in a post somewhere over the last month or so you have stated that you felt that if you could trade everyone for a starting lineup (maybe it was if you could pick a starting lineup) it would be Detroit. Is this true?

You must answer these two before I go any further.

01-19-2006, 11:48 AM
I think I know where you are going with this.

Yes I do like to play inside-out, I do like the ball to go into the post as much as possible.

And yes I do think in many ways the Pistons are a perfect team.

OK, ask away

01-19-2006, 12:14 PM
I agree with you that you need to get a majority of your scoring from inside, and as much as it pains me to say I too think the Pistons have the best individuals that play together best. But when I think of the Pistons I do not think of a great post up player. I do see players that can post up and do well but that is not how they play. Most of their scoring comes from the guards although alot of it through midrange shooting and penetration. I struggle with this because both of us believe the same principals but both of us contridict ourselves by liking the way a team plays that doesn't follow this recipe.

Can you explain this to me so I can sleep at night.

P.S. KSTAT you watch more Piston games than I so is my perception wrong?

01-19-2006, 03:27 PM
Coach I agree with you. And I believe the Pistons biggest weakness is they don't get enough of their points inside. However if we were to chart points in the paint I'm sure the Pistons have scored more in the paint than the Pacers, even if we just take % of points scored.

Tony Parker leads the entuire NBA in paint points.

But he overall reason why the pistons are so good is because they have players who are good on both ends of the court.

01-19-2006, 03:55 PM
Actually according to 82:

The Pacers attempt 25% of their shots from in close with a .551 eFG% for 20.3 Pts.

The Pistons attempt 22% of their shots from in close with a .510 eFG% for 18.1 Pts.

So the Pacers do it more often in respect to their offense and they get better results from it.

01-19-2006, 04:05 PM
I think what separates the Pistons apart is the # of guys they have that can score in the "in-between" game....not long distance, not in the post.

01-19-2006, 04:59 PM
The lost art of the midrange jumpshop...

01-19-2006, 06:01 PM
The Pistons can beat up on teams with jumpers, because unlike so many other run-and-gun teams, all of their scorers can hit the MID-RANGE jumper.

It's easier to cover teams with spot-up shooters, because you can force them to put the ball on the floor and make them uncomfortable.

Prince, Chauncey, Rip and Rasheed can all put it on the floor and shoot the midrange jumper, as well as hit threes. It makes them a lot harder to guard.

The Pistons CAN post up, mind you, but it's a 2nd-option, not a first option.

01-20-2006, 11:17 AM
This is what I see when I watch the Piston's play (and San Antonio to a lesser extent). There is very little predictability of who is going to get the ball/shot on each possession. They have 4 guys on the floor that are capable of hitting the 3 and very good at the midrange jump shot. Ben is really the only player that is not a real offensive threat but is capable of scoring inside with authority. They all play defense well for their position. Lastly they are all willing to take a back seat in scoring if someone is hot. (Rasheed could be the leading scorer for a lot of teams but is content to let Rip, Chauncey, and the others take the majority of the shots).

Here is what I see with the Pacers. Very predictable on offense. We all know that the majority of the time JO is going to get the ball in the post each trip and he is to go one on one unless there is a double team (Which I think he has gotten better this year at passing out of). We have 3 guys capable of knocking down the 3 (Pt guard, Shooting guard and Small Forward) but they are not adept at putting the ball on the floor for a midrange shot. (I would say we aren't bad at it but our best seems to be at a level where the Pistons 3rd best would be.). Our 4th player JO is a capable midrange shooter and post scorer. Our 5th player if Foster is not capable of scoring with authority on the inside. Or if Harrison he is.

Our team doesn't have people who play as good defensively for their position as the Pistons. Lastly I don't believe we share the ball as well as what we could. I think JO has made strides, Granger is a rookie and will get better, Jax I am up in the air on because he is a high volume shooter, and our Point is respectable.

Of all these things the one that stands out to me is the predictable nature of our offense.

01-20-2006, 11:33 AM
IMO, that is mostly on Carlisle.