PDA

View Full Version : Odd thoughts after being trounced by Utah



Peck
01-09-2008, 03:58 AM
Let me see how does that go again? Never get to up after a win and never get to down after a loss.....

Well what do you do when you haven't won in awhile and the losing has been, how to put this politely, decisive.

People I watched every single solitary brutal moment of this game and all I can say is "I don't have a clue".

Is it offense? Is it defense? Is the the system? Is it the players? Is it coaching?

My answer to all of the above is yes. However right now I don't know of one true thing to do to change any of that.

Also for those of you that are voting to blow it up, and believe me if you would have asked me that 9 min. into the third quarter I would have provided you the match, I want to ask you this.

Blow it up and do what?

Look I make no seceret to this I have wanted Jermaine O'Neal traded for years. However I am now seeing trades suggested on here that even I am cringing at.

Cap room mean nothing & I mean nothing if you can't attract free agents to come here.

Well here is the news on that, young big name free agents are not going to be lining up to play for a team that they consider has zero chance of winning in the very near future.

Yes, you can use the money to pay some of your players down the road. But even then I have to wonder if we really should.

Right now does anybody really want to invest big money in Ike? I know Shawn has a lot of fans but in truth as of now does he deserve a long term extension? I realize that both of them are far more deserveing the Jon Bender who got his deal with far less on floor production, but aren't we trying to avoid that again?

By no means am I on here trying to say "stay the course" but I just want everybody who wants to ship J.O. off for two stiffs with expiring contracts to actually think this through. Now throw in a high unprotected draft pick and we can talk.

Or if somebody wants to tell me that just getting rid of J.O. will benefit the team I am willing to hear them out. But to do it purely for money? No thanks.

I don't pay to see dollar bills run up and down the floor and the Pacers have zero track record of being able to attract free agents.

As I stated in the "we need a trade" thread that Shade put up, this season is a transitional season. Sadly, and believe me I hate this more than most of you, it probably for management is a season where they just want to make the playoffs.

Look I would just prefer to not make the playoffs as opposed to get in the first round, lose in the first round and none of the young players play big roles.

But I know that to the Pacers management this is the gold standard and frankly they have reason to beleive this for financial reasons. Remember they get to share in that playoff money if they get in.

I guess where I really want to go with all of this is this. There is no "one sure way to win a title" in the NBA.

If anything the one sure way you could argue is you have to have one of the 4 best players in the league. Only Detroit really hasn't had that over the past 20 some years.

But even then it's not a sure fire thing.

While Ainge is rightfully getting credit for his moves and it makes his past moves look good, never forget this one thing. If Kevin Garnett was not disgruntled with the Wolves and the Wolves weren't ready to be out of that contract Danny would still be sitting on the same team that is falling apart now up north. Oh he may have added Ray Allen but really would that have mattered?

In other words loading up on draft picks is not a sure fire way to win either, if that were the case the Clippers, Bucks & Hawks would have won titles already.

I think the thing that dissapoints me the most right now is that I think we are seeing regression on the offensive end. I feel like right now we are only ever in a game if we are hitting our jumpers and as anybody knows jump shots are not going to go in even half of the time.

Now if this is coaching or players I am not sure. I don't feel like we are seeing the movement on offense or even the helping with picks and screens on offense like we saw earlier this year.

Jamaal being out obviously hurt that, but I think I started to see that before he left.

On defense I have no idea what we are doing? Look I understand the attempts at trying to draw charges but right now I think we are trying to do that a little to often instead of actually trying do defend the man.

Troy Murphy is a soft defender, there is no arugment about that, however I can't say that any of our starting five are worth a d@mn really on the defensive end. Jermaine is what he always has been, Jamaal gambles more than Art Schlichter, Mike is just blah on defense and Danny is about average for his position.

Foster off of the bench is above average, however unlike everybody else who fawns over him I still point out that his ineptness on the offensive end is no better than Troy's ineptness on the defensive end.

Quis is avg., Kareem is better than I thought he would be but still just avg. at best, Owens for a person who is supposed to be the third string p.g. is actually acceptable, Ike doesn't even try, Harrison is well... hell I don't know. Sometimes he shows that there is the devine spark of life in his eyes and other times he proves that he is nothing more than one of the backup zombie dancers in Michael Jacksons thriller video. Williams I have no real clue on. Diener and Graham are non-factors.

In other words we have a lousy defensive team. But even saying that I will still not contend that defense is our sole problem.

You can NOT go min. after min. in this league without scoring a basket and right now we often have 4-5 min. a quarter where we don't get a field goal and don't get to the line.

Some of it is stupid turnovers, no doubt. However some of it is purely bad shooting and some of it frankly is poor coaching.

Look by no means am I turning on JOB, but right now I don't see any real offense at work here. Sometimes I see what looks like a set play or even crisp ball movement that leads to a good play. But those times are coming fewer and fewer each game.

Sorry gang this really isn't one of my better posts but to be honest with you I am just flabbergasted by how we are losing.

I guess I could take this a little more if we were playing Ike, Danny & Shawn a lot more because at least then I would feel like we were trying to see what we had.

But I question in games like this why J.O., Troy and Jeff play so much.

I'm sure we'll just beat the h@ll out of the Suns tonight.:rolleyes:

Will Galen
01-09-2008, 06:19 AM
[quote=Peck]

By no means am I on here trying to say "stay the course"

Bird has said he won't make a move unless it improves us. He's also said he doesn't believe in tearing a team down and starting from scratch. So, unless we can find a trade that improves us, staying the course is just what we will do. It's also what we should expect. There were only three trades at the deadline last year.

Myself, I don't want to make a trade unless we get a first rounder in it. As I said in another thread, unless it's a no brainer, a trade won't help us. What we need more than anything is a guy that can finish and defend the perimeter. We're not going to find that in a trade, only in the draft.

I'm sure we'll just beat the h@ll out of the Suns tonight.:rolleyes:

I think it will be another double digit loss, but what's ironic about it is it wouldn't surprise me if we beat the Suns. I also wouldn't be surprised if the Suns doubled the score on us, something I thought possible last night when Utah has us down 50-22.

indygeezer
01-09-2008, 08:44 AM
What purpose is there in keeping JO assuming we could find someone to take him? Is he a player that can take over and dominate a game? Does he put a team on his back and will them to victory? Or is he just another VERY expensive piece of a broken wheel? I asked some time last week if this team had growth potential to it...IOW if left alone would this team grow and mature as the Smits/Miller/Jackson/Davis team did? If not then why hang on to him...it is obvious the crowds aren't coming out to see him play like they would a LeBron. I know that none of this sounds fair but he is a very very expensive part and we're going nowhere with or without him So I ask again, what is the purpose of keeping him? Hang on to him for a couple more years so his massive contract comes off the books then? What good is that? We are so far over the cap that his departure would still not allow us space to go after a top tier player.
Perhaps some will say that the pieces are in place and all we need is that one player that makes it all click. If so, then WTH do we do to get that player because in all likelihood 3/4 of the teams in the NBA would like to have the same guy and most have more to offer to obtain him.

As to making the POs this year...attendence is down so far that the PO money will only slow the bleeding. PO money on top of decent attendence is a big plus, but this year it is putting a band-aid on an evisceration.

Nope, IMO it is necessary to do whatever needed to bring the fans back to the gym and build for the future. I believe the fans are shouting that they do not like this team and will not support it (what was attendence like during the recent win streak???) and if mgmnt wants butts in the seats it will take more than just winning to get them back. Rightly or wrongly the Colts are winning but also have a poster boy that everybody loves. They sell out. The Pacers are not winning and like it or not, the populace hates this team...or many of the players.

Kofi
01-09-2008, 08:49 AM
Blow it up and do what?

Start over. Clear the 6+ years of crap the franchise has been through, erase all memories of the brawl and any past troubles with the law. Get rid of J.O. and Tinsley. Try and get rid of Murphy's contract. Hang on to Danny and Shawne. Then bring in the best talent you can acquire, and try to make sure they're not future criminals.

The Pacers have drafted very well under Bird, that's the most important thing for a rebuilding team. Just one top-10 pick could easily land us our next franchise guy for the next decade, and he, along with Danny and hopefully Shawne, can have us back on our way to relevancy once again.

Basically, follow Portland's lead. Of course it's easier said than done, but it's very doable if you have a plan in place and follow through with it.

Unclebuck
01-09-2008, 09:32 AM
I thought this was the offense everyone wanted, ball movement, player movement, quick shots, a lot of threes - no set plays, and most of all the last thing we ever wanted again was a coach that called all the plays. Afterall wasn't the argument that because every team knew our offensive plays, we needed to go to a passing game/triangle type of offense, where players read and react to the defense.

That is exactly what the Pacers are trying to run.


Things are never as bad as they seem, and never as good as they appear. I'm not ready to give up on this years team, I think they are still getting used to the new system. (Peck, I wonder what you were saying in 1994 when the Pacers were 17-24 - don't get me wrong I wasn't expecting a huge turn around then - there were signs however but with this years team - I don't see those signs of a turn around. But I only bring up 1994 to suggest it does take time to turn things around under a new coach.

Tonight in Phoenix will be very ugly, but then they have two days without games and I expect them to play very well in Sacramento.

I do want to say one thing about Jeff Foster. With a player like him, you cannot just say that he is bad on offense, and then say Troy is just as bad on defense - so it is a wash. That is completely discounting the impact Jeff's effort, hustle, energy, enthusism, and leadership has on his teammates. You really cannot measure his true value - but I think it is rather obvious when he's on the floor the Pacers play with more energy - there is a certain spark.

rexnom
01-09-2008, 09:44 AM
Doesn't Jeff's offensive rebounding count as offense? How many extra possessions has he gotten us? And most of his offensive rebounds aren't just rebounds of his own misses or to himself for a lay-up he'll miss.

Unclebuck
01-09-2008, 09:50 AM
Doesn't Jeff's offensive rebounding count as offense? How many extra possessions has he gotten us? And most of his offensive rebounds aren't just rebounds of his own misses or to himself for a lay-up he'll miss.

The rebounds of his missed shots are more than made up for by the number of tips he gets that allows his teammates to get the offensive rebound.

Bball
01-09-2008, 10:12 AM
I thought this was the offense everyone wanted, ball movement, player movement, quick shots, a lot of threes - no set plays, and most of all the last thing we ever wanted again was a coach that called all the plays. Afterall wasn't the argument that because every team knew our offensive plays, we needed to go to a passing game/triangle type of offense, where players read and react to the defense.

That is exactly what the Pacers are trying to run.


Things are never as bad as they seem, and never as good as they appear. I'm not ready to give up on this years team, I think they are still getting used to the new system. (Peck, I wonder what you were saying in 1994 when the Pacers were 17-24 - don't get me wrong I wasn't expecting a huge turn around then - there were signs however but with this years team - I don't see those signs of a turn around. But I only bring up 1994 to suggest it does take time to turn things around under a new coach.

Tonight in Phoenix will be very ugly, but then they have two days without games and I expect them to play very well in Sacramento.

I do want to say one thing about Jeff Foster. With a player like him, you cannot just say that he is bad on offense, and then say Troy is just as bad on defense - so it is a wash. That is completely discounting the impact Jeff's effort, hustle, energy, enthusism, and leadership has on his teammates. You really cannot measure his true value - but I think it is rather obvious when he's on the floor the Pacers play with more energy - there is a certain spark.

I want a lot of ball and player movement... true. I'm not one for a lot of 3's though. I also only want quick shots when they are there... which isn't often. If you can beat the defense, great... but taking a quick shot when the rest of the team isn't setup at all isn't exactly my cup of tea.

I don't like momentum killing, bad decision, quick shots.

As I said in my other post, our offense is looking dull and indecisive. Where are the solid screens? Where are the sharp cuts? Where is the crisp ball movement? Where are the smart decisions?

BUT... even if the offense was a well-oiled machine, the defense is lacking, lacking, lacking... We need to do something to pick it up. Are we THAT slow that we can't keep up with the other team's ball movement and the rotations? Are the wings just too ineffective? Do we lack that one bulldog on defense that inspires the others to bring up their level of play?

Watching possession after possession of a Pacer frantically running to try and catch back up with the open man as he takes an uncontested shot is telling. Team defense is nice, but maybe it is overrated when you look at the individual needs. Usually, the Pacer player is so late closing out that he might as well stay under the basket and block out in hopes that the shot will miss and at least we'll have a shot at the board. At least that way he wouldn't foul the guy after the shot and put him on the line for the "and 1...".

I realize we're trying to take away the inside, but either we're doing it to a fault or else we're a very lacking team on the defensive end (either athletically or mentally... or both).

-Bball

Putnam
01-09-2008, 10:41 AM
taking a quick shot when the rest of the team isn't setup at all isn't exactly my cup of tea.


The Pacers most efficient scoring this season is on quick shots. 82games.com shows the Pacers effective scoring per attempt is highest on the shots that come early in the clock.

clock eFG%
00-10 .529
11-15 .451
16-20 .490
21-24 .402


I also note than, even in the last 10 games, when the Pacers are 2-8, the Pacers outscore their opponent on fast breaks half the time.

So, may I suggest that the Pacers KEEP the emphasis on running, and strive to do that better. It is one thing that doesn't need fixing. They ALSO need to get smarter about recognizing an opportunity for a quickie versus a wasted shot. That does need fixing, and it shows up in the big dip between 11 and 15 seconds. Those are the dumb jumpers that need to stop.


I thought . . . everyone wanted . . . ball movement, player movement, quick shots, a lot of threes - no set plays, and most of all the last thing we ever wanted again was a coach that called all the plays. Afterall wasn't the argument that because every team knew our offensive plays, we needed to go to a passing game/triangle type of offense, where players read and react to the defense.

I don't know about everyone. It's what I wanted, and still do.




http://www.82games.com/0708/0708IND3.HTM

naptownmenace
01-09-2008, 11:31 AM
I want a lot of ball and player movement... true. I'm not one for a lot of 3's though. I also only want quick shots when they are there... which isn't often. If you can beat the defense, great... but taking a quick shot when the rest of the team isn't setup at all isn't exactly my cup of tea.

I don't like momentum killing, bad decision, quick shots.

<snip>

BUT... even if the offense was a well-oiled machine, the defense is lacking, lacking, lacking... We need to do something to pick it up. Are we THAT slow that we can't keep up with the other team's ball movement and the rotations? Are the wings just too ineffective? Do we lack that one bulldog on defense that inspires the others to bring up their level of play?
<snip>

I realize we're trying to take away the inside, but either we're doing it to a fault or else we're a very lacking team on the defensive end (either athletically or mentally... or both).


I agree with all of the above. The defensive scheme is set up to take away the inside but because the rotations are so poor, it doesn't work. They end up giving up a lot of wide open jumpers to teams that are willing rotate the ball or drive and kick the ball out to the perimeter.

I also have noticed that the defense gambles a lot on the perimeter which leads to a breakdown of the "D", which often leads to fouls or another easy shot in the lane.

I think coaching is to blame in a lot of these instances. The team is capable of pulling it off because they had a decent stretch of games when they defended well. However, I think since Foster started playing less minutes and was pulled from the starting lineup, the defense has gone down hill. That falls on the coaching staff, IMO.

Hicks
01-09-2008, 11:54 AM
I think we need to do our very best to ride these players into the playoffs for the money involved, the experience whomever's left after this summer will gain, and the fact that from a P.R. perspective I think it will help to have us in rather than out (especially having not made it last year). I also think as soon as mid-July hits you hit the market hard with blowing this team to hell. Take the short-term high of the playoffs to pump a little oxygen back in the franchise's lungs so it can live off of that air while we rebuild.

Hicks
01-09-2008, 12:00 PM
I thought this was the offense everyone wanted, ball movement, player movement, quick shots, a lot of threes - no set plays, and most of all the last thing we ever wanted again was a coach that called all the plays. Afterall wasn't the argument that because every team knew our offensive plays, we needed to go to a passing game/triangle type of offense, where players read and react to the defense.

That is exactly what the Pacers are trying to run.

Come on, that's a cheap statement because you know very well that part of the problem is that there is NOT a lot of ball or player movement right now. No, running in a large circle around the outside of the paint, and passing it back and forth does not count. As for quick shots, personally I like them if it's an "in-rhythm" shot that's an honestly open look, especially off of a kick-out from the post or a driving player, but not when it's done just for the sake of shooting early (of which Tinsley and Murphy are quickly becoming masters).

Secondly, and this is a general statement not related to quoting UB, but if we're going to have an offense that treats anyone with an outside shot like their Reggie Miller (in regards to how enthusiastically they are encouraged to shoot the ball), why not set as many screens as you would for Reggie Miller? I mean it's not like this is a roster filled with shooters that can create their own shots/looks. Give Mike 2 or 3 screens along the baseline. Kareem too. Danny and Shawne.

I mean if what Jim said is true (and I have no reason to say he's making it up) that we hit over 50% of our open shots while making only like 18% of our contested shots, then why the hell wouldn't you set more screens for these guys? They can't create their own shots and they're usually slower than the guy on the other team. They NEED this as far as I can tell.

Naptown_Seth
01-09-2008, 12:23 PM
Cap room mean nothing & I mean nothing if you can't attract free agents to come here.I don't want them to get cap room, I want them to get salary RELIEF.

I don't buy into a big name signing, but I do think it would be nice if you could sign a KAPONO when you needed a 3pt ace rather than settling for Mark Price aka ball boy and Rush.

This team is toast for 3-4 years unless this current group recovers somehow. If what we've seen lately is where it's headed then blowing it up is what must be done. Tins/JO for Wally, fine. Stuff like that is just to clear out the roster, not to solve anything.

And isn't it ironic that I'm now saying "move JO" and Peck is saying "don't move him"? ;) Try that 2 months ago.


Mal, some of what you say is true, but even back when things were "good" I noted on several nights that really the good offense was just a hot shooting night on the same old looks.

The Atlanta game, guys couldn't miss. I saw plenty of open shots vs Utah, it's not like there were hands in faces all the time.

Troy comes down on a trailer and gets a wide open look that he can even step into...clank. Dun or Danny spot up open for a catch and shoot...clank.

That ain't "contested shots", that's "need new talent".


What part of ANY of these player's history suggested that they would be over 40% from 3? That's many systems and many teammates worth of data too. In fact this is why I have been so complimentary of Dun, he was way above expectations this year.

But when you look at those preseason expectations the one constant among naysayers like me was "mismatch of system and talent". What was winning me over was a hint that lots of the talent had changed, but it's starting to look like as the season wears on and games pile up that guys are reverting to what they've always been.

Even Hulk was flipping out last night.

Aw Heck
01-09-2008, 12:23 PM
I think we need to do our very best to ride these players into the playoffs for the money involved, the experience whomever's left after this summer will gain, and the fact that from a P.R. perspective I think it will help to have us in rather than out (especially having not made it last year). I also think as soon as mid-July hits you hit the market hard with blowing this team to hell. Take the short-term high of the playoffs to pump a little oxygen back in the franchise's lungs so it can live off of that air while we rebuild.
Sounds great. My only concern with that line of thinking is that TPTB will consider making the playoffs this year as an improvement over last year. As a result, they'll decide to keep the team together and make a couple more Kareem Rush / Travis Diener/Andre Owens type free agent signings.

I really think it's going to take missing the playoffs for a second straight year for them to realize that there needs to be some changes. That said, I don't think the Pacers will miss the playoffs. This isn't a bad team; it's a mediocre .500 team that'll hit high points and low points throughout the season. Right now, we're in a trough. In a few weeks though, they'll play better and we'll start having better feelings again before they hit another trough.

Naptown_Seth
01-09-2008, 12:30 PM
clock eFG%
00-10 .529
11-15 .451
16-20 .490
21-24 .402

Huge problem with this stat to prove this point. The first category includes all TO scores, and even slow-down teams look good on that number.

Pull out the 0-5 and see even what 6-10 on it's own looks like, and that still include baseline TO's and crazy rebounds that just take everyone longer to get down court. I mean 1 second? That's a steal at their rim, not a "quick shot in motion offense".

But then you have a contradiction. The true "early" clock, the one where you might not get to HC within 3-4 seconds and then spend 3-4 more with at least a few passes and end up into the 11-15 range which is quick shooting in terms of any level of HC set at all, the team isn't as good.

In fact they are better, acceptably so even, when they run a LONGER set, getting into the last stages of the clock.

And then obviously no one shoots well when they've only got 4 or less left, that's breakdown time, not what you meant to do.

Unclebuck
01-09-2008, 12:56 PM
Come on, that's a cheap statement because you know very well that part of the problem is that there is NOT a lot of ball or player movement right now. No, running in a large circle around the outside of the paint, and passing it back and forth does not count. As for quick shots, personally I like them if it's an "in-rhythm" shot that's an honestly open look, especially off of a kick-out from the post or a driving player, but not when it's done just for the sake of shooting early (of which Tinsley and Murphy are quickly becoming masters).



Mal, you are correct, it was a cheap statement, I was trying to be a a little tongue-in-cheek a little ironic. My only real point is that I'm not all that concerned about the style of the offense, as any style has its good and bad qualities. Running the type of offense this year has some drawbacks, as did the offense we ran the past 4 years - and they each have good points to them. I do reject the notion that the offense we ran under Carlisle was bad in concept as it seems many Pacers fans believe to at least a certain degree

rexnom
01-09-2008, 12:56 PM
Cap room mean nothing & I mean nothing if you can't attract free agents to come here.

Well here is the news on that, young big name free agents are not going to be lining up to play for a team that they consider has zero chance of winning in the very near future.

It's curious that you say this after losing to Utah. A team, nobody, and I mean, NOBODY, wants to go to. However, they were able to get Boozer and Okur, two all-stars, via free agency. Sure, we can say that they lucked out now, but when they signed those guys, everyone was saying that they overpaid.

Then they've rebuilt through the draft with guys like Williams, Kirilenko, and Brewer. Seems like an ok way to rebuild to me. And you don't have to be a FA hot spot to do it.

CableKC
01-09-2008, 01:34 PM
I don't want them to get cap room, I want them to get salary RELIEF.

I don't buy into a big name signing, but I do think it would be nice if you could sign a KAPONO when you needed a 3pt ace rather than settling for Mark Price aka ball boy and Rush.

This team is toast for 3-4 years unless this current group recovers somehow. If what we've seen lately is where it's headed then blowing it up is what must be done. Tins/JO for Wally, fine. Stuff like that is just to clear out the roster, not to solve anything.

And isn't it ironic that I'm now saying "move JO" and Peck is saying "don't move him"? ;) Try that 2 months ago.
Okay....who stole Seth's login? I don't believe he wrote this post. :-o ;)

owl
01-09-2008, 01:41 PM
Secondly, and this is a general statement not related to quoting UB, but if we're going to have an offense that treats anyone with an outside shot like their Reggie Miller (in regards to how enthusiastically they are encouraged to shoot the ball), why not set as many screens as you would for Reggie Miller? I mean it's not like this is a roster filled with shooters that can create their own shots/looks. Give Mike 2 or 3 screens along the baseline. Kareem too. Danny and Shawne.

I mean if what Jim said is true (and I have no reason to say he's making it up) that we hit over 50% of our open shots while making only like 18% of our contested shots, then why the hell wouldn't you set more screens for these guys? They can't create their own shots and they're usually slower than the guy on the other team. They NEED this as far as I can tell.

This a great observation and I don't know why this has not been done. OB said the defense was his the players could run the offense. Maybe they need some coaching here also.

CableKC
01-09-2008, 01:45 PM
It's curious that you say this after losing to Utah. A team, nobody, and I mean, NOBODY, wants to go to. However, they were able to get Boozer and Okur, two all-stars, via free agency. Sure, we can say that they lucked out now, but when they signed those guys, everyone was saying that they overpaid.

Then they've rebuilt through the draft with guys like Williams, Kirilenko, and Brewer. Seems like an ok way to rebuild to me. And you don't have to be a FA hot spot to do it.
Just like the Bulls did a couple of years ago when they had a boatload of $$$...the best FA that they were able to sign was Eddie Robinson. I could see the Pacers FO doing the same because I have little confidence in them that even with a huge bankroll of $$$ that they couldn't get a solid FA.

Maybe the change that we have to look for in the coming year has to not only come from a change in the lineup....but a change in the FO. :shrug:

CableKC
01-09-2008, 02:00 PM
It's curious that you say this after losing to Utah. A team, nobody, and I mean, NOBODY, wants to go to. However, they were able to get Boozer and Okur, two all-stars, via free agency. Sure, we can say that they lucked out now, but when they signed those guys, everyone was saying that they overpaid.

Then they've rebuilt through the draft with guys like Williams, Kirilenko, and Brewer. Seems like an ok way to rebuild to me. And you don't have to be a FA hot spot to do it.
Just like the Bulls did a couple of years ago when they had a boatload of $$$...the best FA that they were able to sign was Eddie Robinson. I could see the Pacers FO doing the same because I have little confidence in them that even with a huge bankroll of $$$ that they couldn't get a solid FA.

Maybe the change that we have to look for in the coming year has to not only come from a change in the lineup....but a change in the FO. :shrug:

Since86
01-09-2008, 03:23 PM
Come on, that's a cheap statement because you know very well that part of the problem is that there is NOT a lot of ball or player movement right now. No, running in a large circle around the outside of the paint, and passing it back and forth does not count. As for quick shots, personally I like them if it's an "in-rhythm" shot that's an honestly open look, especially off of a kick-out from the post or a driving player, but not when it's done just for the sake of shooting early (of which Tinsley and Murphy are quickly becoming masters).

It's a cheap statement because only the coach was changed. We don't have the players to run that type of offense, which is exactly why RC didn't run one, which has been my argument for nearly 2years.

Look at the offense RC ran under Bird, look at what he ran during the Brawl season. He isn't this mechanical robot that keeps his egg timer in his pocket like some on this board would like you to think he is.

He's a very, very smart coach who doesn't try to fit square pegs into round holes. He evaluated what type of players he was given and ran the best offense suited for them. It just happened that the most important position was held by a pouting immature man that felt like he should be able to play like he was on the And-1 tour.

Everyone knows it, but I'll say it again, this is a players league. That is two fold for the Indiana Pacers. They have players that want to run, but don't have the phsyical ability nor the mental ability to do so. So they got their wish, ran a coach out who saw them for what they were, and are reaping the benefits of it.

With that said, do I believe they would be better off with Rick as the coach? Nope. I think they still would be lousy, just for different variables. They still wouldn't have the talent to be good, and they wouldn't want to play for him.

Giving a pig a bath and placing it in a dress doesn't change the fact that it's a pig, which is what they did in the offseason. Getting rid of Rick for JOB supposedly cleaned up the situation, and Rush/Diener/Owens are the new dress.

Retooling by changing your 12-15th men doesn't do a damn thing. The "leaders" have only lead this team into losing and legal problems. What great examples.


I think the most telling thing about the past few years is how much this board changed. As the team sank into either legal problems or kept losing posters who were big upfront mainstays on the board have shifted to the back, we've lost the diehards who would spice things up, get banned but still find ways to come back, and the overall energy has hit rock bottom. I look at it as a pure reflection of the team. There's not much hope, and what little there is feels manufactured because we want to believe.

Something big needs to happen, whether it turns out positive or not. Risks have to be taken because at this pace high school games will have bigger turnouts.

Shade
01-09-2008, 03:28 PM
I know what our problem is, Peck. It's a lack of talent.

Most nights, I don't blame the lack of effort, just the lack of consistency and play-making ability.

We have lots of good/okay/bad players. No great players, and nobody with exceptional upside (except, maybe, Shawne Williams). Tinsley is very good (when he's healthy and playing in the right system), and is easily our best player. But he doesn't have the right players surrounding him.

I was never big on Ike, which is one reason I was so vehemently opposed to the GS trade.

We have a lot of solid guys who are also inconsistent. Granger, Dunleavy, and Quis being the most notable.

JO is not the same player he once was. The system doesn't really suit him, but it's not just that.

It's time to rebuild, not retool.

Shade
01-09-2008, 03:35 PM
Bird has said he won't make a move unless it improves us. He's also said he doesn't believe in tearing a team down and starting from scratch.

This has also been the Knicks' philosophy, and look where it has gotten them.

The problem with "staying the course" with an average team is that you're never good enough to win anything significant, and never bad enough to get a much-needed talent-infusion.

People are making fun of the Heat, but they're in a MUCH better position than we are. They won a title, and are now bad enough to get a very high draft pick next season. And they still have a very young Dwayne Wade. When Shaq's massive contract comes off the books in a couple years, Miami is going to be able to rebuild in one fell swoop ala Portland. The Blazers are the proper model for how rebuilding should be done. And if they could manage to purge those hideous contracts that they had within a couple or three years, we should be able to do the same.

d_c
01-09-2008, 03:36 PM
I know what our problem is, Peck. It's a lack of talent.

Most nights, I don't blame the lack of effort, just the lack of consistency and play-making ability.

We have lots of good/okay/bad players. No great players, and nobody with exceptional upside (except, maybe, Shawne Williams). Tinsley is very good (when he's healthy and playing in the right system), and is easily our best player. But he doesn't have the right players surrounding him.

I was never big on Ike, which is one reason I was so vehemently opposed to the GS trade.

We have a lot of solid guys who are also inconsistent. Granger, Dunleavy, and Quis being the most notable.

JO is not the same player he once was. The system doesn't really suit him, but it's not just that.

It's time to rebuild, not retool.

I would say that the biggest downfall for the Pacers has far and away been Jermaine O'neal really falling off from what he used to be. He used to be sort of the Eastern Conf Tim Duncan.

Not as good as Duncan, but still probably one of the two best bigmen in the conference. He was a workhorse. A guy who could really anchor the frontcourt who made it easier to put complementary/role playing guys on the floor.

He's just not the same as what he used to be, which is too bad because he's not that old. Two years ago, the Pacers could have demanded premium value in return for Jermaine. They can't do that any longer, and that's definitely a blow to the franchise.

d_c
01-09-2008, 03:38 PM
[quote=Will Galen;640572]

This has also been the Knicks' philosophy, and look where it has gotten them.

The problem with "staying the course" with an average team is that you're never good enough to win anything significant, and never bad enough to get a much-needed talent-infusion.

I agree. For four years, the Warriors won 38, 37, 34 and 34 wins. Nowhere good enough for the playoffs and nowhere near bad enough to get an impact player in the lottery.

Believe me, it was pretty damn tough to get out of that cycle.

Unclebuck
01-09-2008, 03:42 PM
[quote=Shade;640666]

I agree. For four years, the Warriors won 38, 37, 34 and 34 wins. Nowhere good enough for the playoffs and nowhere near bad enough to get an impact player in the lottery.

Believe me, it was pretty damn tough to get out of that cycle.

The only cycle that is tougher to get out of is the cycle of losing and not making the playoffs at all.

d_c
01-09-2008, 03:44 PM
The only cycle that is tougher to get out of is the cycle of losing and not making the playoffs at all.

The time period I mentioned with the Warriors included losing and not making the playoffs at all. The problem with their losing was that it didn't lead to getting better talent.

Shade
01-09-2008, 03:47 PM
[quote=d_c;640668]

The only cycle that is tougher to get out of is the cycle of losing and not making the playoffs at all.

We could very well be headed down that road. Last year might just have been Year One...

NapTonius Monk
01-09-2008, 03:48 PM
I don't buy into a big name signing, but I do think it would be nice if you could sign a KAPONO when you needed a 3pt ace rather than settling for Mark Price aka ball boy and Rush.

Ummmmm...did you just put Travis Diener in the same class as Mark Price? He's closer to more like Brent Price. Mark Price was a consistent all-star player, and if Diener comes up to that, we'd be better for it.

JayRedd
01-09-2008, 03:54 PM
Ummmmm...did you just put Travis Diener in the same class as Mark Price? He's closer to more like Brent Price. Mark Price was a consistent all-star player, and if Diener comes up to that, we'd be better for it.

Seth did not. Larry Bird did.

(well not really, but he compared them.)

Reeder
01-09-2008, 03:58 PM
Ummmmm...did you just put Travis Diener in the same class as Mark Price? He's closer to more like Brent Price. Mark Price was a consistent all-star player, and if Diener comes up to that, we'd be better for it.

Isn't this remark a reference to Larry Bird's comment that Diener reminded him of Mark Price? My memory may be bad, so feel free to correct if I'm mistaken.

edit: oops! Too slow!

NapTonius Monk
01-09-2008, 03:59 PM
Seth did not. Larry Bird did.

(well not really, but he compared them.)

Oh yeah...I remember that.

jmoney2584
01-09-2008, 04:24 PM
It's amazing to see the amount of people on this board coming over to the rebuild side of things. I wish we had a little black and white color spectrum in everybodys avatar block to the left and you could shade the different degrees of the dark and light.... Mine would for sure be "as black as the deepest depths of darkest africa" ( I forget what movie that quote is from, but it's a good depiction of the shade i am feeling).

Anyway, something has to be done...My question to all, if you are the GM do you wait until missing the playoffs/post-season to rebuild or do you take your chances mid season before the deadline and try and gamble on a teams chances at lotteryism and get your picks now?

PS, I hope everyone took advantage of the IU game being on ESPN last night, if not you missed your chance to see two draft entrees play last night...hang your heads in shame

Dr. Goldfoot
01-09-2008, 04:27 PM
Solid teams have veteran players with playoff experience. Those are the players that get you to the playoffs and know what to do once you get there. As I recall the Pacers have shipped off some players with alot of experience for some with none. They have 5 guys with real playoff experience....JT, JO, Rush, Daniels & Foster. Meanwhile, Reggie, Dale, Jackson, Artest, Armstrong, Crosh, Harrington, Pollard, Freddie, AJ, Peja and even Bender have all left the stable.

Since86
01-09-2008, 05:09 PM
PS, I hope everyone took advantage of the IU game being on ESPN last night, if not you missed your chance to see two draft entrees play last night...hang your heads in shame

And saw one hell of a shooting exhibition put on by EJ. He's got some serious range, a couple beyond the NBA 3pt line.

OakMoses
01-09-2008, 05:20 PM
I didn't see the game last night.

Looking at the stats, however, it would seem that if the Pacers had had an average shooting night, it would have been a fairly close game.

We shot 5-24 from 3 pt. range. If we'd shot our average 36% from 3, we'd have made 9 three's (8.6 to be exact, I'm rounding up).

We also shot 16-26 from the line. If we'd have shot our normal 74%, we'd have made 19 free throws.

If you add that up, it's 15 points.

111-104 doesn't look like such a terrible score on the road against a good Western Conference team.

We're a live and die by the jump shot team. I think we're just going to have to suck it up and live with the inconsistency until we see a change in the roster.

jmoney2584
01-09-2008, 05:32 PM
And saw one hell of a shooting exhibition put on by EJ. He's got some serious range, a couple beyond the NBA 3pt line.

I really liked the announcers quote saying he has "reggie miller range" haha.

Since86
01-09-2008, 05:38 PM
It's scary to think that he's THAT good of a shooter at the ripe age of 19. I'm honestly starting to think that he's on par with some of the best shooters in the world, and I'm not being sarcastic one bit.

He shoots over 46% from the 3pt line, which without looking at the stats from last night shot rise a bit. He does all this while never seeing the light of day. He either makes a good move off the dribble to get space, or uses a very quick catch and release.

The highlight of him on ESPN shooting where they draw the line shows he's a good 7 or so feet behind the line, that's like 26-27ft, it's crazy to see him shoot it and not think twice. Not only shoot it, but just nut it like it was a FT.

You can keep your OJ Mayo, and say he's just as good of a scorer, there's no comparison where I'm sitting. He's making teams look stupid every single night while everything is focused on him.

The more I see, the more impressed I become.

EDIT: Sorry, he's shooting 44.6% from 3. He's only been held to two games under 20pts. The first he played 12mins, because of an injury and ended up with 8pts, the other he had 15pts.

Highlites from last nights game can be found here.
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/recap?gameId=280080130

CableKC
01-09-2008, 05:47 PM
And saw one hell of a shooting exhibition put on by EJ. He's got some serious range, a couple beyond the NBA 3pt line.
Stupid question....I don't keep up with IU basketball....but I have no clue as to who EJ is.

Do you mean EG ( as in Eric Grodon )?

OnlyPacersLeft
01-09-2008, 05:49 PM
we have no go to scorer....we can't play defense...and we turn the ball over so much when our "Playmakers" try to make a play...it's sickening really. This game tonight lets all watch it with an open mind. Sure we are going to get killed...but hey it's all good! what is our record anyways? 16-20?

CableKC
01-09-2008, 05:51 PM
Anyway, something has to be done...My question to all, if you are the GM do you wait until missing the playoffs/post-season to rebuild or do you take your chances mid season before the deadline and try and gamble on a teams chances at lotteryism and get your picks now?
If an opportunity presents itself where we get players that fits our needs....then I move JONeal ( or more specifically.....the best trading asset that a team would remotely be interested in that we have IMHO that does not fit the system that JO'B put into place ) ASAP. Otherwise....I take the best offer ( whatever that is ) that I can get before the start of the draft.

Either way.....JONeal is in another different uniform by the start of the 2008-2009 season.

OnlyPacersLeft
01-09-2008, 05:54 PM
really i think danny can be a go to guy on our team. He's got that ability to get to the rim and hit jump shots as well as create his own shot. He hasn't been doing it lately but i expect it to come along and very soon.

Since86
01-09-2008, 05:54 PM
Stupid question....I don't keep up with IU basketball....but I have no clue as to who EJ is.

Do you mean EG ( as in Eric Grodon )?

Kind of, he's Eric Gordon Jr. so his nickname is EJ. (sounds better than EG I guess)

Kemo
01-09-2008, 06:16 PM
Ummmmm...did you just put Travis Diener in the same class as Mark Price? He's closer to more like Brent Price. Mark Price was a consistent all-star player, and if Diener comes up to that, we'd be better for it.


Im sorry but I disagree,

How do ANY of you Diener naysayers come up with your negativity on TD??

All I hear out of alot of you is complaining and moaning how Travis is a bust , how he sucks and how we need to get rid of him...

I just don't get it...

Here you have a guy that "can" shoot the ball , is an excellent passer/playmaker .. brings a great spark of energy to the team when he's on the court.. and hardly ever turns the ball over....


How can you base these negative assumptions off of a guy that barely sees 3 to 5 minutes off the bench behind guys that aren't near as good nor deserve the playtime any more than him at PG ... (a'la Owens and 'Quis)


How does J.O.B ... or any of you for that matter expect Diener to be an impact and a good player .. when he only sees "pity minutes" at the end of the game , or only 3 to 5 minutes... when he actually does get to play?!?!?!?!


You simply CANNOT keep a guy on the bench (clear at the end of it I might add) ... that much , and expect desired results .. How is a player supposed to develop his game, chemistry , and consistancy .. when he gets little to no PT ?? Then you guys want to complain how we dont have a good backup pg.. and blah blah ..
The problem is.. JOB cannot play JT for 40 to 48 minutes a game and expect him to be the next Allen Iverson.. it isnt gonna happen.... all it is going to do is injure JT , and screw up VALUABLE playing time for our backup pg's ... then when the time comes where JT gets injured.. we are left with 2 pg's (Diener and Owens) who are expected to fill in the void .. and it simply is unrealistic to put that kind of burden on them with not getting any pt throughout the season , to develop chemistry..


I guarantee you if he got at the very least 20 minutes per game playing time .. all of Indiana would see what he is made of... and quite possibly develop into our starter in the future...

Diener should bar-none .. come off the bench for Tinsley as his backup for right now.. and play 20 to 25 minutes...
and Owens be the 3rd string options for pg... or at least rotate minutes ... and reward good playing ..
The way it is now .. Diener could go out play 8 minutes.. score 12 points 3/4 fg and 2/4 off 3 pointers ,get 5 assists , and commit zero turnovers , and Jim O'brian rewards him by not playing him rest of the game, so JAMAAALLLL can get his 40 minutes in.. score his 10 to 15 points , his 4 to 6 assists , and turn the ball over at least 5 to 6 times ...

Then the next game .. JOB prally wont even play Diener (if he does , maybe 3 to 5 minutes if he lucky)..
Or if Tinsley gets injured.... he starts a VERY mediocre Andre Owens.. and plays 'Quis as a PG...?!?!?!??!?!


WTF is wrong with this picture...??!!?! Am I the only one with eyes to see this crap??

It just utterly floors me , and it bothers me even more when there are some people on here that want to down different players , that are geting the shaft .. over clear favortism or locker-room politics..

I really really want to like JOB .. and I have said nothing but good things about him to try and turn the Pacer's image around.. but it is getting harder and harder each day .. when I see what is going on..
I just don't see the reasoning...

Kemo
01-09-2008, 06:22 PM
ALSO to add ..

the problem with the new offense isn't so much with the players as a whole not getting it...


The problem lies with JO and JT... not "getting it"


Every single time.. that we start struggling in a game.. its like they forgot the new system they are supposed to be playing.. and it turns right back into the
"Jamaal / Jermaine Show"
where all JT does is take bad shots, hogs the ball , turns it over frequently , and JO becomes the "go-to guy" shooting horrible fade-away or turn-around jumpers..
and of course we lose... because it totally screws the offense up.. and the defense , as well as lowers the team morale ... and the whole game goes to crap from there...

Big Smooth
01-09-2008, 07:10 PM
It's scary to think that he's THAT good of a shooter at the ripe age of 19. I'm honestly starting to think that he's on par with some of the best shooters in the world, and I'm not being sarcastic one bit.

He shoots over 46% from the 3pt line, which without looking at the stats from last night shot rise a bit. He does all this while never seeing the light of day. He either makes a good move off the dribble to get space, or uses a very quick catch and release.

The highlight of him on ESPN shooting where they draw the line shows he's a good 7 or so feet behind the line, that's like 26-27ft, it's crazy to see him shoot it and not think twice. Not only shoot it, but just nut it like it was a FT.

You can keep your OJ Mayo, and say he's just as good of a scorer, there's no comparison where I'm sitting. He's making teams look stupid every single night while everything is focused on him.

The more I see, the more impressed I become.

EDIT: Sorry, he's shooting 44.6% from 3. He's only been held to two games under 20pts. The first he played 12mins, because of an injury and ended up with 8pts, the other he had 15pts.

Highlites from last nights game can be found here.
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/recap?gameId=280080130

I'm also very impressed with his body control and ability to draw fouls going to the basket. Seems like it is very difficult to draw a charge on Eric because he uses his body so well getting to the rim.

jmoney2584
01-09-2008, 08:40 PM
I'm also very impressed with his body control and ability to draw fouls going to the basket. Seems like it is very difficult to draw a charge on Eric because he uses his body so well getting to the rim.

Like i said before, the bar i tend in B-town carries direct TV so i never miss a game on the big ten network (even though they are holding the state hostage). I can't honestly remember him being called for one charge this entire year...I'm sure it has to have happened but maybe only once or so, pretty sure he leads the nation in free throws made per game as well, EJ treats the line like its a buffet...he keeps coming back for more.

CableKC
01-09-2008, 09:05 PM
Like i said before, the bar i tend in B-town carries direct TV so i never miss a game on the big ten network (even though they are holding the state hostage). I can't honestly remember him being called for one charge this entire year...I'm sure it has to have happened but maybe only once or so, pretty sure he leads the nation in free throws made per game as well, EJ treats the line like its a buffet...he keeps coming back for more.
Eric Gordon is ranked 7th in FTA this season but 3rd in FTM.

jmoney2584
01-09-2008, 09:21 PM
yea he is at 7.7 mad eper game and hansborough is at 7.9 per game but IU has played only 13 games compared to UNCs 15 so we'll see how that goes when they are all squared up schedule wise. I think i heard the announcer say coming into last nights game he was first, but who knows. point being IU never has those players AND the Pacers NEED those kind of players. A.I. and D wade both are guys that people thought too small to play the sg position but they bake their cake by drawing fouls on opposing big man which greatly changes the dynamic of the game. gotta love it

kester99
01-09-2008, 10:56 PM
Diener trying to make kemo look like a genius in the PHX game...:-p

jeffg-body
01-10-2008, 12:06 AM
I have to agree with a few of the guys in that I don't see all of the "is a bust" talk about Travis Diener. All the guy does is come out and play hard with what he has. He is not a big or a strong guy, but gives you effort and is a smart player. He's not gonna come in and be our starter, but he does well with that 10 minutes or so a night when we need someone to direct the team and not make mistakes.

I don't personally believe in talking about player contracts negatively about them because I look at it like this. If it was me at work and my boss offered me a big raise would I say no? If they can get it while they can why not? Their window is really small in the big picture of things. Look at it from this perspective average career lengths are: 5.3 years baseball, 5.1 years basketball, 4.4 years football. Put these numbers with a physical disability rate after 50 years of age around 34% and it changed my perspective.