PDA

View Full Version : Hawks/Pacers Post Game 34: Revenge served



Doddage
01-04-2008, 10:26 PM
Yep. Granger ties his career high and Dun gets a dubdub.

Oh, and the Hawks commentators and our attendance is pathetic.

bellisimo
01-04-2008, 10:27 PM
good to see DG in action tonight...
too bad he'll probably disappear for another 5 games or so before he comes back and scores more than 20...

Isaac
01-04-2008, 10:34 PM
I've been hesitant to say it, but since the Chicago game Kareem Rush has become a consistent threat off the bench. If Granger and Dunleavy can mirror the way they played tonight on a more regular basis, we'll be right back in the thick of the race for that 4th seed.

BlueNGold
01-04-2008, 10:36 PM
good to see DG in action tonight...
too bad he'll probably disappear for another 5 games or so before he comes back and scores more than 20...

The more JO gets touches, the more DG and DunDun will vanish...and the more likely we struggle to score points efficiently. None of this should be a surprise.

BlueNGold
01-04-2008, 10:37 PM
I've been hesitant to say it, but since the Chicago game Kareem Rush has become a consistent threat off the bench. If Granger and Dunleavy can mirror the way they played tonight on a more regular basis, we'll be right back in the thick of the race for that 4th seed.

Rush is a good backup SG IMO who can defend the perimeter OK. We are fortunate to have him for the price and he is getting better.

Trader Joe
01-04-2008, 10:38 PM
I've been hesitant to say it, but since the Chicago game Kareem Rush has become a consistent threat off the bench. If Granger and Dunleavy can mirror the way they played tonight on a more regular basis, we'll be right back in the thick of the race for that 4th seed.

We're BARELY in the playoffs right now. Not to mention theres about a .1% chance we even win ONE of our next four games.

LoneGranger33
01-04-2008, 10:38 PM
When Dunleavy isn't aggressive, he is pretty much worthless, unless you count his presence as a 6-9 point guard.

BlueNGold
01-04-2008, 10:41 PM
Ok, what was different tonight?

This is what showed up in the box score:
1) Far less shooting by JO
2) Far more shooting and effectiveness by other players, not just Granger and Dun.

That is all.

Trader Joe
01-04-2008, 10:42 PM
The difference in this game is that Dun and Granger got hot from the field. Otherwise the box score looks pretty similar to our past few games.

kester99
01-04-2008, 10:44 PM
More and better ball movement and people movement, leading to better open shots by other folks....not just dropping it into JO, standing around and hoping. Good practice time with JO'B since the last game.

BlueNGold
01-04-2008, 10:46 PM
The difference in this game is that Dun and Granger got hot from the field. Otherwise the box score looks pretty similar to our past few games.

Hmph. Rush lit it up also. JO on the other hand played within his abilities for once by shooting much less.

However, JO only had 3 boards when Dun had 12 and Murphy and Granger had 9.

Looked nothing like that 72pt performance against Memphis other than JO's poor performance

bellisimo
01-04-2008, 10:52 PM
did we win this - or did the Hawks give one away?

Trader Joe
01-04-2008, 10:53 PM
Hmph. Rush lit it up also. JO on the other hand played within his abilities for once by shooting much less.

However, JO only had 3 boards when Dun had 12 and Murphy and Granger had 9.

Looked nothing like that 72pt performance against Memphis other than JO's poor performance

JO shot 10 times tonight. He shot 11 times against Memphis, and was just generally all around bad. He shot 26 times against the Bobcats, but also pulled down 13 boards and had 5 assists. He shot 20 times against the Pistons at Conseco, but again 11 boards and 5 assists. Against the Pistons at the Palace he shot 13 times and made 8 scoring 25 points. Against the Hawks (the start of this losing streak) he shot 14 times, but again pulled down 10 boards.

So its not like JO's shot selection was significantly less than usual except for the Bobcats game and the home game against the Pistons. However pretty much everything else JO did was on par with what he did against Memphis (except his rebounding was better agiainst the Grizz). So unless you're saying we're a better team when JO doesn't rebound or pass the ball effectively, I think all this proved is something we already knew. If Granger and Dun are hot, the Pacers win. All that probably means is our three pointers are falling. This isn't anything new. Its just a shame Dun and Granger never want to step up consistently. That along with Tins has been the key to the successful stretches for this team.

Alpolloloco
01-04-2008, 10:53 PM
JO played well at the defensive end, so maybe he better concentrated on that end insteas of forcing too many shots on offense.

aero
01-04-2008, 10:54 PM
was our D good tonight, or did Atlanta really play that bad ? or was it a mixture of both ?

Trader Joe
01-04-2008, 10:57 PM
JO played well at the defensive end, so maybe he better concentrated on that end insteas of forcing too many shots on offense.

JO blocked 4 shots against Memphis also. Whether this team wins or loses isn't really affected by JO anymore. Granted thats a bad thing considering his contract, but to say well we lost cause of JO or we won because of JO it just generally isn't true anymore. The play of Dun, Granger, Rush, Quis, and Tins is far more important in successfully exectuing Obie's gameplan.

BlueNGold
01-04-2008, 11:00 PM
JO shot 10 times tonight. He shot 11 times against Memphis, and was just generally all around bad. He shot 26 times against the Bobcats, but also pulled down 13 boards and had 5 assists. He shot 20 times against the Pistons at Conseco, but again 11 boards and 5 assists. Against the Pistons at the Palace he shot 13 times and made 8 scoring 25 points. Against the Hawks (the start of this losing streak) he shot 14 times, but again pulled down 10 boards.

So its not like JO's shot selection was significantly less than usual except for the Bobcats game and the home game against the Pistons. However pretty much everything else JO did was on par with what he did against Memphis (except his rebounding was better agiainst the Grizz). So unless you're saying we're a better team when JO doesn't rebound or pass the ball effectively, I think all this proved is something we already knew. If Granger and Dun are hot, the Pacers win. All that probably means is our three pointers are falling. This isn't anything new. Its just a shame Dun and Granger never want to step up consistently. That along with Tins has been the key to the successful stretches for this team.

You make some good points. I would like to know, however, if there is a tendency to defer to JO that hinders the team and particularly ball movement. It just seems that when Dunleavy gets hot, Granger does too....and clearly it was not dependent solely on JT. There is some trigger here because it seems like the perimeter players blow up at the same time. Maybe it's just the competition...

LoneGranger33
01-04-2008, 11:02 PM
did we win this - or did the Hawks give one away?


was our D good tonight, or did Atlanta really play that bad ? or was it a mixture of both ?

I think we just hit so many three pointers that we took all the wind out of their sails, and there wasn't that much to begin with.

Trader Joe
01-04-2008, 11:04 PM
You make some good points. I would like to know, however, if there is a tendency to defer to JO that hinders the team and particularly ball movement. It just seems that when Dunleavy gets hot, Granger does too....and clearly it was not dependent solely on JT. There is some trigger here because it seems like the perimeter players blow up at the same time. Maybe it's just the competition...

I just think thats how it is. If one guy gets hot other perimeter players feed off of it. The Seattle Supersonics got a fluke 50 win season out of Ray Allen and Rashard Lewis staying ridiculously hot for 90% of the season. Unfortunately Dun and Granger are not Ray Ray and Shard.
To me its just one of those things. I don't think this game tells us that much about this team. Just like I don't think that Memphis game tells us a whole lot.
Granger shot 5/6 from the arc and Dun shot 4/6 from the arc. I don't think that has anything to do with gameplanning. Just hitting their shots for once.

LoneGranger33
01-04-2008, 11:12 PM
On a scale from 1 to 10, Ike Diogu was absolutely horrible tonight.

Trader Joe
01-04-2008, 11:14 PM
On a scale from 1 to 10, Ike Diogu was absolutely horrible tonight.

In other news, the sky is blue and the grass is green.

Ike sucks.

Naptown_Seth
01-04-2008, 11:14 PM
Ok, what was different tonight?

This is what showed up in the box score:
1) Far less shooting by JO
2) Far more shooting and effectiveness by other players, not just Granger and Dun.

That is all.
Really, that's all????

Because a 9 of 12 spot from behind the arc by the wings is par for course.
Come on man, they did what they've done several times this season, shoot their way into a victory.

Or was tonight finally the night guys were "open". Not according to JOB it wasn't, by his count they are open all the time and miss shots, as in "we lost tonight because guys missed open shots".

I predict that the Pacers will win 80% of the games they go 52% from 3 on 20+ attempts at the very least. Call me crazy, but that's how I roll when I'm not busting outta bathrooms with a big Indian at my side.


In a happier tone, THANK FREAKING GOD! This doesn't save the season or flip it back to "hey, this is how it goes with .500 teams", it's too little too late for that. Now they need to go win some surprise games on the road to get back to that status. But at least they dodged the "we're F'd" stage...for now. ;)

Oh, and they also decided to totally destroy them just so they could also confuse the heck out of us as we try to figure them out.

CableKC
01-04-2008, 11:20 PM
Ok, what was different tonight?

This is what showed up in the box score:
1) Far less shooting by JO
2) Far more shooting and effectiveness by other players, not just Granger and Dun.

That is all.
I looked at the shot chart for JONeal...and he took 6 of his shots from the Low-Post ( between 2 to 5 feet from the basket ) where he hit 5 of those shots. Outside of the paint...he only hit 1 of the 5 shots he took.

That is what we need from our PF......take only efficient shots that he has a good chance of making. If JONeal only took shots like this...then he would be way more effective in this offense.

BobbyMac
01-04-2008, 11:26 PM
The more JO gets touches, the more DG and DunDun will vanish...and the more likely we struggle to score points efficiently. None of this should be a surprise.


This only happens when DG and Dun don't move when JO has the ball....when they move, JO draws the double and gets the ball to them for a good shot!

Hoop
01-04-2008, 11:41 PM
I'm just glad I didn't get mad and leave before the 4th quarter started this time. Progress? I sure hope so.

Naptown_Seth
01-04-2008, 11:42 PM
This only happens when DG and Dun don't move when JO has the ball....when they move, JO draws the double and gets the ball to them for a good shot!
And to follow up on that JO was coming off a couple of back to back 5 assist games. I'd say he was being a darn good facilitator. With or without JO I've seen some of these guys go into stand mode, and neither Dun nor Danny can afford to just stand and watch the post or even just the ball from the weakside. And yet you see it creep into their games, Danny especially.

JO passes out of the post all the time. His "slog ball" is simply waiting for the double to come, not some intentional slow down attempt. Now maybe JOB doesn't want them to wait for that, but isn't that a prime benefit of a low post threat?

Get it to JO, cut the lane or pull a baseline give and go, and even if he doesn't pass it you've pulled a defender off him to protect the passing lane and now he's got space to attack in close.

Or stand and watch as he gets doubled from the weakside with good rotation and is pressured into a tough jumper. Some of this is on JO, but not nearly as much as he is blamed for.

Since the losses began JO has assists of 6, 3, 1, 4, 5, 5, 1 and the 3 tonight. That's a 3.5 apg average.
Now Dunleavy in those same 8 games: 3, 7, 4 ,3, 2, 2, 2, 2 for a 3.1 apg average.


And then at the other end just to show his value you have these blocks in the last 8: 2, 6, 2, 3, 2, 3, 4, 4 = 3.25 blocks per game.

Go look at true PF/C players and find how many dish 3.5+ AND get 3.2 blocks for you. That's gotta be a very short list. Just the assists over 3.0 cut out all but Dirk, KG, Josh Smith, Diaw (3.3), Boozer (3.0), Camby (3.1), Duncan (3.0) and B. Miller (3.0). Of those only Josh Smith and Camby are over 3.0 blocks on the year too.

And to this we say "boy JO has been the cause of our problems lately".


Not only all of that, but the funny thing is JO just came off a strong FG% month by his standards, a respectable 48.5% December.

NuffSaid
01-05-2008, 12:02 AM
My post-game commentary/game observations:

- Great team and individual defense tonight. Sometimes a 3-hr practice and 90 minute film session will do a team good!

- Granger and Dunleavy finally got their games going at the same time. OUTSTANDING!

- Was good to see JO finally get uncorked out their in the 2nd half. We needed to have atleast one Big have his game going. JO played very smart out there. He started kicking the ball out instead of fighting through the double-team.

- I still don't like Quis at the Point. I think he tries to do too much from that position. He doesn't have very good court vision, and his decision making on passes is questionable. I'd rather he stick w/playing from the 2-Guard.

- It was smart of Dun to take charge of the offense and...well, just take charge out there! He really sparked the offense and blew this game wide open! But the real benefit to him running the offense was that he allowed Quis to focus more on his game. (I really don't think JOB had anything to do with that because when it happened no time-out was called. Dun just did it!)

- Rush finally had a better than average game as well.

- It was good to finally see David Harrison back out there. I like his progress far and above over Ike's. This team could use another big body who's willing to rebound, block shots and score w/the short- to mid-range jump shot.

Overall, a good win by my boyz! Now, go out and show you can play w/teams out West and surprise some folks and win 4-5. (I can dream can't I? ;) )

GO PACERS!

Naptown Seth,

As usual, good observations. I'm always very surprised at all this folks who continue to devalue JO in JOB's offense. I knew it would be a matter of time before he grasps some things, but overall, I like how he has tried to make the adjustments. I think he's far more important to this team's offense and defense than most fans care to admit. Most just want him gone so they can feel more comfortable and this team moving forward post-brawl. I say, "Get over it already!" Even the media has started to back off that old story. So should the fans.

Kofi
01-05-2008, 12:14 AM
There is a correlation between Jermaine's shot attempts and the Pacers win/loss record. Big men, particularly star big men (a la O'Neal) are suppose to be your teams most efficient scorers. Jermaine is not even close to ours. 1.11 points-per-shot is bad for a guard, and utterly horrible for a power forward. He and Tinsley are the two reasons we're always amongst the bottom of the league in team field goal percentage.

Here's a stat...

We're 7-13 when J.O. takes 12 shots or more. That's .350 winning percentage, or 29-53 over an 82 game schedule.

We're 9-5 when he takes 11 shots or less (including games he doesn't play). That's .643, or 53-29 over an 82 game schedule.

Both Mike and Danny have proven to be far more reliable, effective scorers than Jermaine this year. So why is J.O. still our first option? It doesn't help the team win, both stats and anyone watching the games can tell you that. So what gives?

This team would be much better off if Jermaine O'Neal turned into a Marcus Camby clone and focused more on defense and rebounding, only taking high percentage shots, while letting the offense run through Mike and Danny.

NuffSaid
01-05-2008, 12:15 AM
did we win this - or did the Hawks give one away?
What??? I can't even believe you're asking that question!! :eek: The Pacers took this game from the very beginning. Have you seen the box scores? Two back-to-back 30+ pt quarter (2nd and 3rd) not to mention they won every quarter except the 4th, and they would have won it had JOB not pulled the starters near the 7 minute. They fought back every run the Hawks made and attacked the basket alot more than they had been doing up until these last three games.

No, my friend. The Hawks didn't give this game away. The Pacers demanded it, command it and won it on their terms!

Now, one can only hope they perform as well on their WCRT.

Oneal07
01-05-2008, 12:20 AM
When I don't watch a game, we win, When I watch the game we lose. . .The Pacers must not like me. . . . But I'm glad to see balance in our attack.

I'm also glad to come home and not see another L in our column

JayRedd
01-05-2008, 01:07 AM
The more JO gets touches, the more DG and DunDun will vanish...and the more likely we struggle to score points efficiently. None of this should be a surprise.


Ok, what was different tonight?

This is what showed up in the box score:
1) Far less shooting by JO
2) Far more shooting and effectiveness by other players, not just Granger and Dun.

That is all.


JO on the other hand played within his abilities for once by shooting much less.

However, JO only had 3 boards when Dun had 12 and Murphy and Granger had 9.

Looked nothing like that 72pt performance against Memphis other than JO's poor performance


I would like to know, however, if there is a tendency to defer to JO that hinders the team and particularly ball movement. It just seems that when Dunleavy gets hot, Granger does too....and clearly it was not dependent solely on JT. There is some trigger here because it seems like the perimeter players blow up at the same time. Maybe it's just the competition...

So...how did you feel about JO's performance? Maybe you could clarify with a few more posts.

I think some of you guys are so set on looking for every flaw in Jermaine's game that you simply ignore everything positive that he does. I only saw the first half, but he did some very productive things out there tonight.

For instance:


1) in the first quarter, he had assists on two out of the first three treys we hit. These both happened within four possessions and put us up 12-8, and then 16-8 respectively.

2) He drew two charges on back-to-back possessions in the 2nd Quarter. This happened towards the start of one of our patented offensive droughts where we could only manage to score 8 points in 8 minutes and found ourselves on the wrong side of a 15-8 run by ATL. We lost the lead during this stretch. Anecdotally, I also watched him change multiple shots and force Joe Johnson to stop his penetration to kick out for a missed jumper on one occasion.

3) He found Dunleavy with a cross-court pass from the opposite block to the corner for a three-point shot. This put us back up 42-37. This was our second made three-pointer on back-to-back possession after that previous anemic offensive stretch. After this shot was made, we would never look back.

4) Shortly after we got our offensive groove back in the 2nd Quarter and were making every jumper we took (Dunleavy had just scored on three consecutive possessions) Jermaine blocked a Joe Johnson lay-up where he had walked right past the guy guarding him and had a high-percentage shot from the paint.

I admittedly didn't see much of the 2nd Half, but here's what the box score yall so love to cite says.


5) JO scored our first two buckets coming out of the locker room. Both layups. This stretched our lead from 11 to 15.

6) He blocked an Al Horford lay-up attempt a minute-and-a-half later.

7) He drew a charge four minutes later.


So in summation, he drew 3 charges, blocked 4 shots, and scored 11 points on 10 shots while not monopolizing the offense in any way shape or form (this was despite struggling mightily at the line going 1/4. Most nights, he makes 3/4 and finishes with 13 points on 10 shots). He also had 3 recorded assists, had multiple other good passes out of the post and, as always, kept defenders worried about him on the block as our jump-shooters made it rain from the outside.

That's a poor performance? Isn't this exactly what half of yall harp on him to do all the time? Don't worry about being the first option or stats, defer to shooters and cutters, pass out of the post, play stellar D?

So, just let me get this right: He takes 20 shots and he's ruining our team. But he shoots 50% from the field and single-handedly thwarts 7 scoring opportunities (not to mention altered shots and other things that don't show up in a game-log) and he didn't show up.

Seriously...what do yall want? We won by 22. Just give it a rest for a day, could ya?

LoneGranger33
01-05-2008, 01:16 AM
I wanna see a game-winner from this team at least once this year.

Anthem
01-05-2008, 01:42 AM
That's a poor performance? Isn't this exactly what half of yall harp on him to do all the time? Don't worry about being the first option or stats, defer to shooters and cutters, pass out of the post, play stellar D?

So, just let me get this right: He takes 20 shots and he's ruining our team. But he shoots 50% from the field and single-handed thwarts 7 scoring opportunities (not to mention altered shots and other things that don't show up in a game-log) and he didn't show up.

Seriously...what do yall want? We won by 22. Just give it a rest for a day, could ya?
Post of the freaking year.

I can't speak for Conseco's attendance, but I know why I haven't been here much recently. More of this and less of what you were refuting would be pretty welcome.

Infinite MAN_force
01-05-2008, 02:08 AM
I was at the game, and I can see both sides of this JO issue.

You have to admit, there are times when he takes these aweful looking turnaround jumpers that almost NEVER goes in. When he does this, I want to pull my hair out. Its not that he doesn't do a lot of things well, but I do think his desire to be a go to scorer holds back the team on occasion. For example, the charlotte game. I was listening on the radio, but during the overtime, it was... Jermaine misses a jumper, Jermaine misses a jumper, Jermaine misses a THREE POINTER.

JERMAINE IS NOT A CLUTCH PLAYER. we will all be better off when he realizes this. I really love everything about his game except his shot selection on occasion... if he would just NOT force the issue sometimes, I would feel a lot better.

On the other hand, the Miami game where he got destroyed by shaq, got up and hit two free throws... than took a charge on the next possession. I said... man, I love this guy. I feel like if he could just mentally alter his game he could fit into this offense perfectly.

His contract bothers me a little also. I still hope he opts out not cause I dislike him or cause I don't think he helps the team, but you can't have that kind of money tied up in that guy.

Will Galen
01-05-2008, 04:16 AM
How about that ball Granger saved from going out of bounds!

For those of you who didn't see it, Granger went into the far right corner after a loose ball (Hawks end) with a Hawk on his left. He saved it with a behind the back pass to Dun.



Post of the freaking year.

I can't speak for Conseco's attendance, but I know why I haven't been here much recently. More of this and less of what you were refuting would be pretty welcome.

There's a bunch of guys on here who don't know anymore about basketball than I do and even I can see they are making ridiculous statements. For instant, (Its just a shame Dun and Granger never want to step up consistently.)

Posting such ridiculous statements along with the negative Nellie's posts are bringing the forum down.

We need the positive people to speak up and the NN's to keep quiet. What's more fun than discussing the positive aspects of Pacers basketball with like minded fans? It builds your enthusiasm for the game, and for the forum.

The problem is this is the Internet and people feel free to say whatever they want. Of course they have to stay within the rules, but they still ruin forum's and other people's experience's with how they post.

What I would like to see on here is the moderators hand out technical fouls to people who make dumb statements, and people who are negative Nellies. Once someone gets a total of 10 fouls they would get benched for a day.

My first thought was to hand out technical fouls to people to draw their attention to the way they are posting, but I realized that some of these guys would be proud of it. Thus to show them it's not something to be proud of, give them a day off after ten fouls.

Bball
01-05-2008, 04:28 AM
After reading Will's post, I have come to realize the Pacers are the greatest team in the NBA. While their record might not indicate it yet, the immediate future will show it. This team has no problems or glaring needs. Maybe they just need to gel a bit, but that shouldn't take long. We are winning the NBA Finals THIS year!!

;)

Does a Positive Pauline post cancel out a Negative Nellie post? ;)

-Bball

kester99
01-05-2008, 04:37 AM
What's more fun than discussing the positive aspects of Pacers basketball with like minded fans? It builds your enthusiasm for the game, and for the forum.

Amen on that.

And on a positive note, I've been watching recordings of our last 2 games vs Detroit (didn't get to see them when they happened), and I was struck by how well we played. If that sounds funny, as I said, I didn't get to see them real-time, only read comments, and yes, made some assumptions of my own as to our quality of play. We lost, sure, but put up good numbers against a team that could well be the champs this year.

The questions posed here about what the Pacers did to suddenly turn it around have it just a little backwards, I think. That game against Memphis was the aberration, not the win against ATL. Once JT gets back in the groove (may take a game or two), I think the Pacers will start to rock some folks again.

And one more thing. What has been one result of JT's absence the last few games? Andre Owens gets thrown into a sink-or-swim situation, and mostly swims. The experience he's gained will be good for the Pacers, backup-PG-wise, going down the stretch.

Will Galen
01-05-2008, 06:55 AM
After reading Will's post, I have come to realize the Pacers are the greatest team in the NBA. While their record might not indicate it yet, the immediate future will show it. This team has no problems or glaring needs. Maybe they just need to gel a bit, but that shouldn't take long. We are winning the NBA Finals THIS year!!

;)

Does a Positive Pauline post cancel out a Negative Nellie post? ;)

-Bball

FWIW I don't consider you a NN. Well . . . not the kind I'm talking about. (giggle, giggle, snort)

Everyone is negative at times. What I was talking about is the guys that write a bunch of negative posts in a thread, or the people that all they do is write negative posts. People need to know when they are bringing the forum down.

You get 2 or 3 NN's together in a thread writing 20 negative posts between them and it . . . sucks, It turns people off.

Bball
01-05-2008, 07:06 AM
FWIW I don't consider you a NN. Well . . . not the kind I'm talking about. (giggle, giggle, snort)

Everyone is negative at times. What I was talking about is the guys that write a bunch of negative posts in a thread, or the people that all they do is write negative posts. People need to know when they are bringing the forum down.

You get 2 or 3 NN's together in a thread writing 20 negative posts between them and it . . . sucks, It turns people off.

You're saying downer posts bring people down? ;)

I was just funnin' with ya anyway.

Actually, on the topic at hand, some of the Fanboi posts turn me off much in the same way (especially in the summer). But those usually disappear when reality sets in after 10-15 games or so and then some of them are the most negative and snipey of all.

Of course... Just as some people have a player (or coach) that they believe is the root of all evil not only on the team but in the world... there's always someone who believes a certain player can do absolutely no wrong at all. Sometimes I think their player could bring a ball bat into the arena and start taking out people in the first rows and they'd still find a way to excuse that behavior ("He was just trying to get into the swing of things.... It's not like anybody died! Plus, when he accidentally hit Murphy it STRAIGHTENED his nose!").

-Bball

OnlyPacersLeft
01-05-2008, 08:23 AM
I actually thought the hawks commentators were pretty good. Steve smith's insight from being a player was awesome. What a huge win...we needed this one! I fell asleep mid way during the 2nd period up by 2. Wake up and we are up about 20 in the 4th! WOOOOOOO
Gosh i hope tinman can hurry back...we need him.

granger33
01-05-2008, 08:24 AM
You get 2 or 3 NN's together in a thread writing 20 negative posts between them and it . . . sucks, It turns people off.

Amen, man. Amen.

I've been a long time viewer of this board but decided just to join lately. but the amount of Negative posting on this board is terrible. It's the most negative posting I've seen on any NBA board apart from Miami's.

I too have been frustrated with this team and shown it on this forum.I just think some people on this board just want a big trade to go down to shake things up, not caring who goes or what we get.

JO isnt as talented anymore, but opponents still think his our go-to-guy and Granger is gonna be a good solid player in a couple of seasons.

So Lets not keep on saying how much we wanna send those two blokes out! We had a thrashing over the Hawks today, be happy!

Mourning
01-05-2008, 09:22 AM
So...how did you feel about JO's performance? Maybe you could clarify with a few more posts.

I think some of you guys are so set on looking for every flaw in Jermaine's game that you simply ignore everything positive that he does. I only saw the first half, but he did some very productive things out there tonight.

For instance:


1) in the first quarter, he had assists on two out of the first three treys we hit. These both happened within four possessions and put us up 12-8, and then 16-8 respectively.

2) He drew two charges on back-to-back possessions in the 2nd Quarter. This happened towards the start of one of our patented offensive droughts where we could only manage to score 8 points in 8 minutes and found ourselves on the wrong side of a 15-8 run by ATL. We lost the lead during this stretch. Anecdotally, I also watched him change multiple shots and force Joe Johnson to stop his penetration to kick out for a missed jumper on one occasion.

3) He found Dunleavy with a cross-court pass from the opposite block to the corner for a three-point shot. This put us back up 42-37. This was our second made three-pointer on back-to-back possession after that previous anemic offensive stretch. After this shot was made, we would never look back.

4) Shortly after we got our offensive groove back in the 2nd Quarter and were making every jumper we took (Dunleavy had just scored on three consecutive possessions) Jermaine blocked a Joe Johnson lay-up where he had walked right past the guy guarding him and had a high-percentage shot from the paint.

I admittedly didn't see much of the 2nd Half, but here's what the box score yall so love to cite says.


5) JO scored our first two buckets coming out of the locker room. Both layups. This stretched our lead from 11 to 15.

6) He blocked an Al Horford lay-up attempt a minute-and-a-half later.

7) He drew a charge four minutes later.


So in summation, he drew 3 charges, blocked 4 shots, and scored 11 points on 10 shots while not monopolizing the offense in any way shape or form (this was despite struggling mightily at the line going 1/4. Most nights, he makes 3/4 and finishes with 13 points on 10 shots). He also had 3 recorded assists, had multiple other good passes out of the post and, as always, kept defenders worried about him on the block as our jump-shooters made it rain from the outside.

That's a poor performance? Isn't this exactly what half of yall harp on him to do all the time? Don't worry about being the first option or stats, defer to shooters and cutters, pass out of the post, play stellar D?

So, just let me get this right: He takes 20 shots and he's ruining our team. But he shoots 50% from the field and single-handedly thwarts 7 scoring opportunities (not to mention altered shots and other things that don't show up in a game-log) and he didn't show up.

Seriously...what do yall want? We won by 22. Just give it a rest for a day, could ya?

JO had a good game. And I'm happy about that! OTOH... wasn't he due to give us one again after the past few games and given that he is afterall our Franchise player?

I mean look at the critique Danny and Dun Dun get when they have a few bad games and it's not like they are our first options. Better, sometimes when JO has an ugly game some of his supporters try to turn the thing around by virtually completely blaming it on those two players or Murphy, ridiculous. Sure, some of the argument have some merit, but come on now.

Like some others noted before I would love him to play like this (normal amount of shots and where he actually has a decent chance of hitting them, more focus on defense).

What I do really think JO has become excellent at the past two years is dishing out to the open man, he showed that again tonight. No question he's become one of the best big man at that.

Regards,

Mourning :cool:

Major Cold
01-05-2008, 10:11 AM
Granger played Joe a lot better than before. Add Rush to that and the inconsistency of Marvin from the perimeter, and the Hawks we determined to pound it inside. JO played great interior defense. Josh C penetrated on Dun all the time. Horford was a non-factor because of JO taking charges and taking it to him on the other end in the 1st.

Lets not forget that the shots Dun, Rush, and particularly Granger were open shots. Tins did not create those shots the ball rotation did. The Hawks commentators said that the team watched a lot of film. That helped their spacing on the floor this game.

The Hawks could grumble a little after the loss to Dallas. We were due for a win.

OakMoses
01-05-2008, 10:43 AM
This was a terriffic win. I have to admit that at work on Friday I was wondering whether or not I should even watch the game. My hope meter was so low after the Memphis game. I don't think I could have taken another bad loss to another mediocre/bad team. Needless to say, I'm glad I watched.

Observations:

-JO was very good tonight, especially on defense. Seth's done a great job of pointing out JO's value to the team on this front. JO's defensive abilities are the one skill set on our team that is not duplicate by any other player on the roster.

- Kudos to Troy Murphy for a good performance in limited minutes. Atlanta forced us to play small by playing Josh Smith at PF. Troy came up with a very Fosteresque 9 rebounds in 18 minutes. His shooting wasn't good, but he hit his only three and dished out 4 assists. His defense on Smith wasn't any worse than Granger's.

- There were a couple of guys who played very badly tonight: Ike & Shawne. Their play looked as bad as the box score would indicate. Make sure you take note of Shawne's 6 fouls in less than 9 minutes.

- What really stood out was the level of aggression. This was from all our perimeter players. Owens was looking to take it to the whole and Anthony Johnson could do nothing to stop him. Unfortunately, Josh Smith could. Danny was much more aggressive than usual.

- Marquis was great on defense tonight, but his offense was poor.

- I like what Kareem Rush brings to the table. There's very little doubt why he's playing instead of Shawne right now.

- Dunleavy was great.

Hawks observations:

- Josh Smith is the opposite of Mike Dunleavy. He's an incredibly athletic player who is a monster at the defensive end. On offense, however, he lacks skill and has a poor understanding of the game.

- If you want to talk about lack of aggression, watch Joe Johnson last night. The best player on the court goes 3-11 with one assist against a team that really has no one who can guard him.

- I've thought for a while that Josh Childress is underrated. I feel much more strongly about that now. He was by far the Hawks best player last night. He's not a great player and will never be an all-star, but I think he's a championship type guy. He plays good defense, can score in a variety of ways when needed, doesn't look to force his game when other guys are playing well, hustles every play, and is smart. I know we have a million SF's, but I'd love to see Childress in a Pacer uniform someday.

- I don't know why the Hawks are starting Anthony Johnson. He gives them nothing. Acie Law is clearly more talented, but seems to be suffering from a lack of confidence. Play him thirty minutes a game and let him run the team. That should give him some confidence. Their strategy with AJ seems to be for him to bring it up the court without turning it over, pass it to Johnson or Smith, and then stand there and make sure he gets back on defense. It's terrible.

OnlyPacersLeft
01-05-2008, 10:56 AM
I actually thought the hawks commentators were pretty good. Steve smith's insight from being a player was awesome. What a huge win...we needed this one! I fell asleep mid way during the 2nd period up by 2. Wake up and we are up about 20 in the 4th! WOOOOOOO
Gosh i hope tinman can hurry back...we need him.

BillS
01-05-2008, 11:44 AM
Some of my observations from the front row of section 119:

1) The "standing around" thing is NOT a JO phenomenon. I noticed at least three occasions in the first half where JO was on the bench and the team still stood around waiting for the ballhandler to do something.

2) Reading the Star article helped me understand why everything got better in the second quarter, but it doesn't change one thing - of the players who hit the floor after that timeout, Dunleavy was the one who picked the team up and carried it until everyone else could get fired up as well. By the early 4th quarter I was hoping he'd start passing the ball to another shooter so he'd get a triple double :)

3) Whoever stoked Murphy's Wheaties needs to do it every game. His defense was very good and might have made the individual difference when the Hawks tried to make a run at the beginning of the game when we were goofing around at the offensive end.

4) Speaking of defense, and apropos of a recent post regarding defensive confidence (I can't find it or I'd link to it), did anyone else notice that Dunleavy played his man up close and personal while everyone else was backed off to prevent the dribble? If I was better at scouting, I'd be able to tell if this was because Dun knew his guy was no good off the dribble, but still it was something I noted.

5) Diener is still not Steve Kerr.

indyman37
01-05-2008, 12:23 PM
i just looked at the pacers post game page and the thing that stood out to me was the hustle board. Out of the 91 points the hawks scored, 50 were in the paint and 33 were fast-break points. that accounts for 83 of their points for goodness sake.

ABADays
01-05-2008, 12:26 PM
Yikes! :-o I hope Will doesn't hit me with a flagrant!

Alpolloloco
01-05-2008, 12:38 PM
JO had a good game. And I'm happy about that! OTOH... wasn't he due to give us one again after the past few games and given that he is afterall our Franchise player?

I mean look at the critique Danny and Dun Dun get when they have a few bad games and it's not like they are our first options. Better, sometimes when JO has an ugly game some of his supporters try to turn the thing around by virtually completely blaming it on those two players or Murphy, ridiculous. Sure, some of the argument have some merit, but come on now.

Like some others noted before I would love him to play like this (normal amount of shots and where he actually has a decent chance of hitting them, more focus on defense).

What I do really think JO has become excellent at the past two years is dishing out to the open man, he showed that again tonight. No question he's become one of the best big man at that.

Regards,

Mourning :cool:


Mourning, we're really thinking alike on the JO subject. Great response!

Anthem
01-05-2008, 12:50 PM
I don't know why the Hawks are starting Anthony Johnson. He gives them nothing. Acie Law is clearly more talented, but seems to be suffering from a lack of confidence. Play him thirty minutes a game and let him run the team. That should give him some confidence. Their strategy with AJ seems to be for him to bring it up the court without turning it over, pass it to Johnson or Smith, and then stand there and make sure he gets back on defense. It's terrible.
Because he's a steady veteran presence with ballhandling savvy, a nice shooting touch, and pretty good defense at the 1?

:laugh:

Yeah, I don't believe it either.

NuffSaid
01-05-2008, 01:20 PM
JayRedd,

You are the man!! I've been waiting for somebody - anybody - to make such an observation concerning JO's contributions to the team. While I agree that when he takes fewer shots and passes the ball more, the team tends to get into a better flow because players like Dunleavy and Granger get more involvled, the things you've pointed out JO's been doing (or trying to do) all season long. Last night's win can be more attributed to two of the team's most athletic players stepping up and getting the job done together than JO taking more or less shots. Still, JO was a key factor. I'm glad somebody has finally given him his due credit.

Thank you!

I know it's a cliche', but it's true, "Offense keeps you in the game, but defense wins ball games!" And last night, the Pacers really stepped up their defense. They also didn't settle for jump shots despite going 13-25 from downtown for 39 pts. They scored 44 pts in the paint, 18 pts from the line for a total of 101 pts. Break it down and in effect it means the Pacers took a total of 16 jump shots from 10 ft or more (13 3PAs, 6 FGs from the field that account for the remaining 12 pts). Impressive!

LoneGranger33
01-05-2008, 01:25 PM
NuffSaid, you are 98% correct, but that first observation was a mistake.

Will Galen
01-05-2008, 02:26 PM
NuffSaid, you are 98% correct, but that first observation was a mistake.

Does that mean Jay Redd is a girl?

CableKC
01-05-2008, 03:18 PM
I thought about this yesterday night......but am I the only that feels underwhelmed by this win? Usually, I am excited after a win.....but this win just didn't interest me that much. Maybe it's because the team has a way of playing inconsistently, that PacerBall is getting boring. My impression was that the Hawks didn't play any perimeter defense and that we were just doing what we always do..... Take shot after shot.

A win is a win.....but I'm not too impressed....it feels more like the Hawks lost the game and gave up then the Pacers taking over and winning the game.