PDA

View Full Version : A Schedule Comparison: Pacers -vs- ???



NuffSaid
12-26-2007, 01:31 AM
I've been wanting to do this for quite some time.

When I look at the Pacers 15-13 record, I can't help but be proud of their results to date when compared to some of the teams ahead of them namely the Celtics, Magic and Pistons for example. Many fans are disappointed with this team, but I see things a bit differently than most. If I could post a side-by-side comparison of these three team's schedules perhaps you'd see what I see. But since I can't, I'll just have to tell you 'bout it using an inter-divisional rival as an example. :)

For starters, the Pacers had 9 back-to-back games from the start of the regular season through 23 December compared to the Pistons who had only 6. Both team had 14 road games, however, the Piston had a stretch of 5 road games in between November 11-18. Their reward, however, was 4 home games in a row for the rest of the month. The longest home stretch for the Pacers thus far all season has been 2 games and most of those have been tied to a back-to-back series where the Pacers would be home for one game then on the road for the next or visa versa. Suffice it to say, my boyz have done a lot of travelling during this young season.

For the games ahead beginning 26 December through mid-February 2008, the Pacers and Pistons share similar schedules. Both teams having games on the same days from 26 Dec to 4 Jan. The only difference to this point is the Pistons have one more road (4) game than the Pacers (3). Another interesting similarity in their schedules is that both team go on the road from approximately 4/5-13 Jan and again from 19/21-23/26 Jan. The difference is that for the Pacers' first road trip of the new year, all games are against teams from the West Coast while only two of the Pistons' games during this same period are against teams from out West. As for the second set of road games between 19-26 Jan, the Pacers have (4) w/one back-to-back set while the Pistons have (3) road games and none are back-to-back. Moreover, the Pistons will have 4-days off between their game on 25 Jan against the Magic and their game on 29 Jan against the Pacers @ the Fieldhouse, whereas the Pacers will only have 3-days off between their game against the Heat on 26 Jan and their game agaisnt the Pistson. And that's just through 29 January!

Between 29 January and 5 February, the Pacers' next four games are at home. The Pistons will also have a home stand; however, it spans (5) games from 31 January to 10 February. And did I mention that for the month of February, the Pacers will have 4 sets of back-to-backs compared to the Pistons' two? Now, to be fair the Pistons will end February and go into early March with 7 of their first 6 games to start the month on the road, but they only have 6 sets of back-to-backs through 7 March. After that, the Pistons' next (5) games are at home through 18 March. On the other hand, while the Pacers will only have (4) road games in February, they'll pay for it through mid-March with 6 sets of back-to-backs through 15 March. Their longest home stand through 21 March will be only (3) games.

The rest of the season eases up for the Pacers beginning 26 March. Every game from then on out will be against teams in the East, and they'll have at least one day off between games throughout. The Pistons will fair about the same except they'll have 3 sets of back-to-backs from 26 March until the end of the season and they'll still face one more team from out West - the Suns.

So, while some Pacers fans may be down on my boyz, I think they've done a fine job to date based on the difficulty in their schedule. You local fans had better recognize! For this team to be 15-13 at this point and competing as they have is remarkable. For those who think I haven't gone far enough to illustrate how tough the Pacers have it, I urge you to do your own comparison between the Pacers and Celtics for example, or the Cavs, or the Magic. Perhaps then you'll see what I see and be more willing to give this team some slack.

Kstat
12-26-2007, 01:48 AM
we had more back-to-backs than anybody else in the NBA last year, and we started this season playing 8 of our first 10 on the road. I don't want to hear it.

The schedule is the schedule. You win as many games as you can and move on.

Hicks
12-26-2007, 02:08 AM
we had more back-to-backs than anybody else in the NBA last year, and we started this season playing 8 of our first 10 on the road. I don't want to hear it.

The schedule is the schedule. You win as many games as you can and move on.

:laugh: Thread over. Move along.

Kofi
12-26-2007, 02:30 AM
The Pacers have played one of the toughest schedules in the league bar none. It's a shame we've blown so many games either via losing huge leads, losing to crappy teams, or both. Still, I look for us to win 50 games this year and make it at least to the 2nd round. Our depth is outstanding.

Isaac
12-26-2007, 12:08 PM
I understand the schedule has been difficult, and for the most part I am pleased with the way we are playing. However, I am not happy or at all satisfied with being 15-13. We should have beaten Minnesota and Seattle easily, and we should have been able to close out Phoenix. Even giving them a pass on the Toronto and Denver giveaways, we should be 18-10 or 19-9. I feel like if we get better at closing teams out we can win 50 games this year.

Bball
12-26-2007, 12:39 PM
I'm of the opinion the 'coulda, shoulda, woulda' games are all part of what define a team. Every team has a 'coulda, shoulda, woulda' game or two throughout the year. But to look back and find several 'coulda, woulda, shoulda' games and declare them as signs this team is heading to 50 wins is being a bit overly optimistic. What they really show (IMHO) is that the team is going to lose several games they could've won if they could've played a little better... a little longer.

It's a pattern that will play out thru the season.

It's a sign we'll be hovering around .500, not a sign we're on our way to a 50 win season.

-Bball

Unclebuck
12-27-2007, 09:36 AM
The Pacers have generally played very well in the second half of back to backs and are 2-0 in the 4th game in 5 nights.

They seem to have more problems after having a couple of days off between games.

rexnom
12-27-2007, 09:37 AM
The Pacers have generally played very well in the second half of back to backs and are 2-0 in the 4th game in 5 nights.

They seem to have more problems after having a couple of days off between games.
I was about to say. We've been killing these "schedule loss" games. I think it's kind of playing with the house's money or as a HUGE underdog. When you are expected to lose, there seems to be less pressure, and I think that easing of pressure really helps us.

Unclebuck
12-27-2007, 10:28 AM
Not to beat this to death, but I was just looking back at the Pacers schedule. Looking at their worst performances of the season.

At Cleveland - 3
At Minnesota - 1
at Atlanta - 3
at Charlotte - 1
Home to Lakers - 2

All those were after at least one day off.

I think an argument could be made that this team is a rhythm team and they get out of rhythm easily if they have too much time. off.

rexnom
12-27-2007, 10:47 AM
Not to beat this to death, but I was just looking back at the Pacers schedule. Looking at their worst performances of the season.

At Cleveland - 3
At Minnesota - 1
at Atlanta - 3
at Charlotte - 1
Home to Lakers - 2

All those were after at least one day off.

I think an argument could be made that this team is a rhythm team and they get out of rhythm easily if they have too much time. off.
Hmm...you may be on to something...anything to pull attention away from the possible "this is just a .500 team" theory.

Unclebuck
12-27-2007, 10:55 AM
Hmm...you may be on to something...anything to pull attention away from the possible "this is just a .500 team" theory.

Anything but that. I think the pacers can be better than a .500 team - but they need Daniels and Tinsley both healthy and if they are I see them being a 45-46 win team which is 8 to 10 games over .500

If I was really ambitious, I would look to see how they shoot the three with days between games. That might tell us something.

But I think the Pacers have played 3 straight subpar games. The Wizards game was OK, last night wasn't good and the game at Minny (even though I didn't see - had to have been really bad)

rexnom
12-27-2007, 11:08 AM
Well, I think last night showed us a few trends:

- Daniels is probably the second or third most important guy on the team. Sometimes the most important.

- The problem with having Mike and Danny as your leading scorers is that they have a tendency to disappear for loooong stretches.

I actually did not have a problem with Tinsley last night. Mostly because I think it really hurt him that we didn't have a backup. I think he played the most minutes in that first quarter and then after that horrible turnover by Owens, he had to come back in sooner than Obie would have preferred. I just don't think Tins can play 40 minutes/game, rested or not. Also, the team blew several of his passes early in the game and then after that I just don't think he had the energy to keep up those passes. So, he settled. I think that's human.

Bball
12-27-2007, 12:42 PM
I think the pacers can be better than a .500 team - but they need Daniels and Tinsley both healthy and if they are I see them being a 45-46 win team which is 8 to 10 games over .500



41 wins and 41 losses = .500

41+8 = 49

41+10 = 51

45-41 = 4
46-41 = 5

:confused:

-Bball

Kstat
12-27-2007, 12:43 PM
bball, 45 wins means you have 37 losses.

45-37=8 games over .500.

Naptown_Seth
12-27-2007, 12:58 PM
The Pacers have played one of the toughest schedules in the league bar none. It's a shame we've blown so many games either via losing huge leads, losing to crappy teams, or both. Still, I look for us to win 50 games this year and make it at least to the 2nd round. Our depth is outstanding.
Even though I might come off as negative when analyzing the team, I'm really not, at least in the sense of supporting them and continue to hope for success.

But I just can't see where you get this view. I'm glad you have it, I wish more fans did (at least casual fans who don't take time to think about the team too much beyond basics), but for someone that looks at the team closely I don't know how you could feel that way.

The Pacers just had a very soft run and are about to hit a pretty hard stretch. Even the Orlando win is losing some luster as the Magic appear to be repeating their fall off following a loss to the Pacers last year.

50 wins and the 2nd round is going to require a much more consistent effort than we've seen so far. And in regards to Nuff's point (which I do love since there is solid logic behind it) the one issue I see is that the back to back's haven't been the problem. They've done well on 2nd nights. To me that means that getting past those won't fix anything because they haven't been the problem.

Buck in fact already addressed this.

I wouldn't mind seeing a "how have they lost so far/what is coming that fits that description" look at the schedule. And yes I'll be the first to acknowledge that you can't extrapolate and count on it. Just bear in mind that this goes both ways, .500 so far could turn into .250 just as well as .700 ball. This is just doing what we can till the real results come in. :)

If you ever needed a cautionary tale on these kind of expectations, 29-24 should be it. That included some nice post-trade wins too.

Isaac
12-27-2007, 01:12 PM
41 wins and 41 losses = .500

41+8 = 49

41+10 = 51

45-41 = 4
46-41 = 5

:confused:

-Bball

:rotflmao:

And here I was thinking I was bad at math.

Naptown_Seth
12-27-2007, 01:15 PM
One other thing, for a final total you have to take out the current results and then look at the win rate required.

15-14 leaves you with 53 games. 46 wins means 31-22 the rest of the way. Here's the list of win rates required to meet win total goals (total wins this rate would be for a full 82 games):

52: .698 (57)
51: .679 (56)
50: .660 (54)
49: .641 (53)
48: .623 (51)
47: .604 (50)
46: .585 (48)
45: .566 (46)
44: .547 (45)
43: .528 (43)
42: .509 (42)

They've played .517 ball up till now and basically project to 42 wins. You can see that to hit higher goals they must win at a much better rate than the final total would be due to 29 games already having been played at .517 ball.

Can a 42 win team become a 51 win team mid-season? I don't see it, but that's the only way they reach the 48 win goal. And 50? That requires the Pacers to suddenly play elite ball, Pistons-Suns-Mavs-Spurs ball. Does anyone really see that change happening?

Hicks
12-27-2007, 01:20 PM
When did 48 become their goal? Or who's goal is it?

JayRedd
12-27-2007, 01:24 PM
The Pacers have played one of the toughest schedules in the league bar none.

Not sure about that. Our schedule seems pretty run-of-the-mill so far.

We've had 14 home games vs. 15 roadies. We haven't faced San Antonio. We've only seen Boston once. We've already seen Western Conference pushovers like Minny, Seattle and the Clips. Plus, the whole Eastern Conference has been playing pretty poorly out of the blocks so far, (aside from the Cs, Detroit and Orlando), so I have to think that our upcoming games against at least some of Jersey, Toronto, Chicago, Cleveland and Miami will be a little tougher the next time around.

Unclebuck
12-27-2007, 01:25 PM
The only goal I've heard Jim O'Brien talk about is getting homecourt advantage in the first round. - which will probably take close to 48 wins.

I don't feel like the Pacers have played a particularily tough schedule to date, I certainly hope the team agrees with me, because it is getting tougher very soon - we still have to play at Dallas, S.A, Phoenix, Lakers, Utah, Houston, Detroit 2X, G. State, Boston, Orlando.

Pacers have won some very good road games though such as - New Orleans, Portland, Orlando - that isn't bad for a .500 team

Naptown_Seth
12-27-2007, 02:01 PM
Buck mentioned 46 range, Kofi and Isaac talked in the 50 range. I split the diff. (edit: sorry, this is snarky, left in for clarity on responses) It's not like I didn't list all the variations. You're reading too much into it to focus on the 48 part.

Buck is right regarding HC, that could be tough if the total is lower than 47 or so. I've assumed that playoffs were the goal, not a win total (other than "more than last year").

Hicks
12-27-2007, 02:12 PM
Actually, I wasn't reading anything into it beyond the fact that you said, "the 48 win goal" and I thought I had missed something. I was just wondering.

It'll probably take that much for the 4th seed.

I think we'll win around 43 or 44 games.

kester99
12-27-2007, 02:25 PM
I did a preseason scrub of the schedule, and figured a 46-36 record. I did totally not see Orlando's improvement coming, but on the balancing side, I assumed a lot better play from Chicago.

We're three games behind the pace we should be keeping (by my figuring)....a 43-39 clip. What I'm still hoping for is continuing team improvement. I just can't think we're at a stagnating point in our development as a team...too many young (or reborn) players still trending upwards in their performance, and only 29 games into the new coaching regime.

Right now, it's looking like Atlanta, Toronto, Washington, Cleveland fighting us for that 4th spot in the East. We really need to tromp ATL when they come to Conseco 4 Jan.

Naptown_Seth
12-27-2007, 02:47 PM
Sorry Mal, I thought you were sort of sniping at me, thus the response.

No, the Pacers are clearly ahead of the 25-30 win pace I expected. I just don't know if that's a good thing completely. Not that I approve of tanking, but I have to admit that I'm just not sure where this is headed. For now I'm just enjoying the good games and trying to not read too much into the bad ones. But next spring even an anti-tanker like me is going to be bummed about another 16-17 draft pick instead of the 7 or 8 spot.

Right now I think they could use a click for Danny, Ike and Shawne. That would help a ton. Luckily Rush seems to have had one and started to dial it into an NBA caliber game at least.

Bball
12-27-2007, 04:19 PM
bball, 45 wins means you have 37 losses.

45-37=8 games over .500.


Damn back pain medicine...

-Bball

Unclebuck
12-27-2007, 04:23 PM
Damn back pain medicine...

-Bball

You had me for a second as I was trying to figure what type of "New Math" you were using. I had no idea it was drug induced math

Gyron
12-27-2007, 04:32 PM
OMG, Bball is using Post enhancing drugs......

Unfortunately, it backfired on him. Now we are gonna have to make him submit to a pre-post drug test......

kester99
12-27-2007, 04:48 PM
OMG, Bball is using Post enhancing drugs......

Unfortunately, it backfired on him. Now we are gonna have to make him submit to a pre-post drug test......


May need a commission to look into this....PD may have fostered a whole culture of acceptance when it comes to post-enhancing drugs.

We'll need someone to head up the commission too....hmmmm.

How about naturallystoned or newman8r or....well, we'll have to ponder that one.

jeffg-body
12-27-2007, 11:15 PM
I think we have played a pretty tough schedule looking at so many games in short spurts, road trips and back to backs. Later in the year when we get some spread out time it will pay off for those guys looking to rest their sore body parts and be able to put more into the game.

Bball
12-28-2007, 02:07 AM
When I posted in this thread, drug testing was not a requirement of PD. Therefore, any drug use I may or may not have been involved with, legal or not, and any postings during that period of time, were not under the control of the PD.

-Bball

Gyron
12-28-2007, 08:48 AM
Did your publicist write that statement? You have the same lawyers as Clemmons don't you?

NuffSaid
12-28-2007, 10:16 AM
we had more back-to-backs than anybody else in the NBA last year, and we started this season playing 8 of our first 10 on the road. I don't want to hear it.

The schedule is the schedule. You win as many games as you can and move on.
My point with this thread isn't necessarily to point out that the Pistons or any other team has an easier schedule than the Pacers. In fact, I think I've illustrated that both team's schedules will balance out at some point during the season. What I did want to point out to Pacers fans is that despite how tough their schedule appears to be that for them to be 15-14 at this point is pretty good.

And just to clarify, my view of the Pacers' schedule isn't just who they play but also how much time off they'll have between games. I don't think most people realize, for example, that the Pacers' longest home stand the entire season is 4 games. Their average home stand is only 2 games. The longest rest period they'll have between games is 7 days and that's at the All-Star break. They average about 2 days off between most games, and as I pointed out in my initial post, for most of their back-to-back games they'll be travelling to that second game after playing that first game at home whereas for the Pistons (sticking with them for my comparison) the reverse is true. Thus, it's no wonder the Pacers are doing so well in the 2nd game of their back-to-backs thus far this season. Of the 9 sets of back-to-back games they've played thus far, 4 of those second games have been at home and they've won 3 out of 4 of those. Now, granted, in some cases my boyz are coming into that first game having been at home, but in most cases its been with only 1 day off AFTER coming off the road. Thus, IMO it's a case of pick you're poison. You lose one, then come back to win the second taking the split as "acceptable" on the road. Not a formula I subscribe to, but I can see where guys in the locker room might adopt that philosophy. (And as I read more of Phil Jackson's book, "The Last Season," it's a philosophy that's not all that uncommon among players or coaches.)


:laugh: Thread over. Move along.
Man, I hope not! Seems to me the local fans need all the convincing they can get in order to get them to change their close-minded views and lower their expectations just a touch if they're ever going to come out and support their team again any time soon.

MyFavMartin
12-28-2007, 01:47 PM
Mike Wells mentions that the Pacers lack killer instinct in his latest blog.

Where should that come from?

The Head Coach, The Captain(s), The Players, The Coaching Staff?

I'm thinking the players themselves, led by the captains. Another thread is analyzing the GS-Pacers trade and we gave up some tremendous killer instinct and leadership with Stephen Jackson. I do like what Dunleavy has brought to the table as a facillitator, but he and others are inconsistent in the aggressiveness.

Then again, if the Pacers still had SJax, no fans would be coming to the games because of the off-court issues.

What needs to change with this team to get a killer instinct and to put away teams? This team got fired up with Chicago when Murphy and Thomas had a confrontation. What can put that kind of fire into the Pacers all the time?

Kstat
12-28-2007, 02:05 PM
To clarify, most NBA players perform as poorly with 2+ days of rest as they would with no rest at all. Keeping a good rhythm is critical to consistency.

Most NBA players prefer to play every other day. Anything more or less is unsuitable for them.