PDA

View Full Version : Post Game Thread: Whats the problem?



J_2_Da_IzzO
11-15-2006, 09:49 PM
I dont even know where to begin with todays game. I just want to ask a few questions:

Why did JO lose the weight, get more athletic? He obviously thought he played better 2 years ago and I agree as should most. But the most important thing he hasnt changed back is his game. He constantly stands at the 15-18 ft mark and shoots. For the skills he has in the post and the athletic ability he is being wasted. I remember the days JO used to attack offensive boards and fly through air for the jam. Its gone....

Another thing I wanna ask is related to the above but involves Al. Is Al playing limiting JO?? It seems Al doesnt think when he gets the ball and either wants to shoot or drive as soon as he gets it. Yes he is getting his points but the team is not benefiting. Over the past few games JOs offense has been awful and Als offense seems to be great. Can the two not work together on offense? Whilst JOs offense has went down his rebounding has went up however which is a plus but being our best player he really should be playing at a much higher level.

I believe it would be wise to play Al with the second unit and JO with the first. That means Al will be coming off the bench and will he be happy about that? I dont know but he has realized after his time with ATL that winning is more important then being the leading man. I think starting Harrison, JO, Granger as our front court should be given a chance with Al coming in from the bench with the 2nd unit.

IndySouthsider
11-15-2006, 09:53 PM
I dont even know where to begin with todays game. I just want to ask a few questions:

Why did JO lose the weight, get more athletic? He obviously thought he played better 2 years ago and I agree as should most. But the most important thing he hasnt changed back is his game. He constantly stands at the 15-18 ft mark and shoots. For the skills he has in the post and the athletic ability he is being wasted. I remember the days JO used to attack offensive boards and fly through air for the jam. Its gone....

Another thing I wanna ask is related to the above but involves Al. Is Al playing limiting JO?? It seems Al doesnt think when he gets the ball and either wants to shoot or drive as soon as he gets it. Yes he is getting his points but the team is not benefiting. Over the past few games JOs offense has been awful and Als offense seems to be great. Can the two not work together on offense? Whilst JOs offense has went down his rebounding has went up however which is a plus but being our best player he really should be playing at a much higher level.

My opinion?

A consistent jump shot. Seriously, when I hear someone use the term "Athletic" I always think "great he can't shoot."

ajbry
11-15-2006, 09:58 PM
I agree with you wholeheartedly. Individually, Al has been producing well. However, he has definitely limited the offensive firepower for JO and Jack. We cannot win with Al as our leading scorer, it just doesn't work out well for our team.

Moses
11-15-2006, 10:02 PM
This game tells me that David Harrison and Rawle Marshall need alot more playing time. JO needs to get into the lane alot more often. An outside jumper every now and then is good, but he needs to look to drive/post-up first and shoot second.

The biggest problem though is the rotations and line-up we currently have. Al can't keep playing center if JO isn't going to pick up the slack rebounding. I think Rick should try this lineup for just one game and see if it works out.

PG: Tins
SG: Quis
SF: Al
PF: JO
C: Harrison

I realize that leaves us with no outside shooting, but let's be honest...our team isn't a very good long range team. Jack and everyone else is way to inconsistent. We need to post-up and drive more. The lineup I posted may not be the optimal lineup and I agree..but Rick needs to tinker around with the lineups and find one that works...because our current rotations are simply awful.

odeez
11-15-2006, 10:02 PM
I am not sure we can blame Al for JO not scoring or Jack for that matter. Those two know how to score.

rimock31
11-15-2006, 10:04 PM
A regular rotation, that's what this team needs. Oh and is it just me, or has foster forgotten how to rebound? I thought he was supposed to be healthy this year for the first time in awhile but it seems he's more tentative than ever

Moses
11-15-2006, 10:06 PM
I just think we have too many me first players on the floor. I don't think they personality chemistry issues, but they're games just don't compliment each other. Maybe if Rick stays with this rotation long enough J.O., Al, Jax, and Danny (who is trying) will change their games, but I'd rather see a lineup change. I can't believe Rick is stupid enough to make a statement in the Star that he has to find a way to get Jeff more time on the floor, then gives him the same minutes, and get outrebounded again like this. I really want to see less of Danny, Al, and J.O. at this point.
I agree. I think Rick is doing a ****-poor job on our current rotations. I really wish we had gotten another HC in the off-season. Rick is a good coach, but we aren't the right team for him to be coaching it seems.

Pacerized
11-15-2006, 10:09 PM
I just think we have too many me first players on the floor. I don't think they have personality chemistry issues, but their games just don't compliment each other. Maybe if Rick stays with this rotation long enough J.O., Al, Jax, and Danny (who is trying) will change their games, but I'd rather see a lineup change. I can't believe Rick is stupid enough to make a statement in the Star that he has to find a way to get Jeff more time on the floor, then gives him the same minutes, and get outrebounded again like this. I really want to see less of Danny, Al, and J.O. at this point.


Sorry: Thought I'd clean up my post, but you replied in the meantime.

Unclebuck
11-15-2006, 10:11 PM
Tonight it was really simple, the Pacers effort, intensity and energy was terrible. To discuss anything else would be a complete waste of time. Every breakdown tonight was due to the poor effort. Yes the rebounding stats were similar to Saturday night, but the Pacers at least played extremely hard against the Bulls.

Marquis played pretty well tonight, Al scored some points, but other than that I thought everyone else was in some sort of malaize. The first half was especially concerning - Pacers looked tired and uninterested in the game.

Tonights game was concerning

pwee31
11-15-2006, 10:12 PM
Don't compare Runi and Tinsley. They don't play the same minutes. They aren't on the same size leash when it comes to mistakes. So it's not really fair to compare the 2

odeez
11-15-2006, 10:17 PM
Tonight it was really simple, the Pacers effort, intensity and energy was terrible. To discuss anything else would be a complete waste of time. Every breakdown tonight was due to the poor effort. Yes the rebounding stats were similar to Saturday night, but the Pacers at least played extremely hard against the Bulls.

Marquis played pretty well tonight, Al scored some points, but other than that I thought everyone else was in some sort of malaize. The first half was especially concerning - Pacers looked tired and uninterested in the game.

Tonights game was concerning

I agree Buck! Is it RCs fault for not getting them ready to play? I think you nailed it though, the effort is not there. You can see in the boxscore. So the question is, why?

ajbry
11-15-2006, 10:20 PM
Postgame quote from Ryan Gomes, regarding Al's performance in the 1st half: "We became aware of him and made sure we kept on our rotations, while staying on Jermaine O'Neal and Stephen Jackson, but rotating towards Harrington."

So, essentially, it seems as if JO, Al, and Jack just haven't figured out how to compensate for any matchup problems yet. Hopefully they'll be able to develop a strategy in that aspect, or else it's going to be more nights like this - Al leading the way, JO out of his groove, and Jack with only 10 attempts.

Pitons
11-15-2006, 10:21 PM
Dunno but they looked like they didn't want to win at all. Agree with UB, Daniels played good, Al not bad, JO at least had 12 rebounds, and there weren't others who can step in.

BlueNGold
11-15-2006, 10:22 PM
The problems are easy to identify. The solutions are far more difficult to determine.

1) We lack interior toughness. This is most evident in our rebounding numbers. We do have shotblockers, but that is not the same thing as an aggressive, powerful body that pursues the ball. The only players resembling tough interior players are Foster who is not even that tough and Harrison who has not shown he can play. We will be in trouble in this area and the solution is trading Al or JO...or bringing one of them off the bench. Sorry, I know it's a tough pill to swallow, but it's the truth.

2) We lack consistent perimeter shooting. This is a smaller problem. However, we cannot advance far in the playoffs without better shooting. Even the Pistons had Billups to hit clutch 3 pointers.

3) We have a lot of back court players, but they are all average or below average starters in this league.

We have other problems too, but they reside off the basketball court.

J_2_Da_IzzO
11-15-2006, 10:31 PM
The problems are easy to identify. The solutions are far more difficult to determine.

1) We lack interior toughness. This is most evident in our rebounding numbers. We do have shotblockers, but that is not the same thing as an aggressive, powerful body that pursues the ball. The only players resembling tough interior players are Foster who is not even that tough and Harrison who has not shown he can play. We will be in trouble in this area and the solution is trading Al or JO...or bringing one of them off the bench. Sorry, I know it's a tough pill to swallow, but it's the truth.



Seems like bringing Al here could prove bad business if it continues this way.

And I agree. I think Al should be coming off the bench. That way we have 2 primary offensive options with both units.

McKeyFan
11-15-2006, 10:33 PM
Even the Pistons had Billups to hit clutch 3 pointers.

Very true.

And a guy named Rip. He can shoot pretty good. And Prince can hit a sweet three. Oh yeah, that guy, what's his name, Rasheed. He can shoot too!

And I think they have a couple of subs that can shoot better than our best.

BlueNGold
11-15-2006, 10:35 PM
Seems like bringing Al here could prove bad business if it continues this way.

I would not say it was bad business. I think Al off the bench might be the best thing for this team. He would definitely provide instant offense. I don't think Al and JO on the court at the same time, particularly if they are the "big guys", is a good fit.

pwee31
11-15-2006, 10:36 PM
Start: Tins, Quis, Granger, JO, Foster
2nd unit: Runi, Rawle, Jack, Al, Harrison

Of course you can give or take a guy here or there. it's worth a shot.

Evan_The_Dude
11-15-2006, 10:44 PM
More than anything, Rawle Marshall needs to play more, and needs to have the green light. Good things happen when he has the ball... and yes I only saw the end of the disas... I mean game.

rimock31
11-15-2006, 10:44 PM
First Unit: Tinsley, Rawle, Al, JO, Foster
2nd Unit : Sarunas, Quis, Granger, Baston, Harrison

Jackson: somewhere else

BlueNGold
11-15-2006, 10:46 PM
Start: Tinsley, Jack, Granger, JO, Harrison/Powell
2nd unit: Greene, Quis, Rawle, Al, Foster

This would be my choice. Powell if Harrison is having a "David Day".

ajbry
11-15-2006, 10:47 PM
Start: Tinsley, Jack, Granger, JO, Harrison/Powell
2nd unit: Greene, Quis, Rawle, Al, Foster

This would be my choice. Powell if Harrison is having a "David Day".

Perfect, I think that lineup could work very well. Nonetheless, it seems so unlikely because Al left here to become a starter, so we can't count on him being sent to the bench after his hot start.

waterjater
11-15-2006, 10:50 PM
I didn't see the game and at this point I'm glad I didn't!

Other than the outside shot (which we don't have whatsoever), why can't our frontline dominate. Is it really because of the back court or the combination of players on the front court.

The old Celtics had a strong front line that all liked to score (Bird, Parish, McHale). They all wanted to score and all were able to. So our guys need to figure it out. Obviously the Celtics front line had more talent and experience than ours, but our guys should be able to make other teams pay.

For a few games, we were really sharing the ball and making the game look easy. Sounds like we've regressed. Glad I saved my money and dropped league pass this year.

Water

pwee31
11-15-2006, 10:51 PM
Perfect, I think that lineup could work very well. Nonetheless, it seems so unlikely because Al left here to become a starter, so we can't count on him being sent to the bench after his hot start.


Sorry but Orien didn't look good at all in the 9mins that he played

BlueNGold
11-15-2006, 10:51 PM
More than anything, Rawle Marshall needs to play more, and needs to have the green light. Good things happen when he has the ball... and yes I only saw the end of the disas... I mean game.

Definitely. I think I know who he reminds me of. Rip Hamilton. ...ok, maybe I'm getting carried away.

ajbry
11-15-2006, 10:54 PM
Sorry but Orien didn't look good at all in the 9mins that he played

It was his first regular season action against his former team... What exactly were you hoping for?

BlueNGold
11-15-2006, 10:56 PM
Sorry but Orien didn't look good at all in the 9mins that he played
Judging Greene at this point is too early. Judging the team's strategy at this point is becoming a possibility.

AesopRockOn
11-15-2006, 10:58 PM
It's obvious that we need to beef and toughen up. And tinkering with the lineups is very much needed. And dude you need to get off your anti-Jack trip; it isn't convincing and it's not going to happen. And I really doubt they're going to make Al play the role that Danny was going to play this year.

Anyway, I'm going to set this thing to 5 hours and we'll all be okay :mib:

pwee31
11-15-2006, 10:59 PM
It was his first regular season action against his former team... What exactly were you hoping for?

For one, I'm not the one saying he should be in the 2nd unit after one game. 2ndly he played a whole 1-2 preseason games and that resulted in us losing keeping a 4th PG and losing James White and the draft picks that went with him.

I know it's his former team and that can be a hard matchup, but you would think he would a little advantage knowing the team.

Dr. Goldfoot
11-15-2006, 11:02 PM
I think the starting five are fine. We just need to trim the overall rotation to give the best 8 or nine players adequate minutes to develop a rhythm. I've seen too many guys sit for far too long between court action. On the other hand, early in the game Carlisle was subsituting so much I lost track of who what where. At one point Granger came in and he tried to replace him before a second ticked off the clock.

Four guys ran the point tonight....Tinsley played the first 9 minutes..Runi played 8 minutes...Tinsley played 6 minutes.. Armstrong played 45 seconds...Tinsley started the second half and played 5 1/2 minutes...Armstrong played 6 1/2 minutes and shared 3 minutes on the court with Greene....Tinsley started the 4th and played 4 minutes...Green played the final 8 minutes and shared the court with Runi for the final 6.

The same with the 2 guard 6 guys shared time there...Jackson, Runi, Green, Marshall, Daniels & Granger all saw 2 guard minutes.

11 guys were in the rotation before mop up time when Harrison got his number called. I'm all for interchangable players but at some point you have to set a rotation this isn't CYO basketball where everybody gets a shot.

ajbry
11-15-2006, 11:05 PM
At one point Granger came in and he tried to replace him before a second ticked off the clock.

Yeah, I was pretty surprised at that as well. It certainly seems that Rick is a bit overwhelmed by these new players and the new system.

LoneGranger33
11-15-2006, 11:08 PM
I went to the game...apparently it was a great decision on my part, money well spent...and came away with three lessons learned:
1) Jermaine O'Neal can not play defense on anyone over 6'6, at all
2) Rawle Marshall needs to eat something, or a lot of something
3) We need to make a 2 for 1, 3 for 1, 4 for 1, or 5 for 1 trade
4) Tinsley needs to either stop shooting or stop missing
5) I can't count

ajbry
11-15-2006, 11:10 PM
I'm sure as hell glad I didn't go to the game, it would've been embarassing to walk out of the Garden.

pwee31
11-15-2006, 11:12 PM
Judging Greene at this point is too early. Judging the team's strategy at this point is becoming a possibility.


It's not like he didn't play last year! Just b/c he had a solid game against our PGs doesn't make him good, who doesn't have a solid game against our PGs. Did you watch him the rest of the season? Probably not b/c they preferred to play West at the point in front of him even though West is shoot first, and then they released him and went with a rookie in Rondo and traded for an unproven Telfair. If you couldn't make the Celtic roster as a PG there's probably a reason. But by all means let's label him as a "lock down" defender b/c he's the best PG defender on the Pacers and can't do anything else!! :mad:


Whew... sorry, had to get that out. A little frustrated from our play lately.

LoneGranger33
11-15-2006, 11:21 PM
WE NEED SOMEONE WHO CAN SHOOT THE BALL

tora tora
11-16-2006, 12:02 AM
How in the name of God can a front court of Granger, Harrington and O'neal give up 110+ points per game? Do they ever practice playing -defense-??

rexnom
11-16-2006, 12:06 AM
I'm sure as hell glad I didn't go to the game, it would've been embarassing to walk out of the Garden.
Yeah, I ended up not going. Thankfully I have my roommate heckling me all night to remind of how painful it was.

rexnom
11-16-2006, 12:08 AM
It's not like he didn't play last year! Just b/c he had a solid game against our PGs doesn't make him good, who doesn't have a solid game against our PGs. Did you watch him the rest of the season? Probably not b/c they preferred to play West at the point in front of him even though West is shoot first, and then they released him and went with a rookie in Rondo and traded for an unproven Telfair. If you couldn't make the Celtic roster as a PG there's probably a reason. But by all means let's label him as a "lock down" defender b/c he's the best PG defender on the Pacers and can't do anything else!! :mad:


Whew... sorry, had to get that out. A little frustrated from our play lately.
I think you need to relax. I really like the Celts PG rotation. I'd trade half of my kingdom for it. There's no shame in not cutting it there. Also, Orien Greene can't shoot, handle the ball, and isn't really a point guard in the classic "Steve Nash/Jason Kidd" sense.

Peck
11-16-2006, 12:45 AM
Just some brief thoughts on this one.

Look guys I think to many of us look to individual play (I'm as guilty as anyone here) to try & solve problems. We say insert player A here or start player B or player C is horrid he shouldn't play at all.

The fact of the matter is that right now we are not facing a talent issue, we are sometimes facing a lethargy issue. Which is perplexing to say the least but not something that can't be over come.

Rebounding is a problem, but it won't be solved by playing player A instead of player B.

In other words Jeff Foster played in this game & we were still out rebounded by a great deal.

That is & has always been our teams biggest problem for as long as I can remember. We do not attack the glass as a unit, we expect one or two players to have to do it all while the rest of the team runs back to either get a fast break or to stop the fast break depending on if we are on offense or defense.

Let's just look at this shall we? Saras, Tinsley, Marshall, Daniels, Armstrong, Greene & Jackson accounted for a whole 6 rebounds with Jackson actually grabbing 3 of those.

Now contrast that with Pierce, Telfair, West, Rondo & Allen who totalled 20 rebounds.

I'm not just blaming Carlisle for the game but unfortunately when it comes to players rebounding I feel & have always felt he has other prioritys. I know some agree with him but I'll tell you right now the fastest way to stop a fast break is to get an offensive rebound or conversley the fastest way to get out & run is to get the defensive board.

The real true irony for me is this, seven years later & what does our team still need more than anything else? A Dale Davis like player.

But again one player is not going to change the entire coarse of our rebounding. It has to be a group effort & everybody, including the coach's, has to commit to our players (including our guards) grabbing some rebounds.

Now I've read comments about Al scoring to much or Jermaine not scoring enough??????

I'm really confused by this because in all honesty Al gets most of his points off of quick hits to the basket & some dead eye long shooting he has been hitting on.

I don't see how he is slowing down the offense at all.

There is no need to panic IMO, the Celtics have always given us trouble because they can get out & run & Paul Pierce is a great scorer.

But offense, while not good, to me wasn't where the problem was. Our defense just seemed lackluster all night long & that I don't understand. Maybe we had to long of a layoff?

I think we have to adjust our defensive scheme a little & get a commitment to rebounding & I think we will work our way out of this.

jjbjjbjjb
11-16-2006, 12:47 AM
1) We lack interior toughness. This is most evident in our rebounding numbers. We do have shotblockers, but that is not the same thing as an aggressive, powerful body that pursues the ball. The only players resembling tough interior players are Foster who is not even that tough and Harrison who has not shown he can play.

Whither Josh Powell?

Unclebuck
11-16-2006, 01:07 AM
Yeah, I was pretty surprised at that as well. It certainly seems that Rick is a bit overwhelmed by these new players and the new system.

Go back and watch the sequence again. Rick changed his mind because the Celtics substituated. Rick did not want to put Marshal in a situation where he had to guard Pierce, so he put Granger in, but then the Celts took Pierce out and Rick thought it would be a good time to let Granger rest - but Javie wouldn't let Rick do it.

Rick is not overwhelmed.

BigDawg44
11-16-2006, 01:13 AM
i do like what bird and carlisle said in the post game quotes....im not going to post them here cuz im lazy. but it seems as though bird is keeping this team and carlisle on a tight leash. i have a feeling that if things continue to go the way they are we are gonna see some changes on the roster or in the lineup.

Unclebuck
11-16-2006, 01:28 AM
Without actually seeing Rick's post game press conference it is difficult to know, but Rick appears to be frustrated.

http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/quotes_061115.html

Seed
11-16-2006, 01:32 AM
Four guys ran the point tonight....Tinsley played the first 9 minutes..Runi played 8 minutes...Tinsley played 6 minutes.. Armstrong played 45 seconds...Tinsley started the second half and played 5 1/2 minutes...Armstrong played 6 1/2 minutes and shared 3 minutes on the court with Greene....Tinsley started the 4th and played 4 minutes...Green played the final 8 minutes and shared the court with Runi for the final 6.

The same with the 2 guard 6 guys shared time there...Jackson, Runi, Green, Marshall, Daniels & Granger all saw 2 guard minutes.

11 guys were in the rotation before mop up time when Harrison got his number called. I'm all for interchangable players but at some point you have to set a rotation this isn't CYO basketball where everybody gets a shot.
I think Rick is still trying to establish the best rotations, but these numbers are quite overwhelming actually. I doubt if this crazy train allows anyone to show his real abilities.

Peck
11-16-2006, 04:10 AM
Actually now that I've had more time to think about this I have to say this.

What is Rick's fasination with small ball? By small ball I don't mean our starting lineup because I don't consider them small.

I mean knowing that our team is having massive problems right now rebounding why did he choose to keep four point guards active as well as two swing men & one big guy he won't play?

We have two players who have proven on this level that at least they could rebound on accident if they had to & a rookie who showed promise in the pre-season of looking like a rebounder.

Why de-activate Powell? Why not take out Harrison if he won't play him other than garbage time?

I think Rick dreams of fielding a team of 6'6" and under some day.

Quis
11-16-2006, 04:21 AM
I agree with you wholeheartedly. Individually, Al has been producing well. However, he has definitely limited the offensive firepower for JO and Jack. We cannot win with Al as our leading scorer, it just doesn't work out well for our team.

Al's offense has been brilliant thus far. There's no way you want him shooting less. The man who needs to be shooting less is the man missing 70% of his shots, thus killing his own team. I wont mention his name, but he needs to go a.s.a.p. because he's a very bad basketball player and only hurts the team.

Quis
11-16-2006, 04:22 AM
More than anything, Rawle Marshall needs to play more, and needs to have the green light. Good things happen when he has the ball... and yes I only saw the end of the disas... I mean game.

Rawle has looked promising, but in no way does he deserve minutes over Marquis Daniels. The sooner Daniels is playing 35 minutes a game, the sooner this team starts winning on a regular basis.

denyfizle
11-16-2006, 05:24 AM
We need a tough rebounder man. We need a Dale Davis to bring some toughness back to our interior. Foster is our best rebounder yet he's more of a pest rather than a beast in the box. JO has been playing his butt off rebounding and blocking shots but he just needs help. I don't really blame anything on our players, I think they're doing an ok job. Maybe it's the personnel. Or maybe it's really Carlisle that's holding us back but who knows really. I just wish we had a banger down there though that can help JO out.

31andonly
11-16-2006, 05:51 AM
That game was one of the most embarrasing performances i've ever seen..I really think we have a strong frontcourt but how can these guys give up one rebound after the other! I saw Celtics point guards grabbing offensive rebounds standing next to JO and AL.. A lineup change has to be made.. Harrison has to get some minutes..he would be the dale davis type of player, but how can he improve if sitting on the end of the bench all the time! Why isn't Baston playing?Why did they sign him?
Also, why not giving Quis regularly his 20 minutes?
JO's jumper isn't falling, so why is he always trying and trying again?
Lot of things I can't understand but it was awful to watch the Pacers yesterday!

D-BONE
11-16-2006, 07:08 AM
Here's what I agree with from this thread based on what transpired last night and thus far this year:

-We have a rebounding deficient team.

-Our early season energy and cameraderie seem to be getting more inconsistent along with our intensity and defense on a nightly basis. (We've now given up big time points to the Wiz and Celts. That's not good IMO.)

-Minutes are being distributed amongst way to minute people. We need a tighter rotation but RC may not know what that rotation will consist of.

Here's something I'm kinda surprised hasn't been mentioned yet (I don't think):

-We've gotta get better PG play. I feel like Tins has been adequate but not good. But last night, outside a few nifty passes, Rondo and Telfair made him look downright sad out there IMO. Of course, we know our ten backup PG situation continues to be an enigma so we don't have much to turn to.

Finally, I suppose I understand arguments to move people like Al and Jack to the bench from the standpoint of putting more pop in the second unit. Yet I still don't get why you'd do that with two of your most consistent guys so far. I could take these arguments more seriously if I felt they weren't based primarily on obvious agendas in favor of other players individual performance.

LoneGranger33
11-16-2006, 08:29 AM
LARRY BIRD: (Re: Team not playing well) “Well, and we had a few days off. You know, it’s sort of sad that we came out and played like we did. But, I think Rick’s (Carlisle) got to find the right combination so when we’ve really got three of our starters playing well, like Granger and Tinsley and Jackson, really not playing that well. And Sarunas (Jasikevicius) is the first one off the bench, and he don’t play well. So really 4 out of the first 6 guys are not playing that well. And Paul (Pierce) and Sczcerbiak were hitting shots and they were getting better ball movement with… I feel like a coach here.”

Not yet my friend, not yet...

RICK CARLISLE: “I was a psyche major in college and I read the quote about the definition of insanity and that is doing the same thing over and over and thinking that it is going to change. I am a believer that this team can change. I am a believer that we can do things hard on a consistent basis. I am a believer that we can be a solid decision making team and I am a believer that we can be a team that plays with intensity on the defensive end and that can fuel our game and that will be our identity. I am going to keep preaching that to our team because I believe in them, I believe in them.”

Is he admitting he's going crazy?

Slick Pinkham
11-16-2006, 08:40 AM
This team relies on individual talent alone. The talent disparity between NBA teams isn't all that great, so any team that doesn't have good on-court chemistry that allows them to play with confidence, focus, and aggression is going to be pretty near a 0.500 team, and lose often on the road to even the worst teams in the league.

The rotations need to get juggled until one or more units are found where the play of that group actually exceeds the sum of the individual parts.

Maybe no combinations of players can do that, and all the experts are right and this is a 0.500 team that will have to scramble to stay out of the lottery.

Unclebuck
11-16-2006, 09:15 AM
Here's something I'm kinda surprised hasn't been mentioned yet (I don't think):

-We've gotta get better PG play. I feel like Tins has been adequate but not good. But last night, outside a few nifty passes, Rondo and Telfair made him look downright sad out there IMO. Of course, we know our ten backup PG situation continues to be an enigma so we don't have much to turn to.



I think that same thing each and every game. But I don't say it for two reasons.

1) I think it is obvious and goes without saying. Why state the obvious after every game.

2) I don't want to beat a dead horse.

BillS
11-16-2006, 10:31 AM
Actually now that I've had more time to think about this I have to say this.

What is Rick's fasination with small ball? By small ball I don't mean our starting lineup because I don't consider them small.

I mean knowing that our team is having massive problems right now rebounding why did he choose to keep four point guards active as well as two swing men & one big guy he won't play?

We have two players who have proven on this level that at least they could rebound on accident if they had to & a rookie who showed promise in the pre-season of looking like a rebounder.

Why de-activate Powell? Why not take out Harrison if he won't play him other than garbage time?

I think Rick dreams of fielding a team of 6'6" and under some day.


I think this combines with Rick's emphasis on defense and means he is desperately trying to find a combination that leads to consistent perimeter shooting. This is especially the case on nights like last night where we get mobbed on the inside without any consequences since we can't hit the broad side of the barn from anywhere on the floor.

I know we focus heavily on rebounding, but on the offensive end at least there are a couple of ways to improve rebounding without sending everyone to the board:

1) Hit the shot so no rebound is possible
2) Spread the defense so that fewer defenders are available to crash the boards

I really don't think we'd be so upset about rebounds on the offensive end if our outside shooting was perceived by teams as more dangerous.

McKeyFan
11-16-2006, 12:47 PM
I think this combines with Rick's emphasis on defense and means he is desperately trying to find a combination that leads to consistent perimeter shooting. This is especially the case on nights like last night where we get mobbed on the inside without any consequences since we can't hit the broad side of the barn from anywhere on the floor.

I know we focus heavily on rebounding, but on the offensive end at least there are a couple of ways to improve rebounding without sending everyone to the board:

1) Hit the shot so no rebound is possible
2) Spread the defense so that fewer defenders are available to crash the boards

I really don't think we'd be so upset about rebounds on the offensive end if our outside shooting was perceived by teams as more dangerous.

Good post, Bill.

NuffSaid
11-16-2006, 01:30 PM
Postgame quote from Ryan Gomes, regarding Al's performance in the 1st half: "We became aware of him and made sure we kept on our rotations, while staying on Jermaine O'Neal and Stephen Jackson, but rotating towards Harrington."

So, essentially, it seems as if JO, Al, and Jack just haven't figured out how to compensate for any matchup problems yet. Hopefully they'll be able to develop a strategy in that aspect, or else it's going to be more nights like this - Al leading the way, JO out of his groove, and Jack with only 10 attempts.

I read the above and it makes sense to me! Here's why:


Quote from RC, "Maybe these pieces don't fit together."

Good thing he finally realized this 8-games games into the season. Would hate to see how things would be by game 20 had he not come to see this early on

Frankly, I've been saying it since it was first announced that JO, Al and Granger would play together in the front court. Al's playing out of position. If anything, you slide JO to Center, but then you've got him playing out of position as well. You have to space these guys out (JO and Al); put 'em on opposite sides of the blocks. Otherwise, you've got one trying too hard to be a 4-part player (scorer, shot blocker, rebounder, assist - that would be JO) while another is looking just to score (that would be Al). Don't believe me? Look at the box scores for every Pacers game to date. Notice that Al doesn't have one blocked shot*. Not one! You also notice that he has very few assists. Not saying he's hogging the ball. Just saying maybe he's not looking to defend nor share the ball as much as he should.

Anyone who honestly believes JO isn't doing his part is fooling himself. He has scored in double figures in all but one game thus far. He's avg. just under 3.5 blks per game (24 total on the season so far). Nobody else has nearly as many blocked shots as he. (Jeff Foster is 2nd on the team w/a mere 7 blks!!!)

It goes right back to what JO said at the end of last season - get him someone who can block shots down low right along w/him! If it's just him trying to do it all, this team will not go very far.

Something else that troubles me is the fact that our Guards still haven't got it together on either end of the ball. They defend well in spurts, but their offense is still very inconsistant. They just aren't scoring the ball very well at all. I honestly believe a lineup change is in order. Not necessarily because players aren't doing their part, but rather because the "parts" just aren't clicking.

* Box scores as illustrated on FoxSports.com

Chemistry, ladies and gentlemen...this year's team make like one another, but there's still something not quite right among them. And I think Ryan Gomes may have given us our first real clue.