PDA

View Full Version : The Big Plus-Minus thread



Naptown_Seth
12-18-2007, 04:42 PM
Okay, I've been talking about getting this done for some time, and finally I'm fully caught up on the data (which will last about 3 days probably thanks to the holidays).

It's not a debate thread in theory, though like the schedule thread there is plenty of room for it. However I'm really not looking for posts like "stats lie" and "plus-minus is a sham". We get it, you don't like numbers or these particular numbers. The thread title should have been the warning to stay away if it's not your thing.

What the thread WILL be, at least from my part, is a game by game listing of the +/-, occassionally the running totals or perhaps 5-10 game trends, and blurbs about the top and bottom 5 man groups in +/- and minutes for that game. Around the 20 game mark I also started noting when 5 man groups were brand new for the year, meaning they'd never played together this season.

Why do it? Well with the Saras debates people would go to the totals and ignore the fact that he started high and spent the rest of the year trending downward. It was pretty tough to find trends unless you were grabbing from 82G or Pacers.com on a daily basis, and even then there would be days without proper updates and then 3 games added to the total at the same time.

Also 82Games typically doesn't show anything but the top 20 5-man groups, and sometimes I like to know more. Finally I could start to pull those 2, 3 and 4-man packages at some point, however I haven't done that yet and might not get to it. :)


Disclaimer - I'm doing this in Excel and by hand mostly. I've already compared to Pacers.com and 82Games and we don't quite match up. They don't match each other either. I do check the minutes totals and make sure per game they look right, and generally speaking the totals are extremely close. Someone has errors/differences, and per the comparison of those 2 sites it's not just me.

One other note, I do +/- with PENDING FTAs put on the guy that was on court when the foul was committed, both for and against the Pacers. That might create some slight differences.


Okay, I'm going to do the game posts in order and it will take awhile. But to get it started with a taste of something relevent I'll put up the Knicks game version first, then copy it in its proper place later.

Naptown_Seth
12-18-2007, 05:00 PM
Game 25 - vs Knicks

27 Granger
22 Foster
19 Murphy
18 Tinsley
18 Dunleavy

16 Daniels
11 O'Neal
2 Harrison
0 Rush

(low minutes)
1 Williams
1 Owens


Top three 5-man groups
(all 5-man listed by alpha, not position)

6 in 1:45 play
Quis-Dun-Granger-Murph-JO
5 in 2:15 play
Quis-Dun-Foster-Granger-Murph
5 in 1:30 play
Dun-Foster-Granger-Murph-Tins
5 in 4:45 play
Dun-Foster-Granger-JO-Tins

Not so much, worst 5-mans
-4 in 0:45 play
Dun-Foster-JO-Rush-Tins
-2 in 2:45 play
Quis-Dun-Granger-Hulk-Murph
-1 in 5:00 play
Quis-Dun-Foster-Hulk-Rush

When -1 is one of the worst groups on the night, you probably did okay. :)


Big minute groups
17:00 (0)
Dun-Granger-JO-Murph-Tins
5:00 (-1)
Quis-Dun-Foster-Hulk-Rush
4:45 (5)
Dun-Foster-Granger-JO-Tins


Who the F is that? New 5-mans for the game
Hulk-Murph-Owens-Rush-Williams


Interesting notes
Starting at the 5:45 mark left in the 3rd the Pacers didn't lose or tie a single 5-man group the rest of the way (8 total groups).

The 10 minutes played by the starters to open the game might be the most minutes any group has played straight together all year. Certainly it was a top 5 outing and probably the most in a first half at least. I'm going to check when I get a chance.

Will Galen
12-19-2007, 03:54 PM
Has this combo ever been on the floor together? Murph, JO, Tins, Dun, and Daniels?

It looks like a good offensive unit. Only two good defenders in that group though.

Putnam
12-19-2007, 04:00 PM
Has this combo ever been on the floor together? Murph, JO, Tins, Dun, and Daniels?

It looks like a good offensive unit. Only two good defenders in that group though.


the place to find it is here:

http://www.82games.com/0708/0708IND2.HTM


As of today, that lineup isn't on the chart. It might have made it onto the floor for fewer than 9 minutes if at all.

Naptown_Seth
12-20-2007, 09:59 PM
Hold on. Like I said, I've got them all if they've played at least 9 seconds, barring my own typos. And this is one reason I started doing this Putnum, to get farther into the +/- stuff than was easily available.

They have played together. 1 minute (rounded of course), -2. Not sure which game(s). I could dig but unless it's critical...probably not going to happen. :D

BTW, I have 45 different 5 man groups that feature Daniels-Dunleavy. The most minutes is the Quis-Dun-Jeff-JO-Tins version (19 min, +17), though the 2nd best +/- is +11 in 10 minutes by Quis-Dun-Tins-Danny-Hulk.

I'm gonna get off my butt now and crank out these per game posts.

Naptown_Seth
12-20-2007, 10:22 PM
Game 1 - vs Washington
W 119-110 (OT)

28 Harrison (w00t)
9 Dunleavy
8 Daniels
6 Tinsley
5 Owens

5 Sims
3 Diener
2 Granger
2 Rush

-11 Foster
-12 Diogu


Top three 5-man groups
(all 5-man listed by alpha, not position)

9 in 4:30 play
Dun-Foster-Granger-Hulk-Tins
9 in 4:00 play
Ike-Dun-Granger-Hulk-Tins
5 in 8:45 play
Quis-Dun-Granger-Hulk-Tins


Not so much, worst 5-mans
-19 in 8:15 play
Ike-Dun-Foster-Granger-Tins
-6 in 2:45 play
Quis-Ike-Dun-Foster-Tins
-3 in 1:30 play
Dun-Granger-Hulk-Sims-Tins


Big minute groups
8:45 (5)
Quis-Dun-Granger-Hulk-Tins
8:15 (-19)
Ike-Dun-Foster-Granger-Tins
4:30 (9)
Dun-Foster-Granger-Hulk-Tins


Who the F is that? New 5-mans for the game
What? They're ALL new in this game. :D


Interesting notes
Hulk was in all 3 big winners, including all of the +9 OT group that won the game. It's easy to forget what a huge impact he had early on. His number for this game is nuts.

Mike and Ike special...maybe not. The 2 worst groups featured them and Ike had a rough night in total as well.

Needless to say, that -19 group hasn't seen much action since that night. I have them at 10 minutes roughly, though they're +1 since that first game in the limited minutes.

Naptown_Seth
12-20-2007, 10:57 PM
Game 2 - vs Miami
W 87-85

13 Granger
10 Tinsley
7 Dunleavy
7 JO
4 Rush
2 Rush

-1 Harrison
-4 Foster
-6 Daniels
-7 Diener
-12 Diogu

Limited minutes
-1 Owens


Top three 5-man groups
(all 5-man listed by alpha, not position)

6 in 0:45 play
Quis-Dun-Granger-Hulk-Tins
6 in 0:45 play
Dun-Granger-Hulk-JO-Tins
5 in 1:00 play
Dun-Granger-JO-Rush-Tins


Not so much, worst 5-mans
-9 in 2:15 play
Dun-Foster-Granger-Hulk-Tins
-4 in 3:15 play
Quis-Diener-Ike-JO-Rush
-3 in 4:15 play
Quis-Ike-Dun-Hulk-Tins


Big minute groups
10:45 (4)
Dun-Foster-Granger-JO-Tins
6:15 (-2)
Ike-Dun-Granger-Hulk-Tins
4:15 (-3)
Quis-Ike-Dun-Hulk-Tins



Interesting notes
From best to worst. The top 5 man from the previous game was the worst 5 man group in this game.

The debut of the biggest minutes 5-man was this game, and on cue they led the game in 5-man minutes here too.

The Pacers went on a -7 run with the Dun-Jeff-DG-Hulk-Tins group late in the 4th and were on the verge of losing. Then Rush came in and they won the next 3 5-mans and pulled out the 2 point win.

The Pacers had 2 5-man +6 bursts in 45 seconds each. One to end the 2nd, another mid-3rd.

Will Galen
12-20-2007, 11:04 PM
the place to find it is here:

http://www.82games.com/0708/0708IND2.HTM


As of today, that lineup isn't on the chart. It might have made it onto the floor for fewer than 9 minutes if at all.


Well . . . I thought I had answered this earlier today. I must not have clicked on submit.

Anyway, what I said in the post I thought I submitted was I had read Seth's first two posts in this thread and it got me curious about five man groups, so I had gone to 82 games.com and looked around.

There I had decided the Murph, JO, Tins, Dun, and Daniels group looked pretty good. So then I went to NBA.com and looked at the five man groups. That didn't tell me anything either so I come back here and asked Seth. And then I thanked you for your reply.

In the meantime I had considered that group defensively and decided yes it was a good one offensively, but a bad one defensively, and probably the reason it's only been used one minute as Seth said.

And no Seth it's not critical to know what game. I've already decided it's not that good of a group.

What I had been doing at 82 games is looking at players to see what position they were the most effective at. I then tried to find the best lineup that way and came up with the aforementioned group.

Thanks guys!

Naptown_Seth
12-20-2007, 11:19 PM
Game 3 - vs Memphis
W 121-111

20 JO
14 Foster
13 Dunleavy
8 Tinsley
6 Granger

3 Daniels
2 Rush
2 Diener

-4 Harrison
-5 Owens
-11 Diogu


Top three 5-man groups
(Switching to rough position order for easier reading)

9 in 11:45 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Jeff
6 in 3:30 play
Tins-Dun-Quis-JO-Jeff
4 in 1:00 play
Tins-Rush-Dun-JO-Hulk


Not so much, worst 5-mans
-5 in 1:00 play
Tins-Owens-Quis-Granger-Ike
-4 in 1:30 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-Ike-Hulk
-3 in 1:15 play
Diener-Rush-DG-Ike-Hulk


Big minute groups
11:45 (9)
Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Jeff
4:30 (0)
Tins-Owens-Quis-Dun-JO
4:00 (1)
Diener-Rush-Quis-Granger-Ike



Interesting notes
Yesh, Ike goes for his 3rd straight deep in the red. Not hard to see how his season total is so bad at this point. I'm excited for his return, but then I see this stuff and I wonder. -11 in a game they won easily?

Tins-Dun-JO seems to be part of the magic formula. Not really a surprise at this point.

A ton of small man rotations in this game and last. Owens at SG, Granger at PF, Ike at C, that's small.

Naptown_Seth
12-20-2007, 11:22 PM
What I had been doing at 82 games is looking at players to see what position they were the most effective at. I then tried to find the best lineup that way and came up with the aforementioned group.
That's another angle, and starting with the Memphis game I started putting the 5 man groups in order by POS. The problem with this is interpretation sometimes, especially for all these games I've done long since watching them.

I think my next project with this will be 3 man totals, though probably not per game.

Naptown_Seth
12-20-2007, 11:46 PM
Game 4 - vs Clippers
L 89-104

9 Williams
3 Diener
2 Harrison

-5 Murphy
-9 Daniels
-10 Foster
-17 Granger
-17 Dunleavy
-18 JO
-22 Tinsley

Limited minutes
5 Owens
4 Rush


Top three 5-man groups
(Switching to rough position order for easier reading)

6 in 2:00 play
Diener-Granger-Williams-Murph-Hulk
5 in 1:45 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-Murphy-Hulk
4 in 3:30 play
Owens-Rush-Quis-Williams-Hulk


Not so much, worst 5-mans
-10 in 19:15 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Foster
-9 in 3:15 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Murphy
-7 in 3:30 play
Diener-Quis-Granger-Murphy-Hulk


Big minute groups
19:15 (-10)
Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Foster
3:30 (-7)
Diener-Quis-Granger-Murphy-Hulk
3:00 (4)
Owens-Rush-Quis-Williams-Hulk



Interesting notes
4 starters at -17 or worse. Ya ain't winnin that game, that's for sure.

Huge difference in minutes played between the main 5 and any other variation. But the most the group played at one time was 6:30.

There was a semi-garbage bump to end the game, but also note that to end the 1st quarter the 5 man of Diener-Granger-Williams-Murph-Hulk ran off a +6 in 2 minutes, giving the Pacers a lead that they held till the 3rd.

Naptown_Seth
12-21-2007, 12:06 AM
Game 5 - vs Charlote
L 87-96

15 Foster
3 Dunleavy

-2 Rush
-3 Tinsley
-6 Diener
-7 Williams
-8 Murphy

-11 Granger
-21 JO

Limited minutes
-5 Harrison


Top three 5-man groups
(Switching to rough position order for easier reading)

6 in 2:30 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-Murphy-Foster
4 in 2:15 play
Diener-Dun-Williams-Murphy-Foster
3 in 12:15 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Foster
3 in 1:00 play
Tins-Rush-Granger-Williams-JO

Not so much, worst 5-mans
-7 in 4:30 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Murphy
-5 in 1:00 play
Tins-Granger-Williams-JO-Murphy
-4 in 5:00 play
Tins-Rush-Granger-Williams-JO
-4 in 4:30 play
Diener-Granger-Williams-Murphy-Hulk
-4 in 1:30 play
Diener-Dun-Granger-JO-Foster
-4 in 1:00 play
Diener-Rush-Williams-JO-Murphy


Big minute groups
12:15 (3)
Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Foster
5:00 (-4)
Tins-Rush-Granger-Williams-JO
4:30 (-7)
Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Murphy
4:30 (-4)
Diener-Granger-Williams-Murphy-Hulk


Interesting notes
The 2nd bad outing for JO, this was when we were noticing he wasn't right and was hurting more than he was helping.

Despite JO's bad numbers the real blame has to go on the bench. The team started both the 1st and 3rd strong. +6 to start the game in the first 7 minutes, then +7 in roughly the same span to start the 3rd. The rest? Horrible.

Naptown_Seth
12-21-2007, 12:33 AM
Game 6 - vs Denver
L 106-113

11 Rush
4 Foster
3 Williams
0 Tinsley

-5 Daniels
-7 JO
-8 Dunleavy
-12 Murphy
-20 Granger

Limited minutes
1 Harrison
-2 Diener


Top three 5-man groups
(Switching to rough position order for easier reading)

6 in 2:30 play
Tins-Rush-Dun-JO-Murphy
6 in 1:15 play
Tins-Dun-Williams-JO-Foster
5 in 2:00 play
Diener-Rush-Dun-JO-Foster


Not so much, worst 5-mans
-13 in 16:15 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Murphy
-7 in 2:00 play
Quis-Dun-Granger-Murphy-Foster
-7 in 1:30 play
Diener-Dun-Williams-JO-Foster



Big minute groups
16:15 (-13)
Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Murphy
3:45 (-3)
Tins-Granger-Williams-JO-Foster
2:45 many groups



Interesting notes
-20 from Granger. Ugh. And he was with the starters that ran off a +7 to open the game.

The regular starters had seemed to include Foster. That 5 got 1:30 and went +3. The new version featuring Troy goes 16 minutes for -13. This includes having them finish the final 2:30 of the game with a -6, effectively losing the game. Why?

The Pacers didn't win a 5 man in the entire 4th, add in the final 5 man in the 3rd and it was 6 straight groups that lost or tied. Jump the +3 group and you find a -7 group in the mid-3rd. Before that you have 2 groups going +1 each and then you have the starters for the 2nd half going -8.

To recap, that's a -8, -7, -6, -4, -3, -2 with the occassional +1 or 0 to stop the bleeding. That's how you lose an 18 point lead. 25 if you go back to the 2nd. Pretty much nothing worked after the mid-2nd.

Naptown_Seth
12-21-2007, 12:54 AM
Game 7 - vs Boston
L 86-101

1 Granger
0 Dunleavy
-1 JO
-3 Tinsley

-9 Foster
-11 Murphy
-13 Rush
-13 Diener
-14 Williams

Limited minutes
-4 Owens
-6 Harrison


Top three 5-man groups
4 in 1:15 play
Diener-Dun-Granger-JO-Murphy
3 in 1:00 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-Murphy-Foster
2, a few not worth mentioning



Worst 5-mans
-8 in 4:15 play
Diener-Rush-Williams-Murphy-Foster
-3 in 0:30 play
Tins-Granger-Williams-Murphy-Foster
-3 in 1:00 play
Diener-Owens-Rush-Graham-Harrison
-3 in 0:30 play
Tins-Granger-Williams-Murphy-Foster


Big minute groups
9:15 (-1)
Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Murphy
4:45 (-1)
Tins-Rush-Granger-Williams-JO
4:15 (-8)
Diener-Rush-Williams-Murphy-Foster


Interesting notes
Man, looking back how could JOB expect that Diener-Rush-Williams-Troy lineup to work out. At this point Diener's numbers were already looking pretty bad.

On that note, this game was close till Diener hit the court. First they lost a 4 point lead when one of his 5 mans went -6. Then while it was still close in the 2nd, Pacers down 1, Diener came on and all 4 of his 5 man groups proceeded to lose, for another total of -6. Thanks for playing.

Diener-Owens-Rush-Graham-Harrison? If anything says garbage time it's that lineup. I assume Sims was waived by this point or something.

Naptown_Seth
12-21-2007, 01:21 AM
Game 8 - vs Washington
L 90-103

6 Rush (10 min)
0 JO
-3 Tinsley
-4 Daniels
-4 Diener (9 min)

-8 Williams
-10 Dunleavy
-16 Foster
-18 Granger

Limited minutes
-8 Harrison


Top three 5-man groups
7 in 5:30 play
Quis-Rush-Dunleavy-Williams-JO
3 in 9:45 play
Tins-Quis-Granger-JO-Foster
2 in 2:00 play
Quis-Granger-Williams-JO-Foster


Worst 5-mans
-6 in 3:00 play
Quis-Granger-Williams-Foster-Harrison
-5 in 0:45 play
Quis-Dun-Granger-Williams-Foster
-5 in 9:00 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Foster


Big minute groups
9:45 (3)
Tins-Quis-Granger-JO-Foster
9:00 (-5)
Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Foster
5:30 (7)
Quis-Rush-Dunleavy-Williams-JO


Interesting notes
The Granger-Williams combo made a rare appearance in a top 5-man effort. For the most part early on that pair has spelled trouble.

The combo of Quis-Rush-Dun-Williams-JO picked up a token +7 in the mid 4th with the team down 18. While it did get the game to 11 with 3:15 still on the clock, it really was too little too late. Granger returned for Rush and they went 0. Then Hulk came in for JO and that 5 ended with a -2.

No Tins after the 8:45 mark. And I have him for only 9:45 in the 2nd half total (thus the 23 minutes on the game). Anyone remember why this was, if there was even a reason?

Naptown_Seth
12-21-2007, 01:47 AM
Game 9 - vs Toronto
L 101-110

0 JO
0 Rush
-1 Tinsley
-2 Foster
-3 Dunleavy

-5 Granger
-5 Murphy
-8 Diener
-12 Williams

Limited minutes
-9 Harrison


Top three 5-man groups
5 in 9:00 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Murphy
5 in 1:15 play
Diener-Rush-Granger-Murphy-Foster



Worst 5-mans
-5 in 3:15 play
Diener-Granger-Williams-Murphy-Harrison
-4 in 0:15 play
Diener-Dun-Granger-JO-Murphy
-3 in 3:00 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-Williams-JO
-3 in 1:15 play
Diener-Granger-Williams-Murphy-Foster


Big minute groups
16:00 (1)
Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Foster
9:00 (5)
Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Murphy
4:00 (-2)
Tins-Rush-Dun-Murphy-Foster


Interesting notes
A few games ago I talked about JO having this string of bad games, but really in the last few he's been one of the top +/- guys.

Seriously, no more Diener-Granger-Williams lineups. That's not a lot of strong decision making or ball handling. Did I mention not pairing Danny and Shawne?

Another game and Diener shows up to finish it out. Again, did Tins foul out, was he gassed? A 6 pt game with :45 to play, Diener comes in and they go -4.

I will say this, JOB did get his top 5 group (starters with Foster over Troy) in the game a couple of times where they didn't come through. For the game they were in the black, but they went -6 to start the 3rd and went -2 late in the 4th (just before Diener returned)

Naptown_Seth
12-21-2007, 02:05 AM
Game 10 - vs Utah
W 117 - 97

32 Williams
23 Foster
22 Tinsley
20 JO
19 Dunleavy

8 Rush
2 Daniels
1 Harrison

-6 Murphy
-11 Granger

Limited minutes
-4 Owens
-6 Diener


Top three 5-man groups
23 in 9:00 play
Tins-Dun-Williams-JO-Foster
7 in 2:30 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-Foster-Harrison
5 in 3:00 play
Quis-Rush-Dun-Williams-Murphy


Worst 5-mans
-5 in 9:15 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Murphy
-5 in 1:00 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-Murphy-Harrison
-4 in 0:30 play
Quis-Dun-Granger-Murphy-Foster

Big minute groups
9:15 (-5)
Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Murphy
9:00 (23)
Tins-Dun-Williams-JO-Foster
3:00 (5)
Quis-Rush-Dun-Williams-Murphy


Interesting notes
-11 in a 20 pt win. Come on Granger, that's Ike territory.

+23 in 9 minutes, obviously the first time anything close to that has happened on the year. More of that please. By the way, the 5 that did this is the top starters but with Shawne for Granger instead of Troy for Foster. Looking at Troy and Danny's +/- on the year is this really a surprise?

More on that +23 group. They only went to it twice, in both cases it was Williams and Foster as the first guys off the bench, joining the starters for Danny and Troy as dual subs. They went +8 in the first and +15 in the 3rd. Those followed a +3 and a -10 by the group with Danny/Troy. Nuff said.

Naptown_Seth
12-21-2007, 02:19 AM
Game 11 - vs Lakers
L 114 - 134

6 Harrison
-1 Dunleavy
-4 Rush
-5 Foster

-10 Murphy
-12 Daniels
-15 Tinsley
-16 Williams
-16 Granger
-24 JO

Limited minutes
-1 Diener
-2 Sims


Top three 5-man groups
6 in 4:15 play
Diener-Rush-Williams-Murphy-Hulk
4 in 4:30 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-Murphy-Hulk
4 in 1:30 play
Tins-Quis-Dun-Foster-Hulk


Worst 5-mans
-11 in 9:15 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Murphy
-6 in 1:00 play
Tins-Rush-Granger-Williams-JO
-5 in 1:30 play
Tins-Granger-Williams-JO-Murphy
-5 in 1:45 play
Tins-Quis-Granger-Foster-Hulk

Big minute groups
8:30 (-11)
Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Murphy
5:30 (3)
Tins-Granger-Williams-JO-Foster
4:30 (4)
Tins-Dun-Granger-Murphy-Harrison


Interesting notes
This is the proof case for the +/- stat. We all remember this game as Bynum blowing up JO. Now look at JO's number, a horrid -24. That suggests that the stat sees a lot more than some give credit for.

Following that, look at Hulk's numbers, including being a part of all 3 top 5-man groups. Clearly he was the better play for this game, whether JO was hurting or not.

That crap pair of Danny and Shawne showed up again in 2 of the worst 5-mans. But go figure when they made it into a decent +3 group that played big minutes together. Maybe Tins-JO-Jeff helped a bit.

Naptown_Seth
12-21-2007, 02:36 AM
Game 12 - vs New Orleans
W 105 - 93

16 Harrison
15 Granger
8 Tinsley
7 Dunleavy

5 Daniels
5 Murphy
5 Williams
3 Foster

Limited minutes
-4 Rush


Top three 5-man groups
7 in 3:45 play
Tins-Granger-Williams-Murphy-Hulk
4 in 3:00 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-Foster-Hulk
4 in 2:45 play
Tins-Rush-Dun-Foster-Hulk


Worst 5-mans
-5 in 0:30 play
Tins-Rush-Dun-Murphy-Foster
-4 in 1:00 play
Tins-Granger-Williams-Murphy-Foster


Big minute groups
19:45 (0)
Tins-Dun-Granger-Murphy-Foster
3:45 (7)
Tins-Granger-Williams-Murphy-Hulk
3:15 (3)
Tins-Dun-Granger-Murphy-Hulk


Interesting notes
Well another Williams-Granger squad does well. Turning the corner? Or maybe not, also put up one of the worst 5-mans in the game.

Not since game 4 vs the Clips have we seen 1 group play so much, and so much more than any other group. This time it was in a winning effort.

Hulk backs up what we saw vs the Lakers. He's earning PT, or so it would seem. He's got 3 strong +/- outings on the year, and a ton of low minutes played games.

Naptown_Seth
12-21-2007, 02:54 AM
Game 13 - vs Dallas
W 111 - 107

7 Murphy
6 Tinsley
5 Dunleavy
5 Williams

1 Granger
1 Harrison
-1 Foster
-1 Daniels

Limited minutes
-1 Rush
-2 Diener


Top three 5-man groups
9 in 3:00 play
Diener-Quis-Williams-Murphy-Hulk
5 in 19:15 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-Murphy-Foster



Worst 5-mans
-5 in 0:45 play
Diener-Quis-Granger-Murphy-Foster
-4 in 2:45 play
Tins-Quis-Williams-Foster-Hulk
-4 in 2:30 play
Diener-Dun-Williams-Murphy-Hulk

Big minute groups
19:15 (5)
Tins-Dun-Granger-Murphy-Foster
7:45 (1)
Tins-Quis-Granger-Murphy-Foster
3:30 (1)
Tins-Granger-Williams-Murphy-Foster


Interesting notes
2 strong games from Harrison and it's back to 11 minutes. 4 fouls, but wouldn't you want to ride him right into his 6 fouls, especially considering he had 3 blocks in the game.

Diener had a weird game, part of the best and worst efforts. The difference in groups was Quis for Dun, not something you'd exactly expect. Some of it is probably PG ball handling I guess.

One thing that started happening right after JO sat with injury, JOB started playing groups together for a lot more minutes. 2 games in a row with one 5 man getting nearly 20 minutes together. The bench needed to be shortened. So it wasn't JO being in or out in retrospect, but stabilizing the rotation that started turning things around.

The 4 man of Tins-Granger-Murphy-Foster accounted for all 3 of the top minutes groups, and just among those 3 played 30:30 of the game. Again, stability.

high school hero
12-21-2007, 01:57 PM
Thanks for taking the time to do this, very interesting. I like the +/- stat and JOB said he likes it too. I made a similar more primitive post awhile back noting how awful Ike had been, and how well Harrison was doing. We'll see what happens when Ike gets back, but I really don't understand the love fest with him. Many consider him to be untouchable but want to trade Harrison for a slight upgrade over Diener. You have got to be kidding me. Based on performance so far Ike is the one who should be shipped out. Even though it was only 3 games, his stats jumped out in a very conclusive manner. Only big guy to be in the minus for the first 3 games (every one of his games so far).

Naptown_Seth
12-21-2007, 02:08 PM
12 more to go, plus a new game tonight. I just burned out, but I'll try to finish tonight.

After that it will space more and I'll toss out things like 10 game subtotals. Actually I think I'll do that after I post game 15 (5-15 totals).

Right now it's an archive where anyone can at least run the individual +/- numbers for a given set of games (DEC, in wins, when JO plays, etc) with them each posted separately. I really wanted that option myself the last few years.


Yeah, I like Ike but those numbers are troubling. Given his size on defense and his problems with passing the ball you can see how he would be a problem. I mean Danny is running the same as he did last year, and at some point you must think there is something to that.

Like Ike, there is a reason that Granger is so far in the red while the rest of the starters typically are way above him. It stops being "bad luck/situations" and starts being a trend.


On the other side you see some of Hulk's games and realize (if you didn't just from seeing him play) that when he can stay on the court he can be a major factor. His best +/- games are ones that when you watched you thought great game from him tonight.


JOB said Shawne was getting crunched out by numbers, and Ike is part of that. I agree with you, I'd move Ike now to address the BU PG situation while you still can. But then maybe the word is out when Bill Simmons even questions just how good Ike is ever going to be.

CableKC
12-21-2007, 05:13 PM
Seth, good work. I think that you should send a quick email to "Ask the Pacers" with a link to this post ;)

I went through your +/- Stats, pulled all of the Top 5-Man groups and tallied how many times they appear in the list:

Dunleavy - 25
Tinsley - 24
Granger - 22
Foster - 16
Harrison - 16
JONeal - 14
Murphy - 14
Rush - 10
Shawne - 10
Marquis - 9
Deiner - 7
Ike - 1
Owens 1

Keep in mind that this is just strict tally and does not take into account the # of minutes or games they played. There has been 28 different 5 man combinations.

The only combinations that has been used more then once that has appeared in your Top 5-Man group is:

Dunleavy-Tinsley-Granger-Murphy-Foster ( used 3 times )
Dunleavy-Tinsley-Granger-JONeal-Foster ( used 2 times )
Dunleavy-Tinsley-Granger-Harrison-Marquis ( used 2 times )
Dunleavy-Tinsley-Granger-Harrison-Foster ( used 2 times )
Dunleavy-Murphy-Granger-Harrison-Foster ( used 2 times )

At least based off of what we see above.....based off of the +/- stat....Dunleavy, Tinsley, Granger, Harrison and Foster is the best 5-man combo that we have.

high school hero
12-21-2007, 05:24 PM
Simmons called Ike out? When was that and what did he say?

Anthem
12-21-2007, 06:34 PM
Yeah, I like Ike but those numbers are troubling. Given his size on defense and his problems with passing the ball you can see how he would be a problem. I mean Danny is running the same as he did last year, and at some point you must think there is something to that.
That's a pretty small sample to be making judgments on. Let's see him in the game a little more first.

Naptown_Seth
12-23-2007, 08:33 AM
Cable, I like it. Someone taking on the load of extra research, basically exactly what I was hoping for. :)

Of course I have the full list of all 5-mans, but I hadn't even had time to look at something like "how many times is a player part of the top groups". I'm not sure I want to do the work, but I COULD turn them into per minute and then look at how many times a player was part of the 3 best groups, or part of any group that was at a certain level of per minute.

But really I like this more simple version for now. I mean I hate the 30 second run where a group goes +4 and looks like they won the game or something. Letting groups compete with more minutes helps offset that. Averaging per minute only exacerbates the "quick run" aspect.



Anthem - I understand that and agree to a degree. Let's keep in mind that the positive views of where his game is and what his impact has and will be this year are based on the same sample set.

The numbers only saw a few games, but that's true for the fans' opinion also. That's what I hate about stat bashers, they ignore the fact that opinions are formed by an uncertain formula inside a fan's head based on the exact same sample space.

So John Doe watches the game, sees the plays and says "good, bad, great, bad, okay, good, bad...", adds that up with a running total and comes out with "had a good/bad game".

And this gets worse when that initial judgement of each play is being offset by a bias, such as loving a player and giving more value to the good plays than the bad which leads to the natural result of fueling the fan's love of the player with the pseudo-justification that they are having great games rather than just mediocre ones (or vice versa if the player is hated).

I see a bad +/- and think "how did that happen" if I thought the player played well or if he put up great numbers. Just like if I think a player shot well and then I look at the box and see 4-19 I wonder how in the world I came up with my point of view.

What I don't do is just dismiss the stat as wrong. It's telling me to check my own POV. (edit - reading this sounds hostile toward you and it's not in the least, a tinge crept in on a more general stat-bashers view which is not what I considered your post to be)

And back to Ike, this applies because everyone loved what Ike showed in those first games and was looking to his return as a big bump. Maybe, but when he was out there before something was amiss.


+/- is NOT a cause-effect, you can't just read a perfect relationship between wins and the stat. But like other stats it is a view with some truth in it.


HIGH SCHOOL - Simmons in his trade rankings column listed both Danny and Ike as guys that are good deals now, but after they resign won't be due to their limited overall ability/potential. He added that Granger was the best of the bunch to go beyond that, thus leaving Ike behind so to speak. He included about 5-6 players besides those 2 IIRC.


I'll get back to the postings tomorrow. Holidays and all ya know.

kester99
12-23-2007, 06:25 PM
Do you not like the Lenovo +/- stats? Excerpt below:

<TABLE class=statsTable cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=3 width=740 border=0><TBODY><TR class=statsHeaderRow><TD class=statsHeaderRow noWrap align=left>Player 1</TD><TD class=statsHeaderRow noWrap align=left>Player 2</TD><TD class=statsHeaderRow noWrap align=left>Player 3</TD><TD class=statsHeaderRow noWrap align=left>Player 4</TD><TD class=statsHeaderRow noWrap align=left>Player 5</TD><TD class=statsHeaderRow noWrap align=left>Team</TD><TD class=statsHeaderRow noWrap align=right>+</TD><TD class=statsHeaderRow noWrap align=right>-</TD><TD class=statsHeaderRow noWrap align=right>+/-</TD><TD class=statsHeaderRow noWrap align=right>Min</TD><TD class=statsHeaderRow noWrap align=right>+/- /Min</TD><TD class=statsHeaderRow noWrap align=right>G</TD><TR><TD colSpan=10></TD></TR></TR><TR><TD class=statsRowEven align=left>J. O'Neal </TD><TD class=statsRowEven align=left>J. Foster </TD><TD class=statsRowEven align=left>J. Tinsley </TD><TD class=statsRowEven align=left>M. Dunleavy </TD><TD class=statsRowEven align=left>S. Williams </TD><TD class=statsRowEven align=left>Pacers </TD><TD class=statsRowEven align=right>39 </TD><TD class=statsRowEven align=right>-12 </TD><TD class=statsSortEven align=right>27 </TD><TD class=statsRowEven align=right>11:34 </TD><TD class=statsRowEven align=right>2.334 </TD><TD class=statsRowEven align=right>4 </TD><TR><TD class=statsRowOdd align=left>J. O'Neal </TD><TD class=statsRowOdd align=left>J. Foster </TD><TD class=statsRowOdd align=left>J. Tinsley </TD><TD class=statsRowOdd align=left>M. Dunleavy </TD><TD class=statsRowOdd align=left>D. Granger </TD><TD class=statsRowOdd align=left>Pacers </TD><TD class=statsRowOdd align=right>305 </TD><TD class=statsRowOdd align=right>-286 </TD><TD class=statsSortOdd align=right>19 </TD><TD class=statsRowOdd align=right>144:52 </TD><TD class=statsRowOdd align=right>.131 </TD><TD class=statsRowOdd align=right>19 </TD><TR><TD class=statsRowEven align=left>J. Foster </TD><TD class=statsRowEven align=left>J. Tinsley </TD><TD class=statsRowEven align=left>M. Dunleavy </TD><TD class=statsRowEven align=left>D. Granger </TD><TD class=statsRowEven align=left>S. Williams </TD><TD class=statsRowEven align=left>Pacers </TD><TD class=statsRowEven align=right>58 </TD><TD class=statsRowEven align=right>-39 </TD><TD class=statsSortEven align=right>19 </TD><TD class=statsRowEven align=right>21:46 </TD><TD class=statsRowEven align=right>.872 </TD><TD class=statsRowEven align=right>5 </TD><TR><TD class=statsRowOdd align=left>J. O'Neal </TD><TD class=statsRowOdd align=left>J. Foster </TD><TD class=statsRowOdd align=left>J. Tinsley </TD><TD class=statsRowOdd align=left>M. Dunleavy </TD><TD class=statsRowOdd align=left>M. Daniels </TD><TD class=statsRowOdd align=left>Pacers </TD><TD class=statsRowOdd align=right>45 </TD><TD class=statsRowOdd align=right>-28 </TD><TD class=statsSortOdd align=right>17 </TD><TD class=statsRowOdd align=right>18:36 </TD><TD class=statsRowOdd align=right>.913 </TD><TD class=statsRowOdd align=right>4 </TD><TR><TD class=statsRowEven align=left>T. Murphy </TD><TD class=statsRowEven align=left>J. Tinsley </TD><TD class=statsRowEven align=left>M. Dunleavy </TD><TD class=statsRowEven align=left>D. Harrison </TD><TD class=statsRowEven align=left>D. Granger </TD><TD class=statsRowEven align=left>Pacers </TD><TD class=statsRowEven align=right>59 </TD><TD class=statsRowEven align=right>-43 </TD><TD class=statsSortEven align=right>16 </TD><TD class=statsRowEven align=right>22:32 </TD><TD class=statsRowEven align=right>.709 </TD><TD class=statsRowEven align=right>7</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

kester99
12-23-2007, 07:22 PM
One thing I've noticed on the Lenovo stats, which only show top 50 combinations, is that our 'default' starting line-up....JO, JT, Murphy, Mike, Danny...does not make the top 50....so they are at least only +3 or below.

P.S. I have shamelessly stolen your 'big thread' terminology for another thread.

CableKC
12-24-2007, 04:09 AM
Cable, I like it. Someone taking on the load of extra research, basically exactly what I was hoping for. :)

Of course I have the full list of all 5-mans, but I hadn't even had time to look at something like "how many times is a player part of the top groups". I'm not sure I want to do the work, but I COULD turn them into per minute and then look at how many times a player was part of the 3 best groups, or part of any group that was at a certain level of per minute.

But really I like this more simple version for now. I mean I hate the 30 second run where a group goes +4 and looks like they won the game or something. Letting groups compete with more minutes helps offset that. Averaging per minute only exacerbates the "quick run" aspect.
NP....you're taking your time to go through every game to pull these stats...the least I can do is to do a quick tally of you results ;).

The good news is that 3 of the 5 players that regularly appear in the "top 5" list ( Tinsley.....sort of....Dunleavy and Granger ) are fairly durable when it comes to remaining healthy.....the bad news is that the 2 remaining players ( Foster and Harrison...as of late ) has been hampered by recurring injuries.

Naptown_Seth
12-24-2007, 03:45 PM
Do you not like the Lenovo +/- stats? Excerpt below:
No, just unaware. I could be redoing a ton of readily available for free work for all I know. I just had a bug up the rear to try it and in the past couldn't find some answers I wanted, and here we are. I've gone too far and ticked off Shade too much to turn back now. :D

I think we get that it's not the answer to all questions, it's just A stat, one of many, and this is a nice way to archive it. Just like the Utah thing or the PER or any other type of measure. Heck I'd be fine with them all being thrown into a monster sized STATATRONIC thread even.

I just wanted to get some of these numbers documented in some way, just out of general Pacers interest. Especially per game for TREND interests.

Naptown_Seth
12-24-2007, 04:08 PM
Game 14 - vs Cleveland
L 106 - 111

12 Daniels
11 Williams
9 Granger
5 Harrison

-9 Murphy
-15 Tinsley
-16 Foster
-22 Dunleavy


Top three 5-man groups
7 in 3:00 play
Tins-Quis-Granger-Williams-Hulk
5 in 5:00 play
Quis-Granger-Williams-Murphy-Hulk
5 in 3:30 play
Quis-Dun-Granger-Williams-Hulk


Worst 5-mans
-9 in 15:00 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-Murphy-Foster
-5 in 2:45 play
Tins-Dun-Williams-Foster-Hulk
-5 in 2:15 play
Tins-Dun-Quis-Murphy-Foster

Big minute groups
15:00 (-9)
Tins-Dun-Granger-Murphy-Foster
5:00 (5)
Quis-Granger-Williams-Murphy-Hulk
4:45 (-2)
Tins-Dun-Granger-Foster-Hulk

Interesting notes
I was not pleased with Granger-Williams combos, but in this game it worked.

Note that Hulk was part of all 3 top combos. This keeps showing up. Gotta be impressed with the impact he has on games when he can stay out there. I think it's his ability to be a legit post scoring threat combined with a willingness to run. Makes things easier for other guys, give them an offensive anchor.

The game was lost in 2 runs, one in the first half or so of the 2nd when 4 straight 5-man groups lost, including 3 that went -7,-3,-5 right in a row. The players common to those 3 groups were: Tins-Dun-Foster. That's a surprise I think. What killed them was scoring points themselves, getting 2, 0, and 5 points in those runs respectively for 7 in well over 5 minutes.

The other run was the one at the end of the game, taking it from 99-98 to the loss. Again scoring was the problem, getting only 3 points in a late 2:15 run. :eek: Common in those 2 groups that basically lost it: Tins-Granger-Hulk.

Note that in the majority of that final run that Dunleavy sat. That was the -5 that went from 99-98 to 102-106. Don't cut him too much slack though since he was key with the first bad run, and the slow start in the 3rd (-5 in 6 minutes).

Naptown_Seth
12-24-2007, 04:26 PM
Game 15 - vs Denver
W 112 - 110

11 Tinsley
6 Dun
5 Hulk
4 Foster
4 Williams
3 Murphy

-8 Granger
-9 Daniels

Limited minutes
3 Rush
-9 Diener

Top three 5-man groups
11 in 11:30 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-Williams-Foster
9 in 6:15 play
Tins-Quis-Dun-Williams-Hulk
5 in 2:00 play
Quis-Rush-Williams-Murphy-Hulk


Worst 5-mans
-6 in 1:30 play
Quis-Dun-Granger-Williams-Foster
-6 in 1:00 play
Tins-Quis-Dun-Granger-Williams
-4 in 1:15 play
Diener-Quis-Granger-Murphy-Hulk

Big minute groups
11:30 (11)
Tins-Dun-Granger-Williams-Foster
6:15 (9)
Tins-Quis-Dun-Williams-Hulk
5:15 (1)
Tins-Quis-Dun-Murphy-Foster

Interesting notes
Granger with yet another bad number despite the rest of the starters looking good. Note that he was part of a group that went -6 in the final minute before fouling out. Then came the Dun foul of JR Smith, his missed 3rd FT and Shawne getting the clinching rebound and 1 of 2 FTs. BTW, IMO Dun fouled Smith, no need to come into him like that even if he did kick out.

That late run by Denver was fueled by 3 3pt makes and an AI layup that took 6 seconds after they rebounded a Tinsley missed FT. They beat Indy 13-6 in the final minute, and were playing the foul game against the Pacers (all 6 points for Indy were on FTs).

Hulk in a couple more of the top 5 man groups.

Naptown_Seth
12-24-2007, 04:53 PM
Game 16 - vs Portland
W 95 - 89

17 Rush
14 Foster
10 Tinsley
5 Murphy
4 Dunleavy

-1 Williams
-6 Harrison
-9 Granger


Limited minutes
-1 Diener
-3 Rush

Top three 5-man groups
15 in 4:00 play
Tins-Rush-Dun-Murph-Foster
5 in 2:45 play
Tins-Rush-Granger-Foster-Hulk3 in 7:15 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-Williams-Foster


Worst 5-mans
-7 in 14:00 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-Murphy-Foster
-3 in 1:30 play
Tins-Rush-Granger-Murphy-Hulk
-3 in 1:30 play
Quis-Dun-Granger-Williams-Hulk

Big minute groups
14:00 (-7)
Tins-Dun-Granger-Murphy-Foster
7:15 (3)
Tins-Dun-Granger-Williams-Foster
4:00 (15)
Tins-Rush-Dun-Murph-Foster

Interesting notes
Granger, -9. Other starters 10, 4, 5, 14. This is not just one long running coincidence, or unlucky circumstances. There was group without Danny that went +15, basically the starters with Rush instead. Danny reentered and they went -2, -1, -2, -6, and -1 in the next 5 groups, a span of 11 minutes where an 11 point lead was lost. Tins, Dun, Foster, and Rush were all mixed in during that time, so he had help.

In his defense he was out there when they went +7 in the final 5:15.

Another good Granger-Williams 5 man. Same combo that went 11+ strong minutes vs Denver the previous game, going +3 in this one.

Let's face it, that +15 burst won the game. The Pacers went on a 17-2 run when Rush entered for Danny. It wasn't really Rush though, or Troy. Both helped, but it was the combo of Tins-Dun-Foster that were passing to each other, cutting, screening and running up a ton of points.

Dun 5 points, 2 assists, 3 reb
Tins 2 points, 3 assists
Jeff 4 points, 1 reb

They were brilliant. 5 assists on 7 buckets, they assisted on the 6pts they didn't score too (3pt makes by Rush and Troy).

Naptown_Seth
12-24-2007, 04:54 PM
Game 17 - vs Seattle
L 93 - 95

12 Dunleavy
11 Tinsley
10 Harrison

0 Granger
0 Williams
-1 Foster

-10 Murphy
-11 JO

Limited minutes
-4 Owens
-8 Rush
-9 Diener

Top three 5-man groups
7 in 2:45 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-Foster-Hulk
6 in 3:00 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-Williams-JO
3 in 0:00 play (obviously not 0 seconds, just under 9, this group hit the late 3 while down by 5)
Tins-Dun-Granger-Williams-Foster


Worst 5-mans
-7 in 3:15 play
Diener-Rush-Granger-Murphy-JO
-4 in 12:30 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Foster
-3 in 2:30 play
Owens-Granger-Williams-JO-Foster

Big minute groups
12:30 (-4)
Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Foster
6:00 (1)
Tins-Dun-Granger-Murphy-Hulk
3:15 (-7)
Diener-Rush-Granger-Murphy-JO
3:15 (-1)
Tins-Dun-Granger-Murphy-JO

Interesting notes
Obviously a rough return for JO.

Is it not clear that most things featuring Diener or Owens are going to be problematic right now.

I don't think it's Granger-Williams so much, but rather Granger at SG with Williams playing (usually SF) that isn't that good.

Trying to figure out Murphy's up and down numbers (mostly down to this point), I haven't kept track but I wonder if it is partially due to a Dun+Troy pairing that our Golden St visitors warned us about (never play them together because of defensive issues). I need to work on 2 man groups next I guess. Ugh, work.

Down by 8, 2 different groups tied it up with a +8 run. In both groups were: Tins-Dun-Williams. Also early in the game they took a rare lead after trailing by 5 with a +9 by two groups which featured: Tins-Dun-Granger-Hulk. The rest of the game featured very little in the way of sustained runs.

Naptown_Seth
12-24-2007, 05:16 PM
Game 18 - vs LA Clippers
W 101 - 95

23 JO
17 Dunleavy
9 Tinsley
8 Foster
4 Granger

-2 Williams
-2 Harrison
-5 Daniels
-5 Rush
-17 Murphy


Top three 5-man groups
14 in 6:00 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Foster
8 in 15:00 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-Williams-JO
5 in 1:45 play
Tins-Rush-Granger-Foster-Hulk


Worst 5-mans
-6 in 4:15 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-Murphy-Foster
-4 in 2:30 play
Tins-Rush-Granger-Williams-Murphy
-3 in 1:15 play
Tins-Rush-Granger-Williams-Hulk
-3 in 1:00 play
Tins-Granger-Williams-Murphy-Foster

Big minute groups
15:00 (8)
Tins-Dun-Granger-Williams-JO
6:00 (14)
Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Foster
4:15 (-6)
Tins-Dun-Granger-Murphy-Foster

Interesting notes
Bench issues? Yikes on the difference between starters (Jeff started) and bench here. Of course a huge chunk of this was the +14 they started the game with. And there was the final 8 minutes where the starters with Williams for Foster finished the game and went +4....yes, I said the same group stayed out there for the final 8 straight minutes.

This group had 12:30 playing together vs Seattle too, but went -4. It's also the same 5 that played well together in the DEN and POR games, but with JO in for Foster. That other group didn't play at all in this game, but the JO for Williams version did and was strong.

Basically you see JO returning and fitting into some groups that were already coming together pretty well. A lot of Granger-Williams combos haven't worked, but the 2 of these 3 groups with them together have worked (Tins-Dun-Granger and then 2 of JO-Foster-Williams).

kester99
12-24-2007, 08:17 PM
No, just unaware. I could be redoing a ton of readily available for free work for all I know.

They only have the top 50 combos....and any time on the floor seems to count, so many (I'd think) of the more used combos don't get listed.....our nominal starting five, for instance.

Naptown_Seth
12-26-2007, 03:29 PM
They only have the top 50 combos....and any time on the floor seems to count, so many (I'd think) of the more used combos don't get listed.....our nominal starting five, for instance.
Once I catch up I'll start throwing out things like minutes played and trends (in the last 10, etc) on these. This is just the painful start-up/catch-up because I didn't have it ready to start the year.

I do find it frustrating that I can't get specific answers on these numbers at times. Not that any of these sites owe me anything. It's a lot of work, that's for sure, so I'll take whatever they offer.

Naptown_Seth
12-26-2007, 03:33 PM
Game 19 - vs Phoenix
L 117 - 121

7 Daniels
6 Harrison
3 Rush
2 Foster
0 Tinsley

-3 Williams
-5 Dunleavy
-12 JO
-18 Granger


Top three 5-man groups
8 in 2:00 play
Quis-Rush-Dun-Foster-Hulk
6 in 3:45 play
Tins-Quis-Dun-Williams-Hulk
3 in 12:00 play
Tins-Quis-Dun-JO-Foster
3 in 1:00 play
Tins-Rush-Granger-Williams-JO

Worst 5-mans
-11 in 13:45 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-Williams-JO
-4 in 0:15 play
Quis-Rush-Granger-JO-Hulk
-4 in 1:45 play
Quis-Dun-Granger-JO-Foster


Big minute groups
13:45 (-11)
Tins-Dun-Granger-Williams-JO
12:00 (3)
Tins-Quis-Dun-JO-Foster
3:45 (6)
Tins-Quis-Dun-Williams-Hulk

Interesting notes
The starters went -10 in the first 6 minutes or so. After that there were only a couple of -4s, the rest was very even.

Apart from the last second sub of Williams for Quis for a 3pt attempt, the same five basically played the ENTIRE 4th together, going +3. Tins-Dun-Quis-JO-Foster. That hasn't happened in any quarter that I recall, not up till this point at least.

Hulk +6, Danny -18, and so the trend continues.

Hmm, DG-Shawne have another rough pairing. Yes they also have an okay positive one too, but it was short and Dun wasn't asked to play the 2 with them.

Notice that a lot of groups that have Mike at the 3 seem to do well. Some of the credit goes to Rush and Quis since that's typically how this happens, but maybe it's also symbiotic and they are benefiting from Dun at SF too. Given Danny's +/- maybe it's time to move Dun to SG and let Rush start instead.

2 groups got more than 12 minutes PT together, that's also really unusual.

Naptown_Seth
12-26-2007, 03:34 PM
Game 20 - vs Orlando
W 115 - 109

8 Dunleavy
8 Murphy
7 Daniels
4 Foster
4 Williams
3 Tinsley

-1 JO
-3 Granger

Top three 5-man groups
8 in 2:15 play
Tins-Quis-Dun-JO-Foster
6 in 3:00 play
Quis-Dun-Granger-Williams-Murphy
4 in 5:30 play
Quis-Dun-Williams-Murphy-Foster


Worst 5-mans
-6 in 2:00 play
Tins-Quis-Granger-Murphy-Foster
-4 in 4:45 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-Williams-JO
-3 in 0:15 play
Quis-Dun-Granger-Williams-JO


Big minute groups
16:15 (0)
Tins-Dun-Granger-Foster-JO
5:30 (0)
Tins-Quis-Granger-Foster-JO
5:30 (4)
Quis-Dun-Williams-Murphy-Foster

Interesting notes
Down 1 in the 4th the group of Tins-Quis-Dun-JO-Foster come in and run off a +8 in 2:15. Thanks for the win guys. :)

Just when I thought I was figuring this team out you get a +6 from this group: Quis-Dun-Granger-Williams-Murphy. It's got Troy, it's got Danny, it's got DG-Shawne together, it's got Dun at SG, and there's no Tinsley. Okay sir. :confused:

Quis-Dun-Granger-Williams-JO, -3 in 15 seconds. Tins-Dun-Granger-Williams-JO, -4 in about 5 minutes. Now it's back to normal. :)

kester99
12-26-2007, 03:45 PM
If I remember my finite math right, since we have 5 positions, with 15 variables to fill them (we did have 15 prior to rerereleasing Sims), the number of possible 5-player combinations is only 15x14x13x12x11.....uhh....second here....360,360 combinations. Very symmetrical.

So good on ya, Seth. That could be one hell of a spreadsheet depending on how you approach it:-o.

Naptown_Seth
12-26-2007, 04:36 PM
Game 21 - vs Cleveland
L 105 - 118

6 Dunleavy

-3 Daniels
-4 JO
-5 Murphy
-9 Rush

-17 Tinsley
-19 Granger
-24 Williams

Limited Minutes
4 Owens
Graham played but I haven't kept his individual +/-

Top three 5-man groups
4 in 4:45 play
Owens-Rush-Graham-Granger-Murphy
4 in 2:00 play
Tins-Rush-Quis-Dun-Murphy
3 in 4:15 play
Quis-Rush-Dun-JO-Murphy


Worst 5-mans
-8 in 2:30 play
Quis-Rush-Granger-Williams-Murphy
-7 in 3:00 play
Tins-Rush-Granger-Williams-Murphy
-5 in 1:45 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-Williams-JO


Big minute groups
13:15 (1)
Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Murphy
4:45 (4)
Owens-Rush-Graham-Granger-Murphy
4:15 (3)
Quis-Rush-Dun-JO-Murphy


Interesting notes
That -17 from Tins has to be one of his worst outings. I'll have to run a MIN-MAX on per games to find out when I get the time.

The first 4 groups went -4, -5, -7 and -5...thanks for playing, see ya next time. Yeesh.

You know things went bad when your top +/- group is clearly a garbage time set.

More "bigs time" for Dun in 2 of the top groups, one of those at PF even. Sure does seem to work out when he gets to rotate toward to the front line.

The common thread in all 3 worst +/- groups...the old stand-by, Danny and Shawne together. This just has to end for now.

Naptown_Seth
12-26-2007, 04:53 PM
Game 22 - vs Chicago
W 117 - 102

26 JO
24 Rush
21 Tinsley
14 Daniels
4 Williams
3 Murphy
3 Dunleavy

-1 Granger
-7 Harrison

Limited Minutes
-4 Sims
-4 Diener
-4 Owens

Top three 5-man groups
13 in 7:45 play
Tins-Rush-Quis-Williams-JO
9 in 5:30 play
Tins-Rush-Quis-JO-Murphy
6 in 1:30 play
Tins-Rush-Dun-Granger-JO


Worst 5-mans
-5 in 1:00 play
Tins-Quis-Granger-Williams-Hulk
-4 in 7:45 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Murphy
-4 in 2:15 play
Diener-Owens-Rush-Daniels-Sims


Big minute groups
7:45 (13)
Tins-Rush-Quis-Williams-JO
7:45 (-4)
Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Murphy
5:30 (9)
Tins-Rush-Quis-JO-Murphy


Interesting notes
-5, Granger-Shawne. It should be obvious I'm not letting go on this one at this point. End it.

Great game for Rush, and his play pushed Quis and Dun into the SF slot, something I'm a big fan of at this point. Lots of solid +/- when you get them into spots where speed isn't against them.

Rush entered the game for the first time with the Pacers down 9. He sat for 1:15 after that point until he came out late in the 3rd for a 5 minute rest, then returned to finish the 4th. This also included JOB starting him in the 2nd half along with Quis and Williams (Dun, Troy and Danny sat).

Will Galen
12-26-2007, 06:57 PM
When I looked at 82games.com earlier, Dun was far and away our best SF, but I think O'B uses 2's and 3's the same way on offense. On defense he puts Danny on the other teams best perimeter player.

Right now I would say Williams is odd man out, or our #5 swingman. The main rotation at the swing position is Dun, Dan, and Rush. Daniels figures in there too when he and Tins are in the game together.

Our best defensive five? I would say,

F Granger
F JO
C Foster
P Daniels
G Rush

Our best offensive five? That would depend more on who's on in a particular game. Our leading scorer the last ten games has never been the same guy two games in a row.

JO....30
DG....27
Dun..23
Rush.22
Dun..23
Tins..26
Dun..36
Mar..26
Dun..30
DG...25

Naptown_Seth
12-27-2007, 05:19 AM
He may suggest that his SG and SF are the same, but that doesn't alter that fact that the other team has some say in the matchups too. Fact is that Dun at SG is going to see a bit more quickness coming at him than at SF. Sure he has height, but he typically doesn't use height as part of his game. I mean when do you see Dun post up? Ever?

I didn't notice this till I started posting the game results. Honestly prior to this I was focused on entering the data and checking for errors.

And for Danny, I'm the guy that propped him up early in the season as showing the Pippen caliber skill set, so I'm certainly not wanting to tear him down. But there is just no freaking way this is an endless stream of bad breaks for him. Danny on the court is hurting the team often, especially in some configurations. Shawne has had more success without Danny than DG has had without him.

And Rush was already showing some +/- bumps before he had his breakout game it seems, which makes me a much bigger believer in him. On Rush, I think his effort on defense is part of that. When his shot wasn't dropping he seemed worthless by the box, but I think I was wrong on that.

Naptown_Seth
12-30-2007, 09:55 AM
Game 23 - vs Toronto
L 93 - 104

6 Granger
4 Harrison

-1 Murphy
-2 JO
-4 Dunleavy
-5 Tinsley

-11 Daniels
-14 Foster
-19 Rush

Limited Minutes
-9 Williams

Top three 5-man groups
6 in 5:15 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-Murph-Hulk
3 in 1:15 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Foster
no others at +3 or better



Worst 5-mans
-5 in 2:30 play
Tins-Rush-Quis-Williams-Foster
-4 in 3:00 play
Tins-Rush-Dun-Murphy-Foster
-4 in 3:15 play
Quis-Rush-Dun-Williams-Foster


Big minute groups
20:30 (-1)
Tins-Dun-Granger-Murph-JO
5:15 (6)
Tins-Dun-Granger-Murph-Hulk
3:45 (-2)
Quis-Rush-Granger-Murph-JO

Who the bleep is that? (new 5 mans)
Quis-Rush-Dun-Murphy-Harrison
Tins-Rush-Dun-Murphy-Harrison

Interesting notes
Not a good game for Jeff really, he was part of all 3 of the worst 5 man groups and had that -14 overall.

So much for Dun at SF being good, at least in this game.

Hulk has another game as part of a top 5 man group. Sure does seem to happen a lot.

20+ minutes by one 5 man? Now that is really rare. Has it even happened prior to this? Add to it that they went -1 for the game. Obviously the starting 5 was getting it done, at least in the sense of staying extremely competitive.

Having said that, that group was +15! even at the 4 minute mark of the 4th. They were carrying the load in what looked to be a few minutes away from a Paces win. Then the Raptors went on a 16-0 run in 3 minutes. That included 3 3pt makes, 3 FTs on a 3pt foul, and 2 techs. Yikes. Talk about getting away from you.

Just when Rush seemed to be a key player he has a game like this. If only Bird had brought in Kapono instead somehow. At least in this game.

Naptown_Seth
12-30-2007, 09:56 AM
Game 24 - vs Miami
W 106 - 103

18 Murphy
3 Tinsley
3 Dunleavy
2 Rush
1 Granger
1 JO

-1 Harrison
-2 Daniels
-10 Foster

Limited Minutes


Top three 5-man groups
9 in 11:15 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-Murphy-JO
6 in 2:00 play
Tins-Rush-Granger-Murphy-Hulk
3 groups tied at 3



Worst 5-mans
-5 in 1:15 play
Tins-Rush-Granger-JO-Hulk
-4 in 3:00 play
Tins-Quis-Granger-Murphy-Foster
3 groups tied at -3



Big minute groups
11:15 (9)
Tins-Dun-Granger-Murphy-JO
9:15 (-3)
Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Foster
3:15 (-1)
Quis-Rush-Dun-Murphy-JO

Who the bleep is that? (new 5 mans)
Tins-Rush-Quis-Murphy-Foster
Tins-Rush-Quis-Murphy-Harrison
Quis-Rush-Dun-JO-Hulk
Quis-Rush-Dun-Murphy-Hulk
Quis-Dun-Granger-JO-Harrison

Interesting notes
Foster's definitely slumping lately. Couple of really poor outings for him. But on the flipside Troy is coming on after a terrible start to the year.

A lot of new Rush-Quis combos in this game.

This was a "hold onto the lead" game that was basically won when the 4th opened up with a +10 by Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Murphy. With Foster slumping and Troy improving this seems to be the new go-to group.

Naptown_Seth
12-30-2007, 09:57 AM
Game 25 - vs Knicks

27 Granger
22 Foster
19 Murphy
18 Tinsley
18 Dunleavy

16 Daniels
11 O'Neal
2 Harrison
0 Rush

(low minutes)
1 Williams
1 Owens


Top three 5-man groups
(all 5-man listed by alpha, not position)

6 in 1:45 play
Quis-Dun-Granger-Murph-JO
5 in 2:15 play
Quis-Dun-Foster-Granger-Murph
5 in 1:30 play
Dun-Foster-Granger-Murph-Tins
5 in 4:45 play
Dun-Foster-Granger-JO-Tins

Not so much, worst 5-mans
-4 in 0:45 play
Dun-Foster-JO-Rush-Tins
-2 in 2:45 play
Quis-Dun-Granger-Hulk-Murph
-1 in 5:00 play
Quis-Dun-Foster-Hulk-Rush

When -1 is one of the worst groups on the night, you probably did okay. :)


Big minute groups
17:00 (0)
Dun-Granger-JO-Murph-Tins
5:00 (-1)
Quis-Dun-Foster-Hulk-Rush
4:45 (5)
Dun-Foster-Granger-JO-Tins


Who the bleep is that? (New 5 mans)
Hulk-Murph-Owens-Rush-Williams


Interesting notes
Starting at the 5:45 mark left in the 3rd the Pacers didn't lose or tie a single 5-man group the rest of the way (8 total groups).

The 10 minutes played by the starters to open the game might be the most minutes any group has played straight together all year. Certainly it was a top 5 outing and probably the most in a first half at least. I'm going to check when I get a chance.

Naptown_Seth
12-30-2007, 09:58 AM
Game 26 - vs Philadelphia
W 102 - 85

20 Rush
18 Daniels
14 Foster
10 Granger

8 Dunleavy
8 Murphy
3 JO
1 Owens


Limited Minutes
3 Harrison

Top three 5-man groups
8 in 3:30 play
Quis-Rush-Dun-Murphy-Foster
7 in 2:30 play
Owens-Rush-Granger-JO-Murphy
6 in 5:30 play
Quis-Rush-Dun-Granger-JO


Worst 5-mans
-6 in 12:30 play
Owens-Dun-Granger-JO-Murphy
-3 in 4:00 play
Quis-Rush-Granger-JO-Murphy
-3 in 1:15 play
Quis-Rush-Granger-JO-Foster


Big minute groups
12:30 (-6)
Owens-Dun-Granger-JO-Murphy
5:30 (6)
Quis-Rush-Dun-Granger-JO
4:30 (3)
Quis-Rush-Granger-Foster-Hulk

Who the bleep is that? (new 5 mans)
Quis-Rush-Dun-Murphy-Foster
Quis-Rush-Dun-JO-Foster
Quis-Rush-Dun-Granger-JO
Quis-Rush-Granger-Murphy-Foster
Owens-Quis-Rush-Granger-JO
Owens-Dun-Granger-JO-Murphy
Owens-Rush-Dun-Granger-JO
Owens-Rush-Granger-JO-Murphy

Interesting notes
Obviously that's a lot of new 5 man groups. Quis-Rush as the backcourt is a big part of it, as well as some Owens at PG groups. Tinsley sat this game so you had a lot of groups with a new PG running things. Since Rush and Quis did so well I guess it all worked out.Easy to see the value of Tinsley when you see Owens go with the normal starters and get a -6 in a game the Pacers won pretty easily.

The break open point of the game was the +8 by Quis-Rush-Dun-Murphy-Foster toward the end of the 3rd.

Naptown_Seth
12-30-2007, 09:59 AM
Game 27 - vs Minnesota
L 118 - 131

7 Williams
4 Murphy
1 Daniels

-8 Tinsley
-10 Granger
-12 Rush
-15 Foster
-18 JO
-21 Dunleavy

Limited Minutes
3 Diener
3 Owens
1 Diogu

Top three 5-man groups
4 in 1:00 play
Tins-Rush-Quis-Granger-Foster
3 in 3:15 play
Owens-Diener-Quis-Williams-Diogu

Worst 5-mans
-7 in 3:15 play
Quis-Rush-Dun-JO-Foster
-7 in 4:45 play
Tins-Rush-Dun-Granger-JO
-5 in 1:45 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Foster


Big minute groups
17:30 (2)
Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Murphy
4:45 (-7)
Tins-Rush-Dun-Granger-JO
4:00 (2)
Tins-Quis-Dun-Williams-JO

Who the bleep is that? (new 5 mans)
Owens-Diener-Quis-Williams-Diogu
Quis-Rush-Dun-Diogu-Foster
Quis-Rush-Dun-Diogu-Murphy
Quis-Rush-Williams-Diogu-Foster
Tins-Rush-Quis-Granger-Foster
Tins-Rush-Dun-Diogu-Murphy
Tins-Rush-Williams-JO-Murphy

Interesting notes
The starters came out with a +17, yet JO and Dunleavy went -18 and -21. The -14 when they returned early in the 2nd sure didn't help.

The +3 group with Owens and Diener came in scrub time at the end of the game with the Pacers down by 18.

Naptown_Seth
12-30-2007, 10:00 AM
Game 28 - vs Washington
W 93 - 85

14 Foster
12 Dunleavy
7 Rush
6 Daniels
3 JO

1 Granger
-1 Tinsley
-6 Murphy

Limited Minutes
3 Williams
1 Diogu

Top three 5-man groups
5 in 2:00 play
Quis-Rush-Granger-JO-Foster
4 in 5:00 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Foster
3 - 4 tied


Worst 5-mans
-5 in 1:30 play
Tins-Rush-Granger-JO-Murphy
-3 in 14:30 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Murphy
-3 in 1:45 play
Tins-Quis-Granger-JO-Murphy


Big minute groups
14:30 (-3)
Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Murphy
5:00 (4)
Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Foster
4:15 (-1)
Tins-Rush-Dun-JO-Foster

Who the bleep is that? (new 5 mans)
Tins-Dun-Granger-Diogu-Murphy
Tins-Rush-Granger-Diogu-Foster

Interesting notes
One thing I notice that matches what I think I see in games, JO-Foster=good, JO-Murphy=not so good. There have been recent games where they did pair up on good 5 man efforts, so I could be way off. It just seems to generally run that way.

The game was back and forth and to me the numbers show that. The biggest minutes group was in the red for example. What it boiled down to was the +4 effort over the 5 minutes to just about end the 4th by Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Foster. That was the only time they played together in the game since Troy had started in place of Jeff. Troy of course had the worst +/- game of the night at -6. Prior to this I think Troy had put up a string of decent games.

Naptown_Seth
12-30-2007, 10:01 AM
Game 29 - vs Atlanta
L 95 - 107

3 Diogu
-3 Murphy
-4 Dunleavy
-5 Foster
-8 Rush

-11 Tinsley
-15 JO
-19 Granger

Limited Minutes
3 Williams
-1 Owens

Top three 5-man groups
7 in 2:00 play
Tins-Rush-Williams-Diogu-Foster
3 in 2:15 play
Owens-Rush-Williams-Diogu-Foster
no others better than +2



Worst 5-mans
-6 in 2:15 play
Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Foster
-4 in 1:30 play
Owens-Rush-Granger-Diogu-Foster
-4 in 2:15 play
Tins-Rush-Granger-Diogu-Foster
-4 in 1:00 play
Tins-Rush-Granger-Williams-JO


Big minute groups
21:00 (2)
Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Murphy
3:00 (0)
Tins-Rush-Dun-Granger-JO
2:30 (1)
Owens-Rush-Dun-Diogu-Foster

Who the bleep is that? (new 5 mans)
Owens-Rush-Dun-Diogu-Foster
Owens-Rush-Granger-Diogu-Foster
Owens-Rush-Williams-Diogu-Foster
Tins-Rush-Williams-Diogu-Foster
Tins-Rush-Williams-JO-Foster
Owens-Rush-Williams-JO-Murphy

Interesting notes
What's the count on game where Granger was the worst +/- guy of the night that got at least 10 minutes? Feels like a lot so far.

Most of the new 5 man groups were Diogu-Owens-Rush based thanks to Ike's return, Tins' injury and Rush's improved contributions. One of those was the leading 5-man group.

I mentioned JO-Murphy not always doing as well together, but clearly here they were solid as part of the huge minutes starting 5.

I think this might be the biggest disparity between the main minutes 5 man group and the 2nd most minutes by any other 5 man group.

The game slipped just a bit out of reach when Owens-Rush-Granger-Diogu-Foster finished the final 1:30 of the 3rd with a -4. The starters came back to start the 4th and battled fairly well for 8 minutes, but ultimately lost their set by 2 and left the team out of it for good.

Naptown_Seth
12-30-2007, 10:02 AM
Game 30 - vs Detroit
L 101 - 114

6 Owens
5 Williams

-3 Granger
-4 Murphy
-5 Daniels
-6 Diogu
-9 Foster

-13 Dunleavy
-13 Rush
-15 JO
-16 Tinsley

Limited Minutes
8 Diener

Top three 5-man groups
8 in 6:45 play
Diener-Owens-Rush-Williams-Diogu
4 in 9:00 play
Owens-Dun-Granger-JO-Murphy
No others at +3 or better



Worst 5-mans
-6 in 1:45 play
Tins-Rush-Dun-Diogu-JO
-5 in 2:00 play
Quis-Rush-Williams-Diogu-Murphy
No others at -3 or worse



Big minute groups
9:00 (4)
Owens-Dun-Granger-JO-Murphy
7:45 (-2)
Tins-Dun-Granger-JO-Murphy
6:45 (8)
Diener-Owens-Rush-Williams-Diogu

Who the bleep is that? (new 5 mans)
Quis-Rush-Granger-Diogu-Murphy
Quis-Rush-Williams-Diogu-Murphy
Tins-Rush-Quis-Diogu-JO
Diener-Owens-Rush-Williams-Diogu
Tins-Rush-Dun-Diogu-JO
Owens-Rush-Dun-JO-Murphy
Owens-Rush-Granger-JO-Foster

Interesting notes
Obviously this game featured a good chunk of scrub time with all of Diener's 7 minutes coming with the game out of reach. That gave his group a healthy +/- bump even though it wasn't critical to the outcome of the game.

There are surprisingly few big negative 5 man groups considering the margin of loss. Ultimately few groups were staying together on the court very long, apparently as JOB went looking for answers.

The entire 2nd quarter was negative 5 man groups except the +1 in 1:45 that Quis-Rush-Granger-JO-Foster put up. That's 6 of 7 groups losing. That took the game from 5 points to 23 points.

I think I posted the partial game numbers over in the post-game thread to show the totals prior to scrub time, in case you are interested in those.

Naptown_Seth
12-31-2007, 09:38 PM
Game 31 - vs Detroit
L 92 - 98

1 JO
1 Murphy
-2 Granger
-3 Owens
-3 Dunleavy

-3 Foster
-4 Rush
-5 Daniels
-12 Diogu

Limited Minutes


Top three 5-man groups
8 in 15:45 play
Owens-Dun-Granger-JO-Murphy
5 in 5:30 play
Quis-Rush-Dun-JO-Murphy
3 in 1:15 play
Quis-Rush-Granger-JO-Foster


Worst 5-mans
-7 in 1:30 play
Quis-Dun-Granger-JO-Murphy
-4 in 2:45 play
Owens-Rush-Dun-Diogu-Foster
-4 in 1:00 play
Owens-Dun-Granger-Diogu-Murphy


Big minute groups
15:45 (8)
Owens-Dun-Granger-JO-Murphy
10:30 (-3)
Quis-Rush-Granger-JO-Murphy
5:30 (5)
Quis-Rush-Dun-JO-Murphy

Who the bleep is that? (new 5 mans)
Quis-Dun-Granger-Diogu-Foster
Quis-Rush-Granger-Diogu-Foster
Owens-Rush-Quis-Diogu-JO
Owens-Quis-Dun-Granger-Murphy
Owens-Dun-Granger-Diogu-Foster
Owens-Dun-Granger-Diogu-Murphy

Interesting notes
Tinsley's injury and Owens starting seems to be making the case for Daniels to NOT play PG much. In the short amount of time he played with the starters in place of Owens in this game they run up a -7 spot. At best it's a hit and miss bandage rather than a go-to solution.

I've yet to run the "last 10 games" +/- figures, but I'd ballpark and say that Troy has been very effective in recent games. I think he's really turned it around. Yes his defense stinks, but in the sum total of things he's been adding more than he's been hurting. It's hard to deny that his 5 man groups seem to be winning their matchups more often than not.

Diogu - ugh. Granger has started to show up with some positive +/- nights, so maybe Ike will too. But so far it's been really rough. It was Owens-Rush-Diogu teams that went -4 and -3 to lose that 67-65 lead. At that point Diogu was pulled for good in the game.

Naptown_Seth
12-31-2007, 09:58 PM
Game 32 - vs Charlotte
L 103 - 107 (OT)

6 Murphy
4 Granger
4 Dunleavy
3 JO
0 Owens

-5 Foster
-12 Williams
-14 Daniels

Limited Minutes
-2 Diogu
-4 Diener

Top three 5-man groups
8 in 20:45 play
Owens-Dun-Granger-JO-Murphy
4 in 2:15 play
QUIS-Dun-Granger-JO-Murphy
4 in 2:00 play
Owens-Quis-Granger-JO-Foster


Worst 5-mans
-7 in 8:15 play
Owens-Quis-Granger-Williams-JO
-4 in 4:45 play
Owens-Quis-Granger-JO-Murphy
-4 in 1:15 play
Quis-Dun-Granger-Williams-Foster


Big minute groups
20:45 (8)
Owens-Dun-Granger-JO-Murphy
8:15 (-7)
Owens-Quis-Granger-Williams-JO
4:45 (-4)
Owens-Quis-Granger-JO-Murphy

Who the bleep is that? (new 5 mans)
Diener-Quis-Dun-Diogu-Foster
Diener-Quis-Williams-Diogu-Foster
Quis-Granger-Williams-Diogu-Foster

Owens-Quis-Dun-Granger-JO
Owens-Quis-Dun-JO-Murphy
Owens-Quis-Granger-JO-Foster
Owens-Quis-Granger-Williams-Foster
Owens-Quis-Granger-JO-Murphy
Owens-Quis-Granger-Williams-JO
Owens-Dun-Granger-Murphy-Foster

Interesting notes
Thanks to the Tins injury we saw a ton of new Owens-Quis backcourt 5 man variations in this game. Unfortunately the two with the most minutes were pretty poor and in general it wasn't all that successful.

Granger & Williams together continues to linger as a trouble spot.

JOB has talked about Dun's defense in the last week as a reason for not playing, but frankly it appears he means too much to the offense to pull. Having him fouled out of this game really hurt.

Looking at this situation even further, the first time in the game that the 5 man of Owens-Quis-Granger-Williams-JO was at the end of the 4th after Wallace fouled out Dun and then Murphy within a span of about 15 seconds. This brought in Williams. That group went -3 to finish. Then they played the entire OT together and went for -4 more to end with the -7 total.

You could have expected a far different outcome if they could have finished with the Owens-Dun-Granger-JO-Murph combo.

Naptown_Seth
12-31-2007, 11:10 PM
Okay, finally caught up so here's something more interesting than the individual games things.

+/-, last 10
42 Murphy!!!

15 Granger
8 Hulk
7 Owens
4 Daniels
0 Dunleavy

-2 Williams
-11 Foster
-15 Diogu
-20 Tins
-27 Rush
-28 JO

7 Diener (but only 12 minutes, scrub time)

Per 48 minutes (w/out Diener due to low PT)
9.09 Hulk
6.69 Murphy
2.79 Owens
2.02 Granger
1.02 Daniels
0.00 Dun

-1.61 Williams
-3.06 Foster
-3.96 JO
-4.12 Tins
-6.38 Rush

-11.66 Ike

A couple of things. JO has some huge bombs in there, the first DET game, ATL, and MIN specifically, but he's also had decent numbers in others, so it's not just him.

You can see that Tins was dropping pretty well too after his good start.

Rush has to me seemed like a nice touch, but ironically now that we think he's coming on his +/- has actually been dropping. He was better earlier in the year.

Granger has turned the corner a bit. It might not always look like it but after last year and the start to this year I'd consider that a huge improvement in his +/-.

As I did the individual games I suspect that Murphy had a good total lately, and clearly it's through the roof. I slag him all the time and bump Foster, but right now JOB is making the right call with those 2. Troy has been a part of a ton of winning groups lately, too much to just figure it as chance.

But more than anything this shows just how bad Ike has been. And it's not any better on the year really. I have him at -50 on the year with a -18.25 per48 average. Only Diener is near that. Granger is the next worst at -3.85 to put it in perspective (and now he's running in the black even).

Either Ike needs to figure it out or he needs to go. Right now if Ike was the key part of the trade then things aren't good for Indy.