PDA

View Full Version : Detroit Game Notes or Pacers Losing Attitude



Lithfan
02-24-2006, 04:46 AM
I had an opportunity to watch this game, so I have a firm opinion on it. Here is what I want to say:<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
Defense is great, I have nothing to say here. May be its too aggressive and that costs us three Rasheed 3pt, but that’s OK, you cannot expect that. Rick is great defensive coach. The problem is with offense.
<o:p> </o:p>
<?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" /><st1:State><st1:place>Indiana</st1:place></st1:State> offense sucks. It sucks so much that AJ is primary offensive option ?!?!? Now I get how he scored all those points in last games. He was taking all the shots he could. Even when he should have pass. His defenders were completely shocked, so the gave him to shoot from time to time. How did that happen?<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
If team plays constantly with 2 offensive-less players like Pollard and Foster and the third starter is iso-miss-Jack, fourth unselfish Stojakovic that shoots only when he is free, I can see how AJ pushes himself to be primary option.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
Do you think it’s a good sign?<o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
Do you think this is reason for winning 5 out of 6 games?<o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
I think not. I think the reason we won last 5 of 6, now 5 of 7 is pure momentum stemming from Artest trade + homestand.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
And now when its gone, what’s next?
<o:p> </o:p>
Losing or…. changing the game plan.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
Things that I hated in the game:
<o:p> </o:p>
AJ forced shots.
<o:p> </o:p>
Jack forced shots.
<o:p> </o:p>
<st1:place>Harrison</st1:place> stupid offensive fouls. Someone please give him medication.
<o:p> </o:p>
I know that in this game everybody but Granger and Saras sucked. Both got less then 20 minuts PT. Do you think if they have played instead of Jack and AJ we would loose?<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
Another thing. Nobody and I mean nobody on this team has half of Saras’s game vision. He can create points with his pass on every given opportunity. Admit that half of his passes are just brilliant and you didn't expect them. So why did he played only his portioned 20 min and AJ had 30?!? <o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
Most important note from this game: When Saras made that 7:0 run alone in the 4th, Pacers were within 11 with more then 3 minutes left. And team just gave up. Nobody continued his momentum. Nobody was jumping on the bench, the coach didn't take time out. WTF?!? Is this new loosing attitude? Just look at this once more and you'll understand why I'm furious :mad: .
<o:p> </o:p>
Thank you for the attention.

Evan_The_Dude
02-24-2006, 04:58 AM
I take it this is one of the only games you've watched? AJ making himself the #1 scoring option? What, is he supposed to pass up open shots? Don't judge this team - or any team by how they get beat by the Pistons. Everybodys offense sucks against the Pistons. If you lose to them, the entire team is going to look bad. BTW, AJ had us going on a pretty good run before Rick subbed him in for Sarunas. Lastly, yes Sarunas has good vision, but I think Tinsley has him beat in that category**


**=When healthy

Lithfan
02-24-2006, 05:00 AM
I take it this is one of the only games you've watched? AJ making himself the #1 scoring option? What, is he supposed to pass up open shots? Don't judge this team - or any team by how they get beat by the Pistons. Everybodys offense sucks against the Pistons. If you lose to them, the entire team isn't going to look good. BTW, AJ had us going on a pretty good run before Rick subbed him in for Sarunas. Lastly, yes Sarunas has good vision, but I think Tinsley has him beat in that category**


**=When healthy

I've watched 5 games.... but constantly read Pecks odd thoughts:)

Bball
02-24-2006, 05:34 AM
I wouldn't base too much on this game against the Pistons.

I have to admit, I thought the Pacers didn't treat the final moments of the game as if they'd actually gotten themselves into a position to think about a comeback. It would've been a miracle, but just getting the lead down under double digits after Rasheed got hot shooting 3's was a miracle in the first place.

-Bball

Lithfan
02-24-2006, 06:10 AM
I wouldn't base too much on this game against the Pistons.

I have to admit, I thought the Pacers didn't treat the final moments of the game as if they'd actually gotten themselves into a position to think about a comeback. It would've been a miracle, but just getting the lead down under double digits after Rasheed got hot shooting 3's was a miracle in the first place.

-Bball

Yeah, thats what I'm talking about.

The thing is that only 5 point deficit in final score, 11 point deficit 3 minutes to the game end and team gives up? coach gives up?

Moses
02-24-2006, 07:23 AM
Yeah, thats what I'm talking about.

The thing is that only 5 point deficit in final score, 11 point deficit 3 minutes to the game end and team gives up? coach gives up?
I was a little surprised as well. Why not start fouling their players with a minute left to go or full court pressing..We caught fire at the end of the game with alot of back to back baskets and it did seem as though nobody cared.

Lithfan
02-24-2006, 07:35 AM
I was a little surprised as well. Why not start fouling their players with a minute left to go or full court pressing..We caught fire at the end of the game with alot of back to back baskets and it did seem as though nobody cared.

It was an attitude problem. Rick and most players thought like:
"Well its Pistons, they are the champs, we already lost it and we have another game tomorrow, so lets go to sleep."
And Saras was frightened to yell at people after Danger incident. :D
In any case this is very BAD, I'm dissapointed.

hoopsforlife
02-24-2006, 08:23 AM
I had an opportunity to watch this game, so I have a firm opinion on it. Here is what I want to say:<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
Defense is great, I have nothing to say here. May be its too aggressive and that costs us three Rasheed 3pt, but thatís OK, you cannot expect that. Rick is great defensive coach. The problem is with offense.
<o:p> </o:p>
<?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" /><st1:State><st1:place>Indiana</st1:place></st1:State> offense sucks. It sucks so much that AJ is primary offensive option ?!?!? Now I get how he scored all those points in last games. He was taking all the shots he could. Even when he should have pass. His defenders were completely shocked, so the gave him to shoot from time to time. How did that happen?<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
If team plays constantly with 2 offensive-less players like Pollard and Foster and the third starter is iso-miss-Jack, fourth unselfish Stojakovic that shoots only when he is free, I can see how AJ pushes himself to be primary option.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
Do you think itís a good sign?<o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
Do you think this is reason for winning 5 out of 6 games?<o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
I think not. I think the reason we won last 5 of 6, now 5 of 7 is pure momentum stemming from Artest trade + homestand.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
And now when its gone, whatís next?
<o:p> </o:p>
Loosing orÖ. changing the game plan.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
Things that I hated in the game:
<o:p> </o:p>
AJ forced shots.
<o:p> </o:p>
Jack forced shots.
<o:p> </o:p>
<st1:place>Harrison</st1:place> stupid offensive fouls. Someone please give him medication.
<o:p> </o:p>
I know that in this game everybody but Granger and Saras sucked. Both got less then 20 minuts PT. Do you think if they have played instead of Jack and AJ we would loose?<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
Another thing. Nobody and I mean nobody on this team has half of Sarasís game vision. He can create points with his pass on every given opportunity. Admit that half of his passes are just brilliant and you didn't expect them. So why did he played only his portioned 20 min and AJ had 30?!? <o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
Most important note from this game: When Saras made that 7:0 run alone in the 4th, Pacers were within 11 with more then 3 minutes left. And team just gave up. Nobody continued his momentum. Nobody was jumping on the bench, the coach didn't take time out. WTF?!? Is this new loosing attitude? Just look at this once more and you'll understand why I'm furious :mad: .
<o:p> </o:p>
Thank you for the attention.

I agree with you. These thoughts are exactly what I saw myself last night. The team just gave up with about 3 minutes left. If Saras played AJ's minutes and shot Jacksons shots, he would score 30, easy, every night. I'm not sure where this team goes from here but I know its not to the finals. This is the first important game where they just gave up......

RWB
02-24-2006, 08:30 AM
And Saras was frightened to yell at people after Danger incident. :D


Good point....If Saras wants to be the leader he doesn't have to yell at Granger to get the point accross. If he continues to use the Bob Knight approach then he needs to be shipped out.

SwissExpress
02-24-2006, 08:49 AM
The thing is that only 5 point deficit in final score, 11 point deficit 3 minutes to the game end and team gives up? coach gives up?

Hmmm, I had to work and couldn't follow the game, but if it's true, I'm glad I couldn't. I've already seen a similar scenario once this season in Denver's game against some of the better teams. That is really dissappointing. It's probably related to the number of games they play; I doubt they would give up if they had some 40 games per season.

McKeyFan
02-24-2006, 10:16 AM
It is unfortunate that Danny got so few minutes. He was the key to the run in the last Pistons game that led to our win.

diamonddave00
02-24-2006, 10:28 AM
I think last night against the Pistons was a good example of why the Pacers need Jermaine O'Neal on both ends of the court.

On the offensive end it was basicly 3 on 5 all night with Jeff and Scot in the game. Jermaine's presence both inside and away from the hoop demands he be covered at all times by one of the Wallace's with Jeff and Scot they are free to double team all night.

On the defensive end without Jermaine the Pistons can stroll down the lane with no fear of their shot being blocked. Jermaine at least provides that thought that they know he is in the area and can block their shot,

Last night was a prime example of the fact you need more options on offense than Peja and Stephen firing threes or AJ's mid range game you need a big who can at least be a threat to get 20+ points on a given night. Jeff and Scot together will get you 15 on a good night or just 7-9 combined on an average night.

Perhaps those who want Jermaine O'Neal traded should take those facts into consideration before pushing so hard to move one of the arguably top 5 overall power forwards in the nba.

fwpacerfan
02-24-2006, 10:29 AM
I've certainly heard that a team's offense sucks after many a Pistons game. The Pistons are the premier defensive team in the league.

Inconsistency has been plaguing the Pacers. Granger is great one game, not so good the next. Same with Saras, Freddie, SJax and Harrison. Peja and AJ suffer to a lesser extent. I think being new to each other has a lot to do with it. I also think adjusting to heavy minutes is another. This team is great when it uses passing to move the ball. They were trying to use the dribble to create movement too much last night and it hurt them. The Pistons are great at using passing to get open shots and last night the Pacers weren't. I think this team is playing pretty well right now and I think as they become more comfortable together they will start being more consistent.

BillS
02-24-2006, 10:29 AM
Regarding a "loosing" attitude (why is "losing" so hard for people to spell?): we made the run against the second-or-below string for Detroit. Let's not fool ourselves, if things had looked really bad Flip puts the starters back in and they hold on.

We were plagued by turnovers and the fact that Detroit simply doesn't fail to capitalize on them. We had played from behind in order to keep even most of the night, and we just didn't have enough gas to make a real comeback after the lead hit double digits the last time.

Detroit executes extremely well. Compare our fear of screens (which allows defenders to play inside our jock straps) to Detroit's complete knowledge of where teammates are at all times.

While I normally hate the TNT broadcast team, as they usually seem to just spend the game drooling over our opponents and ignoring us, they commented last night that the Pacers just didn't have the "extra gear" needed to overcome the surge by Detroit. I agree with this, and - perhaps naively - think it is something that will be overcome as we get through the last half of the season.

Like it or not, Detroit is the team to beat. If you ask me, the Pacers' effort last night would have beaten almost any other opponent in spite of the turnovers. Detroit is simply good enough that any mistakes will be the difference between winning and losing, and this Pacer team is just not that polished.

Yet.

diamonddave00
02-24-2006, 10:33 AM
As for Danny Granger being inconsistant in 19 minutes last night he produced 11 points , and 3 rebounds, he was schooled by Rasheed Wallace at times but thats part of the learning experience.

Over the last 11 games Danny has been good for 11.3 ppg and 7 rebounds on average. To me thats very good production for a backup forward getting 24 minutes a night expecaially when you also consider he is a rookie.

Lithfan
02-24-2006, 10:38 AM
I think last night against the Pistons was a good example of why the Pacers need Jermaine O'Neal on both ends of the court.

On the offensive end it was basicly 3 on 5 all night with Jeff and Scot in the game. Jermaine's presence both inside and away from the hoop demands he be covered at all times by one of the Wallace's with Jeff and Scot they are free to double team all night.

On the defensive end without Jermaine the Pistons can stroll down the lane with no fear of their shot being blocked. Jermaine at least provides that thought that they know he is in the area and can block their shot,

Last night was a prime example of the fact you need more options on offense than Peja and Stephen firing threes or AJ's mid range game you need a big who can at least be a threat to get 20+ points on a given night. Jeff and Scot together will get you 15 on a good night or just 7-9 combined on an average night.

Perhaps those who want Jermaine O'Neal traded should take those facts into consideration before pushing so hard to move one of the arguably top 5 overall power forwards in the nba.

Yes, he is top 5 PF or may be even higher.
And Pacers need him badly. There was a thread sometime ago about how mane offensive options you need and the answer is more than 3. I don't think this team can play good offense with both Foster and Pollard on the floor.

owl
02-24-2006, 10:48 AM
I don't think this team can play good offense with both Foster and Pollard on the floor.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++

Especially against Detroit. And the next time Sheed blocks a shot through
the net and rim Harrison better be dunking. Harrison has got to learn that
when he gets that far under the hoop he MUST mash the ball through
the goal.


owl

Lithfan
02-24-2006, 10:51 AM
Regarding a "loosing" attitude (why is "losing" so hard for people to spell?): we made the run against the second-or-below string for Detroit. Let's not fool ourselves, if things had looked really bad Flip puts the starters back in and they hold on.

We were plagued by turnovers and the fact that Detroit simply doesn't fail to capitalize on them. We had played from behind in order to keep even most of the night, and we just didn't have enough gas to make a real comeback after the lead hit double digits the last time.

Detroit executes extremely well. Compare our fear of screens (which allows defenders to play inside our jock straps) to Detroit's complete knowledge of where teammates are at all times.

While I normally hate the TNT broadcast team, as they usually seem to just spend the game drooling over our opponents and ignoring us, they commented last night that the Pacers just didn't have the "extra gear" needed to overcome the surge by Detroit. I agree with this, and - perhaps naively - think it is something that will be overcome as we get through the last half of the season.

Like it or not, Detroit is the team to beat. If you ask me, the Pacers' effort last night would have beaten almost any other opponent in spite of the turnovers. Detroit is simply good enough that any mistakes will be the difference between winning and losing, and this Pacer team is just not that polished.

Yet.

Thanks for your correction. Thats the problem with spelling programs, if two words are close like losing and loosing, they are useless :)
I don't think Pacers effort would be sufficient for other teams.
Detroit was just having less than average game, as their coach said:
http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/quotes.html

"I thought we played maybe 10 to 13 minutes of championship basketball tonight. We didn't play how we're supposed to play even down the stretch. We won the game, but there were definitely some learning experiences."
They've showed flashes of brilliance of some players at several occasions, but had poor overall game. And offense looked bad because it is bad with Foster, Pollard, Jack and AJ on the floor together.

Fool
02-24-2006, 11:12 AM
Especially against Detroit. And the next time Sheed blocks a shot through
the net and rim Harrison better be dunking.

It was through the net (which in itself I believe is illegal) but it wasn't through the rim.

I don't want this to look like "the Piston fan is trolling" but some of you need to look back at the play-by-play. It was a 10 point game with 41 seconds left, not a 5 point game with a minute left (in fact, at the minute mark it was a 13 point game).

I also don't get the "Saras played well" line either, he had 2 pts and 4 assists until the Pistons got up by 20 and there was < 6 minutes left in the game. I assume Carlisle didn't play him more because Billups had a pretty easy time going at him one-on-one (really the only non-3s Billups scored). Not that I believe he played a poor game or anthing, as I alluded to earlier I didn't key on him so he was pretty absent from my perception of the game.

Again, I'm not trying to troll your thread here it just seems pretty out of wack to what I watched in the game (of course I admit a complete bias in that opinion).

Lithfan
02-24-2006, 11:55 AM
It was through the net (which in itself I believe is illegal) but it wasn't through the rim.

I don't want this to look like "the Piston fan is trolling" but some of you need to look back at the play-by-play. It was a 10 point game with 41 seconds left, not a 5 point game with a minute left (in fact, at the minute mark it was a 13 point game).

I also don't get the "Saras played well" line either, he had 2 pts and 4 assists until the Pistons got up by 20 and there was < 6 minutes left in the game. I assume Carlisle didn't play him more because Billups had a pretty easy time going at him one-on-one (really the only non-3s Billups scored). Not that I believe he played a poor game or anthing, as I alluded to earlier I didn't key on him so he was pretty absent from my perception of the game.

Again, I'm not trying to troll your thread here it just seems pretty out of wack to what I watched in the game (of course I admit a complete bias in that opinion).

<TABLE class=pbpTable style="BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse" borderColor=#575757 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=1><TBODY><TR class=pbpRowE><TD>Jasikevicius Layup Shot: Made (9 PTS)</TD><TD noWrap align=middle>3:17
[IND 72-85]</TD><TD> </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

It was 13 points game after 7 consecutive Saras points with more then 3 minutes to go.

And in my opinion he was solid against Billups. His deffense is OK now and Billups was not having an easy baskets against Saras.

Shade
02-24-2006, 12:07 PM
The Pacers will be fine. We're still without JO and Tins, and that means quite a bit more than people around here seem to think.

This current team, with a healthy JO and Tins in this offense, is better than the team that started the season. The defense is getting right back up there, even without Artest (who, btw, gave up 36 to Kobe on over 50% shooting last night). The difference this year is that Detroit's offense is much better than a couple years ago, and we still held them to 88 points.

We'll be fine.

Fool
02-24-2006, 12:29 PM
<TABLE class=pbpTable style="BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse" borderColor=#575757 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=1><TBODY><TR class=pbpRowE><TD>Jasikevicius Layup Shot: Made (9 PTS)</TD><TD noWrap align=middle>3:17
[IND 72-85]</TD><TD> </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

It was 13 points game after 7 consecutive Saras points with more then 3 minutes to go.

And in my opinion he was solid against Billups. His deffense is OK now and Billups was not having an easy baskets against Saras.

That copied play-by-play moment is true, but it doesn't contradict or oppose anything I said. The Pacers had that same 13 point deficit with a minute to go.

As far as easy buckets, the two non-3pt fgs Billups got were both against Saras. One came on the right side of the court after the Pacers punched the ball away from the Pistons. Billups recovered the ball on the Pistons' defensive side of the court and called for the other Pistons to line the baseline as he dribbled back over the timeline. He then crossed over Saras at the top of the key getting a wide open runner (which Billups and Hamilton always shoot be haulting first) just below the foul line. The other came on the the left side of the court, just left of the top of the arc, where Billups backed Saras down to just below the elbow faking to the right (Saras' left or toward the lane) and getting an open jumper going to the left.

Like I said, those are really the only moments that I noticed Saras to any great extent as I wasn't focusing on him and its only a theory about why he didn't get more time from Carlisle (based on the well known Carlisle preference to play based on defensive match-ups) but even if the theory is totally wrong Saras still didn't play all that well when the outcome hadn't been decided in the game (IMO).

Chauncey
02-24-2006, 12:47 PM
SMH @ the Saras fanboys

Lithfan
02-24-2006, 02:08 PM
SMH @ the Saras fanboys

SMH?

Could you be more specific? :rolleyes:

Lithfan
02-24-2006, 02:12 PM
That copied play-by-play moment is true, but it doesn't contradict or oppose anything I said. The Pacers had that same 13 point deficit with a minute to go.

As far as easy buckets, the two non-3pt fgs Billups got were both against Saras. One came on the right side of the court after the Pacers punched the ball away from the Pistons. Billups recovered the ball on the Pistons' defensive side of the court and called for the other Pistons to line the baseline as he dribbled back over the timeline. He then crossed over Saras at the top of the key getting a wide open runner (which Billups and Hamilton always shoot be haulting first) just below the foul line. The other came on the the left side of the court, just left of the top of the arc, where Billups backed Saras down to just below the elbow faking to the right (Saras' left or toward the lane) and getting an open jumper going to the left.

Like I said, those are really the only moments that I noticed Saras to any great extent as I wasn't focusing on him and its only a theory about why he didn't get more time from Carlisle (based on the well known Carlisle preference to play based on defensive match-ups) but even if the theory is totally wrong Saras still didn't play all that well when the outcome hadn't been decided in the game (IMO).

I'm not saying he had a great game. I'm not saying he kicked a hell out of Billups, he just wasn't awful in D as he used to be. All I'm saying, and you seem to agree, are three things:
1. Saras and Granger should have played more.
2. Pacers gave up 3 minutes to go.
3. Pacers offence was awful and not because Detroit defense.

brichard
02-24-2006, 02:15 PM
Jax was frustrating to watch last night b/c he couldn't get it going. He is just a streak shooter. You love him when he is on and hate him when he is off. The problem is that you just don't know which Jax will show up. He could suck for 3 Quarters and then miss nothing in the 4th or visa versa. This is one of the reasons I'm not a big Jax fan b/c he is inconsistent and unpredictable.

We really were struggling for offense last night and I'm sure the Pistons had something to do with that. However, our guys were clearly off even when they had the open shot and Rasheed was playing out of his head.

waxman
02-24-2006, 02:59 PM
I only got to watch the first quarter so I cannot comment on the whole game.... but....

in that 1st quarter Jack was 1-8 ... of which, about two were what i'd classify as a good shot. Oh....And the one time he tried to pass... it got deflected back to him... and he shot it.... What a stupid f**k.

There is absolutely no reason Jack and AJ should be getting more shot attempts... in any game... than Peja.

I like Stephens skillset... I just don't like his decision making ....he's really too inconsistant/inefficient to be a starter. Rick needs to grow a nutsack and take Jack out when he gets in the 1 on 5 mindset....

And good god... please, please try Danny and Peja together at SG and SF with the PG/PF/C of your choice. It doesn't even have to be starting... just at some point in the game. God knows he has tried every other lineup.

grace
02-24-2006, 04:39 PM
There is absolutely no reason Jack and AJ should be getting more shot attempts... in any game... than Peja.

I would think that from time to time the other team's defense might have something to do with the number of shots Peja gets. On nights when Stephen can't hit the broad side of the barn I'd certainly double team Peja.

Fool
02-24-2006, 05:23 PM
I'm not saying he had a great game. I'm not saying he kicked a hell out of Billups, he just wasn't awful in D as he used to be. All I'm saying, and you seem to agree, are three things:
1. Saras and Granger should have played more.
2. Pacers gave up 3 minutes to go.
3. Pacers offence was awful and not because Detroit defense.

Actually I wouldn't necessarily agree with any of those.

waxman
02-24-2006, 05:45 PM
I would think that from time to time the other team's defense might have something to do with the number of shots Peja gets. On nights when Stephen can't hit the broad side of the barn I'd certainly double team Peja.

Fair enough... I know its hard getting good looks against Detroit.

I'll have to watch the rest of the game tonight.... i only saw the first quarter and made the rest of my comments based on the box score... and found it disturbing that Stephen missed more shots than Peja attempted.

Lithfan
02-24-2006, 06:41 PM
Actually I wouldn't necessarily agree with any of those.

Yeah sure, it could have brought lost game to your hommies.