View Full Version : Inconsistent?

Dr. Goldfoot
12-27-2007, 03:20 PM
The Pacers have a number of inconsistent players. I consider these 8 players to be the core of the team...Jamaal Tinsley, Mike Dunleavy, Danny Granger, Troy Murphy, Jermaine O'Neal, Marquis Daniels, Jeff Foster & Kareem Rush. I'll hear arguments that Jeff has been consistent with hustle but other than that 7 of the minute eaters have been up, down and sideways all season.

Jamaal Tinsley burns some of the best points in the league and starts getting recognized as possibly belonging in that group then gets burnt himself by journeymen and young inexperienced players. Mike Dunleavy & Danny Granger drop 25+ one night and 6 the next. Troy Murphy gives you a double double then 20 & 3 then DNPCD. JO has as many 8 & 5 games as 20 & 10. Daniels gives you 26 then 7 then 0 then injury. Rush has 15 "why is this guy in the NBA?" games followed by 10 "Why isn't this guy the starter?" games.

I'm hoping this is a new situation...situation. I think some guys are getting the new system quicker than other which is leading to the wild inconsistencies. Here's hoping the can all get on the same page.....

12-27-2007, 03:24 PM
I think the team is inconsistent in how it plays, which explains the numbers. I don't think the players are necessarily inconsistent - I point the finger at the coaching staff, or Jamaal, if he's the one calling the plays.

I mean, isn't that why we beat Orlando and Dallas and lose to the T-Wolves and the Sonics?

12-27-2007, 03:35 PM
That's my biggest hair-pulling opinion about this team. They drive me crazy because I'll get so pumped up when it's clicking that I'm left pissed off when they lose because often it seems like they're doing the same things, but the results are wildly different. That can be jumpshots not going in, JO's post game not working, free throws missed, Tinsley forcing things and coming up dry, etc.

Drives me nuts because I'm emotionally invested. On the other hand, if I go cold I don't care at all. Bah.

This is the reason this team won't be very good. That is, unless at least 3 of them become consistent.

I don't believe the following players will get consistent long term:


I'm 50/50 on:

O'Neal (used to be)

Notice none of them I'm convinced of.

12-27-2007, 03:39 PM
I don't think there is much acceptance that this is a .500 team. Inconstancy is what mediocre teams do.

12-27-2007, 03:53 PM
This is a little pet peeve of mine. No not inconsistant players, but rather when we start saying a player is inconsistant.

I think to be fair we need to separate inconsistant shooting from inconsistant play. I don't know of too many players who aren't inconsistant in their shooting. Even players such as Michael Jordan, Larry Bird and Magic were inconsistant from game to game in their shooting %.

There is just so much more involved than a players shooting %.

I think the most interesting player to look at is Mike Dunleavy. I truly believe he is the most consistant player on the Pacers team. But then again I separate out the shooting %. Mike could play the exact some game, take the exact same shots and one game shoot 3 of 10 and the next game shoot 7 of 10. To me consistancy involves effort, and playing the same way every game and I think Mike is more consistant than any other player on our team (except maybe Foster)

The only part in Mike's game that I see change (besides the shooting %) is how aggressive he is in looking for his shot - but that has a lot to do with what the defense is giving him.

You have to factor in that there is another team out there. Certain teams defend our players very differently. For example, if Prince defends Granger - Granger will have a game that will have many Pacers fans scratching their heads, wodnering why he is so inconsistant. No, it is because Prince won't have any trouble defending DG. Plus the Pistons won't have to help any on JO.

Dr. Goldfoot
12-27-2007, 04:20 PM
Just to throw it out there, I don't put alot of weight into the shooting %'s myself. They vary from week to week. For instance last week Tinsley was shooting 34% from downtown on the season but after the last three games he's down to around 30%. Before this past week, he would be considered a decent three point shooter but now he sucks.

I'm not sure how many times Jordan, Bird or Magic followed a 6 point outing with a 36 point outing but I would bet only a few times in their entire careers. If you're gonna score 20 points a game it can't be 30--10--30--10--30--10 it has to be a little more consistent than that.

Aggression was something I was thinking about in that original post. I just didn't type it out. Mike's stat line is peppered with less than 10 shots followed by 15 or more etc...Danny has mostly been off one night and on the next. My complaint about him isn't the number of shots but what kind of shots. One game he attacks the basket and the next he settles for jumpers. I understand there are some elite defenders or a guy who's so tough on the offensive end you wear out playing defense. On the other hand, this is the NBA and every team (including the Pacers) has those players on a night to night basis. There are very few slouches hanging around in this league.

I guess my point is each player is being counted on for something every night. When you don't even put up anything near that, then someone else has to step out of their normal role to compensate. That's where this team is right now. Jeff Foster's gonna get you rebounds that much is known. Are Danny and Mike gonna put the ball in the hole against the Pistons this weekend? Is Jamaal gonna push the ball and force the defense or will he be trying (forcing in many cases) to make up for one or both of the wings disappearing? We know Jermaine's gonna play the D but is he gonna bother going after the boards? What about Troy? Will Marquis even be in uniform? and if so will it be the slashing, cutting making something happen Daniels or the 1 rebound 4 points in 28 minutes Daniels?

You see what I mean?

12-27-2007, 04:38 PM
I think the most interesting player to look at is Mike Dunleavy. I truly believe he is the most consistant player on the Pacers team.

The numbers absolutely back this up...and I'm not talking about points production (only). Post #2 of the big Utah Index thread shows performance per the index per game. Dunleavy and Foster are easily the most even-keeled producers. JO actually isn't too bad either, since his return during the western road swing of late November.

Danny's all over the place...more than any of the other regular players.

I've got no numbers on team chemistry.

12-27-2007, 04:56 PM
I think there is a difference between Mike and Danny. i think Danny lets his shooting impact the rest of his game too much (although he seems to be getting a little better, very slowly though) where as Mike whether he's having a poor shooting game or not, he does other things.

12-27-2007, 05:11 PM
I think there is a difference between Mike and Danny. i think Danny lets his shooting impact the rest of his game too much (although he seems to be getting a little better, very slowly though) where as Mike whether he's having a poor shooting game or not, he does other things.

One of the diffs is patience, I think. And 428 games pro vs 189 games pro, somewhat. Also, Mike has been through a real career crisis with his experience at GS. Danny just gets all the hype as the next god's gift, and pushes too hard sometimes, gets frustrated when that doesn't work out, and disappears for a bit.

How many times have we heard something like "I let the game come to me and got my offense in rhythm" from him, after he's had a really good game and gets the post-game interview.

12-27-2007, 05:13 PM
How many of you are consistent with your effort and performance day in and day out in your job? If any of you say you are and never have down days or weeks, then I think we might have to define consistency....

12-28-2007, 12:23 AM
A translation for regular guys like me to what the Pacers have gone through:

I have to agree here that no one in the world is 100% consistent daily and everyone has bad days and good days. Add the fact that the managers have been replaced and a new work philosophy has been established. Also a new documenting system and standards are being applied and no one knows their new specific tasks or specialities. It takes time to refocus and implement that new strategic plan. Give the guys some real time to mesh and they will be all right.:cool:

12-28-2007, 05:07 PM
Personally I think Rush is the 2nd most consistent guy on the team after Foster. Yes his shot was not there early on, but his defensive effort as well as his work to drive the ball or move while off the ball have been very steady.

He's been in the black on +/- minus many games, some even when his shot wasn't there.

Dun has had a few duds, but he's still pretty steady. Again a +/- thing that seems to be there is that at SF Dun seems to shine a bit more. So maybe his issues stem from what he's asked to do more than his own consistency.

Danny OTOH still has massive awareness issues. He obviously isn't feeling the game, doesn't read the flow or his place within it. That leaves him very inconsistent. He's young still, but I was hoping to see this fading away at this point, not lingering like it has.

One other +/- thing since Goldfoot is talking FG%. I agree that FG% can be bumpy even for consistent players. I'm nearly caught up on +/- stuff and right now I get the feeling that there is some consistency there just based on posting the per games. I'll go trend that number out and see if it actually looks that way (steady) or if it bounces all over the place too, at least to the degree of other box numbers.