PDA

View Full Version : Post-Game 43: Pacers get their asses Kirked.



LoneGranger33
01-23-2008, 10:51 PM
Chicago wins, Indiana loses.
Tonight, it was die by the three.
Game was won in the second quarter (and lost again in the fourth)

Dunleavy was 2 for 12.

odeez
01-23-2008, 10:59 PM
Danny looked great tonight, the rest of the team not so good, except for Foster. Our defense was ugly, allowing Kirk to score at will. Yuck!

Alpolloloco
01-23-2008, 11:00 PM
Hinrich was on fire tonight!
Who guarded him most of the time?

I lay the blame by our guards tonight, who couldn't stop Hinrich & co.

Noah was a force tonight too, matching Foster's energy.

Oneal07
01-23-2008, 11:01 PM
Kinda dis-hearting. . . but I watched the Raps beat the Celts earlier, so it's whateva right now lol

Roaming Gnome
01-23-2008, 11:01 PM
I'm losing faith in our plan, Jim. It's starting to look like mindless chucking instead of working to get good shots that are just not going in.

odeez
01-23-2008, 11:02 PM
Hinrich was on fire tonight!
Who guarded him most of the time?

I lay the blame by our guards tonight, who couldn't stop Hinrich & co.

Noah was a force tonight too, matching Foster's energy.

Diener and TINS could not stop him, well they didn't really even try, but he was knocking everything down.

Alpolloloco
01-23-2008, 11:02 PM
And this game once again proves Danny is at his best without JO in the lineup.

We only need a big defensive guy back in a trade for JO and I think we are ready to roll.

LoneGranger33
01-23-2008, 11:05 PM
And this game once again proves Danny is at his best without JO in the lineup.

We only need a big defensive guy back in a trade for JO and I think we are ready to roll.

Or we could just have JO be that guy, especially if O'Brien learns how to coach.

Bball
01-23-2008, 11:11 PM
I'm losing faith in our plan, Jim. It's starting to look like mindless chucking instead of working to get good shots that are just not going in.

I've been seeing those episodes as well.

What gets me is when we're clawing our way back into the game and then take a quick (rushed) 3. ...Which leads to the other team heading the other way for an easy score, and a momentum shift. Those quick 3's look inspiring when you hit them... and look stupid when you miss. What I'm talking about isn't necessarily a 3 without running much clock- I'm talking about a 3 that isn't necessarily open, no offensive rebounder to seen, and the shooter rushing the shot to get it off quickly.

I guess I should rephrase this- You can take a quick 3 in the flow and have good form and a good chance to make it (unless your name is Tinsley)... or you can take a rushed 3 and it just look like Sjax at his worst.

-Bball

Eindar
01-23-2008, 11:13 PM
Or we could just have JO be that guy, especially if O'Brien learns how to coach.

I'm not sure I'm comfortable paying $20+ million for a "big defensive guy", even if we had Red Auerbach or John Wooden coaching.

I'd trade anybody on our roster for my man Kirk, though. I don't care if he's having a bad year, I think it's a product of the team, not him personally.

Will Galen
01-23-2008, 11:14 PM
This game showed we need a point that can stop penetration. Until we get one people need to cool their jets and realize we're going to be more than a run of the mill team.

We just need to enjoy the wins and shrug our shoulders when they lose and be happy about stand out performances like Danny's tonight.

FG...11-18
3's...4-7
FT...7-7
RB...7
As...4
St...2
Bk...1
P....33

Kofi
01-23-2008, 11:15 PM
Tinsley and Diener's defense made Kirk Hinrich look like a first ballot Hall of Famer.

Dunleavy had a rare off night. He's shooting around 50/40/85 for the season so it's acceptable.

Granger had one of the best games of his career, maybe the best.

Diogu and Shawne Williams weren't bad in the limited minutes they got.

Foster was very nice.

LoneGranger33
01-23-2008, 11:18 PM
Career night for Hinrich. Who will get it tomorrow night?

OnlyPacersLeft
01-23-2008, 11:19 PM
with this team...I can confidently say...we are going to lose a lot of games!
JObie does nothing about the turnovers...and then when you can't hit shots you won't win many games...sucks is we have way too many wins right now...I can see us going 0-7 before we win our next game...awesome!

OnlyPacersLeft
01-23-2008, 11:20 PM
Career night for Hinrich. Who will get it tomorrow night?
skinner still play for the bucks? if not i'll say vilanueva...or charlie bell.
:buddies:

tora tora
01-23-2008, 11:25 PM
I stopped watching midway through the second quarter. Are the Pacers even practicing defense or do they emphasize on chucking up 30 three point attempts per game? Something needs to be done, this is ridiculous.

loborick
01-23-2008, 11:34 PM
This game showed we need a point that can stop penetration. Until we get one people need to cool their jets and realize we're going to be more than a run of the mill team.

We just need to enjoy the wins and shrug our shoulders when they lose and be happy about stand out performances like Danny's tonight.

FG...11-18
3's...4-7
FT...7-7
RB...7
As...4
St...2
Bk...1
P....33

Nice to see someone acknowledge Danny's game. Seems like the only time he's mentioned is negatively on here.

Dr. Goldfoot
01-23-2008, 11:41 PM
Nice to see someone acknowledge Danny's game. Seems like the only time he's mentioned is negatively on here.

This has become a very negative board. It's sad when you feel like you're defending your own team on a board dedicated to them.

Bball
01-23-2008, 11:45 PM
I stopped watching midway through the second quarter. Are the Pacers even practicing defense or do they emphasize on chucking up 30 three point attempts per game? Something needs to be done, this is ridiculous.


I thought I remembered hearing that for players to get offensive freedom they had to play defense in OBrien's system?

...Maybe I was wrong...

...Or maybe this is the best defense they can play.

And it's the backcourt defense that kills.

I actually think some aspects of our defense improves without JO. Our rotations seem better and we don't seem to leave shooters open as badly. BUT that doesn't mean much when the other team's PG can abuse our's...



-Bball

Kofi
01-23-2008, 11:50 PM
This has become a very negative board. It's sad when you feel like you're defending your own team on a board dedicated to them.

I don't think it's necessarily negativity, I think it's more people being realists and the frustration that comes along with it.

Young
01-23-2008, 11:57 PM
I thought I remembered hearing that for players to get offensive freedom they had to play defense in OBrien's system?

...Maybe I was wrong...

...Or maybe this is the best defense they can play.

And it's the backcourt defense that kills.

I actually think some aspects of our defense improves without JO. Our rotations seem better and we don't seem to leave shooters open as badly. BUT that doesn't mean much when the other team's PG can abuse our's...



-Bball

I think that Jim can demand all the defense he wants. But when you don't have good defenders, especially at the point guard spot, it doesn't matter much. On their best day Jamaal and Travis are good, Jamaal could be at least average if he gave a rats tail about defense though. At least he is more physical.

I know I had hope for Dick Harter to work magic with this team with his defensive scheme as much is said about what he did with the Pacers Finals team however two different teams. That team had a couple of good defenders on it and much is said about the basketball IQ of that team. Makes a big difference in playing good defense IMO. Also different era of basketball really, different type of basketball being played today than 2000.

The answer to our problems is the personnel of the team. I think that it just has to be accepted that as it is right now it's a .500 ball club at the best. There are some big problems and hopefully Larry can fix them.

On a side note, did anyone catch the Tennessee/Kentucky game last night? I am not happy the Vols lost but man did Kentucky know exactly how to defend them. The announcers kept on talking about how Kentucky had a "shadow defender" all night and boy did it keep Tennessee off their game. Maybe the Pacers should try that to help Jamaal and Travis defend.

CableKC
01-24-2008, 12:03 AM
Hinrich had a career night cuz he kept on scoring when Diener was guarding him. Why didn't Marquis or Rush guard him and then have Diener shift over to guard whoever else is out there?

One thing that NO ONE has noted is that Harrison returned. He only played about 9+ minutes, but I think he did a good job of detering players from driving to the hoop and clogging up the lane. He made some mistakes....but I think he did a decent job filling in for Murphy. I guarantee that if Murphy was playing.....Hinrich would probably had a better game.

I know that the +/- doesn't mean much to you guys...especially in a loss.....but you can probably guess who led the night with +3 :banghead:. I will say that he was way more effective then Ike.

LoneGranger33
01-24-2008, 12:03 AM
This has become a very negative board. It's sad when you feel like you're defending your own team on a board dedicated to them.

Personally, I praised him in the game thread, and he would have gotten a lot more from me if we had won (for Christ's sake, my name is LG33 after all). But a loss brings out the negative in me. On the bright side, I felt some nostalgia this evening for the days we had Troy Murphy available.

LoneGranger33
01-24-2008, 12:07 AM
Hinrich had a career night cuz he kept on scoring when Diener was guarding him. Why didn't Marquis or Rush guard him and then have Diener shift over to guard whoever else is out there?

One thing that NO ONE has noted is that Harrison returned. He only played about 9+ minutes, but I think he did a good job of detering players from driving to the hoop and clogging up the lane. He made some mistakes....but I think he did a decent job filling in for Murphy. I guarantee that if Murphy was playing.....Hinrich would probably had a better game.

I know that the +/- doesn't mean much to you guys...especially in a loss.....but you can probably guess who led the night with +3 :banghead:. I will say that he was way more effective then Ike.

Reading between the lines, it seems you are criticizing Lord O'Brien. Why would you do such a thing?

Hicks
01-24-2008, 12:09 AM
To all of you blaming the coach:

1) Defensively, what do you want him to do? "Hey guys, this giving up open shots strategy isn't working out, let's start getting a hand in their face. K-Thanks."

2) Offensively, do you seriously believe he coaches them to just pass around the perimeter and chuck the ball? In-game, he made a promise from day 1 to coach (during the game) on the defensive end the floor and let the offense be theres (unless they are failing to push the ball). Apparently our players suck at this. I believe he does this to get them to play for each other instead of for him for the sake of team chemistry/unity. He should not give that up and "go Carlisle" on them now, it will BLOW UP IN HIS FACE.

Look, it's becoming obvious Rick had his reasons for playing it conservatively, but the bottom line is the problem IS THESE PLAYERS. You can Carlisle them, or O'Brien them, but THEY CAN'T HANDLE IT.

LoneGranger33
01-24-2008, 12:10 AM
He could have said...Rush, you guard Kirk "Hot like a Pistol" Hinrich.

grace
01-24-2008, 12:20 AM
To all of you blaming the coach:

1) Defensively, what do you want him to do? "Hey guys, this giving up open shots strategy isn't working out, let's start getting a hand in their face. K-Thanks."

2) Offensively, do you seriously believe he coaches them to just pass around the perimeter and chuck the ball? In-game, he made a promise from day 1 to coach (during the game) on the defensive end the floor and let the offense be theres (unless they are failing to push the ball). Apparently our players suck at this. I believe he does this to get them to play for each other instead of for him for the sake of team chemistry/unity. He should not give that up and "go Carlisle" on them now, it will BLOW UP IN HIS FACE.

Look, it's becoming obvious Rick had his reasons for playing it conservatively, but the bottom line is the problem IS THESE PLAYERS. You can Carlisle them, or O'Brien them, but THEY CAN'T HANDLE IT.

The problem is Larry hired THIS coach to coach THESE players. I knew it wouldn't work. I'm not sure why no one else did.

Hicks
01-24-2008, 12:24 AM
He could have said...Rush, you guard Kirk "Hot like a Pistol" Hinrich.

So either you're saying he's a bad coach because:

1) He didn't play Kareem Rush at the point guard.

or

2) He didn't tell Travis Diener to guard Thabo Sefoloshia or Adrian Griffin.


Great. Just great.

I'm starting to think Red Auerbach, Phil Jackson, Pat Riley, Larry Brown, or Slick Leonard would look like a moron coaching this roster.

Shade
01-24-2008, 12:27 AM
I'm losing faith in our plan, Jim. It's starting to look like mindless chucking instead of working to get good shots that are just not going in.

I warned y'all of my fear of this very thing before the season...

Will Galen
01-24-2008, 12:29 AM
I don't think it's necessarily negativity, I think it's more people being realists and the frustration that comes along with it.

Disagree! If people were being realistic they wouldn't get frustrated!

Shade
01-24-2008, 12:31 AM
Look, it's becoming obvious Rick had his reasons for playing it conservatively, but the bottom line is the problem IS THESE PLAYERS. You can Carlisle them, or O'Brien them, but THEY CAN'T HANDLE IT.

I refer you to my "we need a trade" thread (http://www.pacersdigest.com/apache2-default/showthread.php?t=35780):


I have come to the conclusion that Obie and co. are getting the best they can out of the team as currently constructed. We're just an average team. That's all we're going to be until some roster changes are made.

Bball
01-24-2008, 12:35 AM
Disagree! If people were being realistic they wouldn't get frustrated!


The frustration should be aimed toward ownership and management who refuse to address glaring issues. When management makes this many mistakes for this long and yet are allowed to continue along the same path, then you have to start looking at ownership.

-Bball

Bball
01-24-2008, 12:37 AM
We're just an average team.

Darned optimists!

;)

Bball
01-24-2008, 12:48 AM
I'm starting to think Red Auerbach, Phil Jackson, Pat Riley, Larry Brown, or Slick Leonard would look like a moron coaching this roster.

But when you have roster problems, when do you start addressing them? How long has Tinsley been inconsistent on the offensive end and somewhere between bad and woeful on the defensive end? How long has JO been slowing down and bogging down the offense? How long have we been fixated on 6-9 SF's while ignoring other needs?

Most players are doing the best they can (IMO). I'd put Tinsley and Harrison into a different category tho.

I am a little curious why OBrien doesn't use the bench more. Try Shawn Williams some more. Put Owens in. I had a dream Graham played well and should be given minutes... We know what we have with most of our other players. When they can't or won't play defense, let's see if someone else can. If we need some athleticism or some offensive spark, why not go to the bench?

What's it going to hurt? We're losing. We're not in contention for anything. Isn't it time to develop players, showcase players, and otherwise start thinking about the future?

-Bball

Young
01-24-2008, 12:49 AM
The problem is Larry hired THIS coach to coach THESE players. I knew it wouldn't work. I'm not sure why no one else did.

Now Larry hasn't had an easy roster to work with.

No one wants Jamaal. No one wants Jermaine. I really have doubts anyone wants Jamaal. Honestly. I don't know who would take him. And as far as Jermaine he is very difficult to move with his salary and injury problems. I mean maybe the team could have gotten like just Lamar Odom for him but what is the point of that? Jamaal and Jermaine really have no trade value, IMO. I think that Larry has tried to get the most of Jamaal. Bringing in his old college coach, sending out AJ, bringing in DA, replacing Rick with Jim, Jamaal was a reason behind those things.

We had to get rid of Ron. But he was damaged goods.

Stephen Jackson, who was going to give up anything of real value for him? Even Al probably didn't have great trade value as the Pacers and Warriors were the only ones that had any serious interest in him when he was a free agent.

Sure, Larry took on the contracts of Dunleavy and Murphy. Murphy's sucks but what was he suppose to do? Leave Stephen Jackson on this team? Then there would be complants about him not trading Stephen.

As far as Jim goes, obviously the team needed a fresh approach. Rick lost the team. And he brought in the best canidate. I mean he wasn't going to fire Rick just to hire someone similar. Heck most fans wanted Rick gone and wanted a different approach to the game and they got it.

I'd really blame Donnie Walsh for this teams mess before Bird. Walsh brought in Ron, he gave the extensions to Bender, etc. Larry has sort of had his hands tied. Everyone needs to realize this and as said before accept what this team is, and it's not a very good team.

PaceBalls
01-24-2008, 02:25 AM
That was probably the worst game I've seen MDJr play.

Not only was it frustrating for me to watch. but I could tell the rest of the Pacers on the court were getting frustrated with him. He has been having a bad stretch of games lately, at least the ones I have seen. I have seen him look for his shot when he didn't need to and stagnate the offense. I sure hope this crap changes cause it was bad chemistry I saw tonight.

JO'B should have managed the subs better as well and yanked out MDJr when it was obvious his head was not in the game and his shot was off. It was sad seeing Danny play like an all star and everyone else totally blow this game.

owl
01-24-2008, 06:43 AM
The problem is Larry hired THIS coach to coach THESE players. I knew it wouldn't work. I'm not sure why no one else did.


It's the players problem, not the coach. This team is lacking in talent in two specific areas.
point guard and center and somewhat at power forward. Until that changes this is what
we can expect. I am with Will on this.

Mourning
01-24-2008, 07:31 AM
It's the players problem, not the coach. This team is lacking in talent in two specific areas.
point guard and center and somewhat at power forward. Until that changes this is what
we can expect. I am with Will on this.

Which is WHY we need to get good draft picks. Either to draft players or use them as commidities to get the players we want/need. THAT is why a lot of us are opposed to this 50-50 crap which will lead to nowhere.

Regards,

Mourning :cool:

Tom White
01-24-2008, 08:06 AM
no offensive rebounder to seen

-Bball

Other than perhaps Foster, that has been the team's method of operation for years. How many times, over the years, have you seen a shot go up from the perimeter and our "inside" guys start heading away from the basket before it even has a chance to clank off the rim?

That has driven me nuts for a long time.

BoomBaby33
01-24-2008, 08:11 AM
Hinrich was on fire tonight!
Who guarded him most of the time?

I lay the blame by our guards tonight, who couldn't stop Hinrich & co.

Noah was a force tonight too, matching Foster's energy.

I would be too if I was getting layups every other time down the floor. Where was Tins defense anyway? geez? He didnt look like even cared again last night.

Oh well, DunDun had a bad night. As I said, as he goes, so goes the Pacers. If he hits 50% of his his shots, we win. Rather than 17% of his shots like he did. And most of them were good looks. He wasn't passing well either, wasn't getting rebounds either. He was just off last night, that happens some times.

But props goes to Danny - career high. Congrats Danny!

Noah is one of those type of players that if he was on your team you love him, if hes on the other team, you hate him. He plays with alot of energy, like the rest of the league should. Maybe some of the Pacers could learn a little from his hustle last night.

Go get dem Bucks tonight. Watch out for the Mo and Redd show. Gotta play some perimeter D tonight for sure.

Go Pacers!

BTW - now 7-4 w/o JO

LoneGranger33
01-24-2008, 09:04 AM
So either you're saying he's a bad coach because:

1) He didn't play Kareem Rush at the point guard.

or

2) He didn't tell Travis Diener to guard Thabo Sefoloshia or Adrian Griffin.


Great. Just great.

I'm starting to think Red Auerbach, Phil Jackson, Pat Riley, Larry Brown, or Slick Leonard would look like a moron coaching this roster.

Well, I'm pretty sure the positions are fluid, as in Kareem can defend the center on one end and still play shooting guard on the other, but maybe I'm wrong. Either way, it was pretty clear what wasn't working, but Jim O'Brien stuck with it, praying for a miracle. That's why he always squats during games you know.

high school hero
01-24-2008, 09:19 AM
I really wouldn't be surprised to see Harrison starting sometime in the next 10 games. He was definitely hustling out there, and its not just because he's coming off a suspension, he's been hustling all year.
And for the Ike supporters, where are you guys again?

mins +/-
Ike 7 -14
Dun 40 -17
DG 35 -14
David 9 +3

Ike had the same +/- as Granger in ONE FIFTH of the minutes! Hahaha.
Oh, and Harrison was +3, only guy in the positive for the game. Why have people been so delusional about Ike all year? He's awful!

Hicks
01-24-2008, 09:32 AM
Ike had the same +/- as Granger in ONE FIFTH of the minutes! Hahaha.

Example #250928098098299933 of why that is a worthless stat.

Midwest Hoops
01-24-2008, 09:53 AM
Hinrich had a career night cuz he kept on scoring when Diener was guarding him. Why didn't Marquis or Rush guard him and then have Diener shift over to guard whoever else is out there?


You do realize that Kirk scored the vast majority of his points on Tins don't you? The difference between Diener and Tins is that at least Diener will try to defend. Tins is the most selfish player I have seen on the defensive end. I was shocked last night when he actually got into foul trouble. The norm is that he will never be close enough to an opponent to foul him. And if by chance he gets an early foul or two he will never be close enough to get number 3 or 4.
Also the help defense when Harrison is in the game is horrible. I can not stand watching that Spicoli wannabe take up space on the floor. I can not figure out why they would keep that loser around.

high school hero
01-24-2008, 09:57 AM
Example #250928098098299933 of why that is a worthless stat.

Worthless? JOB doesn't think its worthless. It may not tell as much as some stats, but an objective observer watching the game would likely say "wow, in David's limited minutes, he's hustled and played good help defense, had a big block and a steal" and the same person could note "Ike hasn't really done much for us out there, looks a little lost, and can't guard anyone." Without looking at the +/- stats, that person would say "that makes sense" when comparing the two.
I'll will concede that comparisons are tougher to make when its a game that overall we've gotten our butts whooped, and Granger being one of our better players was just out there for a lot of it. I don't think anyone would say Ike and Granger played equally poorly. BUT, to compare Ike and David's +/- is much more logical and really does tell us something about their performances last night.
Watching those two performances last night (Ike and David), would you have been surprised to see the +/- shake down like that? I think you'd at least expect a -8 or so out of Ike, and would expect a positive number for David.

OakMoses
01-24-2008, 10:21 AM
This was an awful loss. The second quarter and the end of the fourth quarter were nearly as frustrating as the Tinsley shot-fest at the end of the Phoenix game.

Observations:

- I'm starting to really worry about Dunleavy. I like his game as much as anyone on the team, but it's really starting to look like all of Seth's predictions about him fading after a strong start might be coming true. He's looked different the past few games to me. Last night he had good shots, but he missed them. He was coming up short on every single one of them. He's playing sloppy, slipping and falling down, and is even slower than usual on defense. I'll give him credit, he gives everything he's got whenever he's on the floor. I just don't think he has much in the tank right now. He looks like a player with no legs left.

- Granger was awesome. It was probably the most impressive game I've seen Danny play. It's really a shame that no one else showed up.

- Tinsley was awful. All of the spark, fire, and leadership that he showed early in the season are gone now. He played terrible defense, threw lots of bad passes, and generally did not want to handle the ball or create for his teammates.

- I like Diener on offense, but his defense isn't any better than Tinsley's.

- Foster played a good game. Harrison was better than Ike. Troy actually might have been useful this game, since Wallace is actually a negative offensively.

- I like the small lineup, but we've been getting killed on the boards lately. The numbers don't show it from last night, but if you watched the game, it seemed like we could never get a defensive rebound.

- Rush didn't play a bad game, but he's a better player when other people create shots for him. No one was doing that last night.

- Daniels was decent on the defensive end, but his offense has dissappeared. Everytime I saw him last night I wished he was Stephen Graham.

- The only thing I blame O'Brien for in last night's loss was playing Dunleavy so much in the 4th quarter. By that time it was obvious that he wasn't giving us much. Rush or Williams or Graham or Daniels would have given us more.

- For our offense to work well, we need to have two creative players on the floor at once. Without JO, we really only have 4 creative players on the roster: Tinsley, Dunleavy, Daniels, and Diener. JO can be, and often is, a creative player when he's passing the ball well from the post. He also forces doubleteams often; this creates open space for our shooters. Last night Tins had no desire to even be playing a basketball game. Dunleavy is really only effective as a creator when his shot is going down. Daniels seems to always look to shoot first. Diener played a fine game but was getting abused by Hinrich. That we have to rely on these four guys to win games is not a good thing.

Hicks
01-24-2008, 10:21 AM
I've said this many times, that stat is being used to judge 1 person while being created based on what TEN people are doing on the floor!

Dr. Goldfoot
01-24-2008, 10:44 AM
I enjoyed watching the game. I wish they would have won. I wont be able to watch tonight so I'm sure everyone will have career nights.

high school hero
01-24-2008, 10:50 AM
I've said this many times, that stat is being used to judge 1 person while being created based on what TEN people are doing on the floor!

That's true. What is also true is you're ignoring the impact one person can have on a game. If one person comes in the game, plays good help defense, blocks/alters some shots, it will positively affect his 4 teammates, and if they're all playing well as 5, they can outplay the other team's 5. Thus, the +/- stat, which is created based on what ten people are doing, can be correlated to what one person brought to his 4 teammates. It can also be correlated to what he's taken away from his 4 teammates (Ike).

JayRedd
01-24-2008, 11:23 AM
The problem is Larry hired THIS coach to coach THESE players. I knew it wouldn't work. I'm not sure why no one else did.

Excuse me?

The worst shooting team in the league hired the most shot happy coach in the League and it's not working out? Not even Nostradamus could have foretold that.

Still, I think a lot of yall are overreacting. Getting the proper personnel is gonna be a multi-year process. But so far, Dunleavy has exceeded everyone's expectations. Danny is evolving nicely. Rush has worked out fantastically. Diener can be a fine 10 mpg guy in this League. Shawne is getting better by the day.

Everything else, of course, needs lots of work.


I am a little curious why OBrien doesn't use the bench more. Try Shawn Williams some more. Put Owens in. I had a dream Graham played well and should be given minutes... We know what we have with most of our other players. When they can't or won't play defense, let's see if someone else can. If we need some athleticism or some offensive spark, why not go to the bench?

What's it going to hurt? We're losing. We're not in contention for anything. Isn't it time to develop players, showcase players, and otherwise start thinking about the future?

I sorta disagree with this.

While it would be nice to see Shawne in there more (especially when Junior is playing like he did last night) but I for one, don't want Jimmy getting all crazy yanking people off the floor and putting in crazy fourth quarter lineups that aren't sustainable. It's my belief that you put your best players on the floor at the end of a game. If they can't get it done, you're probably gonna lose.

If it's a playoff game and it's a win or go home scenario, sure, try Owens or Graham in the final few mintues if no one else is getting it done and that might help you claw out a victory. But when it's mid-January and you're coaching a team with positively 0% chance at contending for anything, yanking your players when they're struggling might do more harm than good.

Jimmy's developing his team. And that comes ahead of developing individual players.

He's letting Mike and Danny and Jamaal (hopefully just temporarilly) know that it's there team. And, IMO, it does little good to undermine the months-long process of instilling that concept and notion just to win some essentially meaningless game.

As for personnel, like I said, it'll take time. We'll make a tweak in February. Then do some more this summer. We'll get more guys that fit Jimmy's style. He's not going to change the way he coaches, and no one should expect him to change.

I don't think anyone in the organization thinks this is good team. They know that moves need to be made and issues need to be addressed. Unfortunately, it's just gonna take another 12 months to start getting the ship back on track. There's no magic formula.

And even me, a cynic with zero faith in our roster as currently constructed, doesn't think we're all that far away. We have about 5-6 guys that could fit into a successful 10-man rotation. Find a new PG, add in say, a Raja Bell and a Sean Williams (NJ) and we'd be very close to being a good team again.

Would we win a trophy? No. But we'd be relevent again and have something to build on for 2010-2011...which is honestly where we need to be looking...And not April 2008. It took a while to get in this mess, and it's gonna take a while to climb out.

Like Brett Michaels once said, "All we need is just a little patience...Baby we can make it."

Hicks
01-24-2008, 11:34 AM
JayRedd I agree with basically everything you just said, but to be fair with Jim here and essentially the same roster we're now in the middle of the NBA in shooting, not the bottom (Literally #15 in the league in EFG%).

Bball
01-24-2008, 11:41 AM
I sorta disagree with this.

While it would be nice to see Shawne in there more (especially when Junior is playing like he did last night) but I for one, don't want Jimmy getting all crazy yanking people off the floor and putting in crazy fourth quarter lineups that aren't sustainable. It's my belief that you put your best players on the floor at the end of a game. If they can't get it done, you're probably gonna lose.

If it's a playoff game and it's a win or go home scenario, sure, try Owens or Graham in the final few mintues if no one else is getting it done and that might help you claw out a victory. But when it's mid-January and you're coaching a team with positively 0% chance at contending for anything, yanking your players when they're struggling might do more harm than good.

Jimmy's developing his team. And that comes ahead of developing individual players.

He's letting Mike and Danny and Jamaal (hopefully just temporarilly) know that it's there team. And, IMO, it does little good to undermine the months-long process of instilling that concept and notion just to win some essentially meaningless game.

As for personnel, like I said, it'll take time. We'll make a tweak in February. Then do some more this summer. We'll get more guys that fit Jimmy's style. He's not going to change the way he coaches, and no one should expect him to change.

I don't think anyone in the organization thinks this is good team. They know that moves need to be made and issues need to be addressed. Unfortunately, it's just gonna take another 12 months to start getting the ship back on track. There's no magic formula.


Like Brett Michaels once said, "All we need is just a little patience...Baby we can make it."

I wasn't advocating throwing the bench in trying to get a win, I was saying we're already losing, let's see what the bench guys can do because we have nothing to lose and everything to gain. We might find that with minutes they actually develop quicker and bring some things to the court that warrants their getting some playing time, or being better used situationally. They might even impress enough to raise their trade value making them attractive filler in a deal.

I suppose if I was sold that we're putting the best 'team' out of the floor already then I'd agree with you... but I think we're still at the point where you could say "if this is all we got, we ain't got much!". Just because a player is "potentially" better is no substitute for consistency. And I still believe defense needs to take some priority.

If you have Danny scoring at a career high, what's it going to hurt to sub Jamaal out and try and get some defensive pressure on Hinrich? Particularly when he's negating Danny's game single handedly and Jamaal is bringing nothing anyway....

If we were running a true motion game, I'm not sure how important Jamaal is anyway. But then, we're not running a true motion game. Players are not reading and reacting, screening, using screens.... as much as they are chucking up shots.

As Axl Rose once sang "Every Rose Has it's Thorn"

;)

-Bball

CableKC
01-24-2008, 11:42 AM
Reading between the lines, it seems you are criticizing Lord O'Brien. Why would you do such a thing?
This goes back to one of those comments that somebody made about JO'Bs poor in-game decision making skills......after the 1st 10+ points that Hinrich is scoring on the your 6'1" PG, you would think that someone would figure out that it maybe a good idea to possibly switch up the defensive assignments so that Hinrich doesn't go on to score another 10+ points on him again.

Everytime that Diener was guarding Hinrich.....Hinrich would post him up and score. There were times when he was hot and was hitting every shot....but it was just sad to see a much stronger Hinrich back into the 175 pound Diener in the Low-post and score over him.

Unclebuck
01-24-2008, 11:43 AM
- I'm starting to really worry about Dunleavy. I like his game as much as anyone on the team, but it's really starting to look like all of Seth's predictions about him fading after a strong start might be coming true. He's looked different the past few games to me. Last night he had good shots, but he missed them. He was coming up short on every single one of them. He's playing sloppy, slipping and falling down, and is even slower than usual on defense. I'll give him credit, he gives everything he's got whenever he's on the floor. I just don't think he has much in the tank right now. He looks like a player with no legs left.



What? I freely admit, that I didn't see any of the game against the Bulls, so perhaps, Dunleavy looked really bad, but prior to last night Mike had played several really good games. In the Sixers game and the two against the Warriors, Mike played extremely well.

Hicks
01-24-2008, 11:50 AM
Yeah, one game is not a pattern.

Dr. Goldfoot
01-24-2008, 11:56 AM
I know you guys are just reacting to an over-reaction but MDJ hasn't played well over the last 5, really. I'm not saying we should just waive him and cut our loses but he is shooting 41% from the field, 27% from the arc & 4.2 T/O. To his credit, he's attacking the basket and rebounding well. He's inconsistent but still one of our better players.

thunderbird1245
01-24-2008, 12:18 PM
Lots of good thoughts in this thread, and I wanted to add mine.

1. I don't understand the panic or despair from some of you. The Pacers are what they are, a roster full of mediocre veterans, young guys with talent who aren't ready, and guys with limitations. This is our team. Expecting more than they are capable of, results wise, is just the fan in all of us coming out.

2. Our coach is not a guy who changes his system to suit the players. Like I said last summer when he was hired, he is a "true believer". He expects the players to adapt to him, not the other way around. Some guys improve playing like that, some guys will get worse. O'Brien is psychologically incapable of coaching a different style, so if he is our guy then we need to adapt the roster to have guys who fit his style better, and that takes time. It will probably take us a couple ofyears to get out of the roster/financial/cap mess we are in now, it's not something that can be done overnight.

3. I said this in another thread a few months back, but it bears repeating again: I love love love Kirk Hinrich as a basketball player. He plays with really great effort every night, he defends exceptionally hard to his utmost ability, and he plays very mistake free basketball. He is routinely ripped in Chicagi sports radio as not being a "true point" guard, but in my mind he is the ideal player to play for us. In my view, acquiring Hinrich should be one of, if not the top, priority in the off season....and I think it can be done. I'll try and work on a realisitic scenario later in the trade forum.

4. Our defense is what is losing us games. The lack of a true defensive role player/stopper on the perimeter is our main weakness. We don't have a Raja Bell, Teyshaun Prince, or Bruce Bowen on our roster. I wanted Aaron Afflalo real bad from the last draft to fill that spot but we didn't have a pick, and couldn't pull of a way to get him.

My desire to add Quinton Ross from the LA Clippers is well known on this board. I think he makes a ton of sense and would be cheap to get. I also think the Knicks Renaldo Blackmon could be had in the right deal.

Overall, we just need to get a plan in place, stick with it, and slowly build our way piece by piece, in a financially smart way. We have a style that can work, we just need to figure out which type players fit it better, and slowly acquire them. Rome wasn't built in a day.

JayRedd
01-24-2008, 12:22 PM
to be fair with Jim here and essentially the same roster we're now in the middle of the NBA in shooting, not the bottom (Literally #15 in the league in EFG%).

Not trying to unfair to JO'B at all. Meant that we were dead in FG% last season and was implying that we should have seen this coming because of that.

In fact, it's a huge credit to JO'B's system that we actually have five guys shooting over 37% from three. And that (obviously) doesn't include Diener who's obviously getting open shots and starting to knock down at least some of them.

To Bball...I do agree with you somewhat and certainly see where you're coming from (a first?).

Just trying to point out that there is another, long-term team-building concept at play too. We've already done a significant amount of "throw it against the wall and see what sticks." Andre didn't stick. He's not good. I know he plays some D, but until we make a real PG change, we're gonna live and die with Jamaal's inconsistant abilities and effort. And more important than having a PG out there that helps us win games, we need a PG out there that can properly run Jimmy's offense and allow Danny, MDJ, Shawne, Ike, etc., to learn it inside and out and continue to develop.

I think Jimmy has figured that out and, knowing what he knows about Jamaal and looking at what he has on the bench next to him for other options, he probably doesn't want to lose Tinsley entirely.

So if he leaves him in throughout the 4th Quarter last night, sure, we'll continue to get roasted by their elf-looking PG. But J'OB can then show this tape to Jamaal later and point out the problems in both his defensive effort and technique. Talk to him like a man and say "Jamaal, we can't have this...You're our PG, but if this type of lackluster effort on D continues down the stretch, than I'm going to have to give Andre a shot."

I know this sort of acquiescing, kid-gloves style towards the soft and cry-baby tendencies of Jamaal infuriates a lot of yall. And that's certainly understandable. But he is who he is and right now he's all we got. And him being disgruntled isn't going to help us out at all. It's not gonna help us win 40 games this year. It's not gonna help Danny, Mike, Ike, Shawne, etc. try to develop. It's not gonna help us not look incredibly desperate when Bird is calling other GMs before the deadline to work out deals.

The Scott Skiles approach of "yank him out the game and sit his *** on the bench to teach him a lesson" may sound good, but do we really think that's going to get through to Jamaal Tinsley?

Maybe it's the right thing to do in principle. But sometimes principles need to be put to the side when faced with reality. And in my version of reality, trying to be a strict disiplinarian with Jamaal by publicly embarrassing him and making him sit on the end of the bench during the 4th Quarter isn't likely to be effective. And the last thing I want is Danny and Mike trying to master this offense for the rest of the year with Diener and/or Andre Owens running the show. They could learn more playing down at the YMCA than playing like that.

Dr. Goldfoot
01-24-2008, 12:52 PM
Two well thought out posts in row.

Thunderbird your first point is much needed and with your rep on here hopefully people stop and read it. Everyone knew this team wasn't much headed into the season ( see attendance) but too many expect greatness. The Pacers aren't at the top of the standings but they aren't at the bottom either. In fact, they're tied for the final playoff spot with the Nets and trail the Hawks by half a game. Both of those teams are struggling right now with 6 and 4 game losing streaks. The Hawks have a 4 game western road trip and the Nets are on a western road trip right now. The Pacer face the Bucks and Heat before having 11 of the next 15 at home. There's a possibility JO will return in that time frame. Your second point is something a number of people can't seem to grasp. This year's Celtics and the Spurs drafting of Tim Duncan are an exception to the rule. Teams are not rebuilt overnight. There are a few pieces already on the roster that can be used to build a foundation in the future. I'll skip the third point and go straight to the fourth. I was an advocate of trying to lure Greg Buckner here over the summer and realize the void Ron Artest left in his wake out on the perimeter defensively. A plan....stick with it....1000 points of light....don't be rash.

JayRedd, I seem to get brushed to the side whenever I mention the Pacers have already done enough "throw it against the wall and see what sticks". The answer isn't to keep changing everything it's to start molding a team. This isn't NBA Live or whatever game people play these days. These are actual people with everyday people stuff. You can't just keep changing the "family". We need a sense of security, bonds between players, cohesiveness, awareness, etc... I tend to think JT's ego is fragile. It's not so much that he needs to be coddled but he gets his feeling hurt. He was "de-activated" and ever since he's not vocal on the floor, passing up shots that even the most ardent Tinsley bounty hunter would approve of and is strictly playing by the book(not taking chances with passes etc..) That's not Jamaal Tinsley that's a guy who's been demoralized.

Dr. Goldfoot
01-24-2008, 01:07 PM
Something I forgot to touch on with T-Bird's post was the "role players". It seems like everyone's focusing on the Jason Kidd's, Vince Carter's, Richard Jefferson's and forgetting about players 6-12 where I think the Pacers are severely lacking. Those are the guys that lose games generally. JOB isn't satisfied with his backup point guards which is why three players have filled that spot sporadically. He can't be satisfied with his 4/5 's either. The Pacers have once again found themselves to be rich with what Larry Bird describes to be the easiest positions to fill the 2/3 spot. I know everyone loves our "depth" but come on.

OakMoses
01-24-2008, 01:14 PM
What? I freely admit, that I didn't see any of the game against the Bulls, so perhaps, Dunleavy looked really bad, but prior to last night Mike had played several really good games. In the Sixers game and the two against the Warriors, Mike played extremely well.

First things first: I like Mike Dunleavy. I'd love to see him play out the rest of his contract as a Pacer.

My observations are based largely on the last three games. The game last night was the worst one I can remember seeing Dunleavy play. He was just plain bad last night. He left everything short, brick off the front of the rim short. When he drove, he'd either get the ball stolen or fall down. He looked slow on defense and Nocioni was blowing by him left and right. During the Philly game he shot well, but I saw a lot of the same problems with the falling down when driving, getting swamped in traffic, etc. In the Sacramento game there was a little bit of both. It could just be a result of being guarded by more physical-type players, but I'm not sure.

This wasn't something I expected to show up in the stat sheet, but it's something that bears watching. I'd love it if Dunleavy came out and played a great game against Milwaukee tonight. I won't be able to watch because I'll be on the road tonight, but just watch him and see if he looks a little less steady than he did earlier in the season. I could be crazy. He is playing about 5 mpg more than his career average, but he seems to be in great shape. I don't know, it was just an observation.

Seth - Where do you get your info. about Dunleavy starting fast and fading? I checked his splits for the last few seasons, and his November stats don't seem to be any better than any other month.

One more thing - I'm having trouble remembering exact instances, but the Pacers were doing a fair amount of cross-matching last night. The Bulls started the game with Sefolosha and Hinrich. Rush may have started out guarding Hinrich, I'm not sure. I know that at one point Diener was guarding Adrian Griffin. That didn't work out well. Griffin went straight to the post and beat up on Travis. The point is that Hinrich was torching everybody. O'Brien tried other matchups at times, but nothing really worked.

Since86
01-24-2008, 01:15 PM
I know you guys are just reacting to an over-reaction but MDJ hasn't played well over the last 5, really. I'm not saying we should just waive him and cut our loses but he is shooting 41% from the field, 27% from the arc & 4.2 T/O. To his credit, he's attacking the basket and rebounding well. He's inconsistent but still one of our better players.

Prior to last night he was shooting 46% in the past 4 games combined. His overall shooting % is going down because he is struggling from the 3pt line, shooting only 26.6% from behind the arc in the past five games.

He's averaging 18.2 pts, 7.4rbs, 3.4 assists, 1 steal, and 4.2 TOs over the past 5 games. Compared to his 17.4 pts, 5.9 rbs, 3.1 assists, 1.1 steals, and 2.49 TO for the season.

His play for the past 5 games is reflecting the entire season. Up in some areas, down in others, then the trend reverses and it all averages out to where he currently is.

EDIT: One thing I do find very interesting through 43 games played, the Ps have had 19 home games and 24 road games. Their record? 19-24.

jeffg-body
01-24-2008, 01:31 PM
Kudos to Danny G. for being the dominant guy for us. Too bad Hinrich couldn't miss a shot. Dun played very average and this happens sometimes to even the best of players. I remember watching a spurs game earlier this year and seeing Duncan have a real off game scoring like 5 points. It happens, the wear and tear of 82 games will inevitably have an off night now and then.

Will Galen
01-24-2008, 01:34 PM
I've said this many times, that stat is being used to judge 1 person while being created based on what TEN people are doing on the floor!

I like the Wages of Wins, stats.

One of the basics of it is the authors show players in the light of what they do at both ends of the court, and how much their play contributed to the end result.

One of the things they track is what they call the Win Score. The way this is computed is they add points, Rebs, Steals, 1/2ast, and 1/2bks. They they take away FGA, TO's, 1/2FTA, and 1/2fouls. When it's totaled up it gives a win score. Last night the Pacers WS's were,

Daniels......-1.5
Diner.........+.5
Diogu........+4
Dunleavy...-.5
Foster.......+11
Graham.....-1
Granger.....+19.5
Harrison.....+1
Owens......+2
Rush........+.5
Tinsley......0
Williams.....-2.5

I've ordered the book so I can take a hard look at it.

http://dberri.wordpress.com/2006/05/21/simple-models-of-player-performance/




Chapter Excerpts<o>:p></o>:p>



Detailed Table of Contents (http://www.wagesofwins.com/toc.htm)<o>:p></o>:p>



Preface Excerpt (http://www.wagesofwins.com/WOWPreface.htm)<o>:p></o>:p>



Chapter 1 Excerpt (http://www.wagesofwins.com/WOWCh1.htm)<o>:p></o>:p>



Chapter 2 Excerpt (http://www.wagesofwins.com/WOWCh2.htm)<o>:p></o>:p>



Chapter 3 Excerpt (http://www.wagesofwins.com/WOWCh3.htm)<o>:p></o>:p>



Chapter 4 Excerpt (http://www.wagesofwins.com/WOWCh4.htm)<o>:p></o>:p>



Chapter 5 Excerpt (http://www.wagesofwins.com/WOWCh5.htm)<o>:p></o>:p>



Chapter 6 Excerpt (http://www.wagesofwins.com/WOWCh6.htm)<o>:p></o>:p>



Chapter 7 Excerpt (http://www.wagesofwins.com/WOWCh7.htm)<o>:p></o>:p>



Chapter 8 Excerpt (http://www.wagesofwins.com/WOWCh8.htm)<o>:p></o>:p>



Chapter 9 Excerpt (http://www.wagesofwins.com/WOWCh9.htm)<o>:p></o>:p>



Chapter 10 Excerpt (http://www.wagesofwins.com/WOWCh10.htm)

CableKC
01-24-2008, 01:35 PM
4. Our defense is what is losing us games. The lack of a true defensive role player/stopper on the perimeter is our main weakness. We don't have a Raja Bell, Teyshaun Prince, or Bruce Bowen on our roster. I wanted Aaron Afflalo real bad from the last draft to fill that spot but we didn't have a pick, and couldn't pull of a way to get him.

My desire to add Quinton Ross from the LA Clippers is well known on this board. I think he makes a ton of sense and would be cheap to get. I also think the Knicks Renaldo Blackmon could be had in the right deal.
I betcha that TPTB doesn't recognize this and continues to go for another "shooter" in the offseason thinking that the offense is the problem.

This is how much confidence that I have in the Front Office. :banghead:

I wouldn't be surprised if they think that we can get by with Rush, Granger and Marquis as our perimeter defenders. BTW.....although I like what Rush is doing for our team.....and would do our best to resign him...I wouldn't be surprised if he decides to bolt for greener pastures now that he has worked up his market value...or ( worse ) we end up overpaying for him.

high school hero
01-24-2008, 02:10 PM
I like the Wages of Wins, stats.

One of the basics of it is the authors show players in the light of what they do at both ends of the court, and how much their play contributed to the end result.

One of the things they track is what they call the Win Score. The way this is computed is they add points, Rebs, Steals, 1/2ast, and 1/2bks. They they take away FGA, TO's, 1/2FTA, and 1/2fouls. When it's totaled up it gives a win score. Last night the Pacers WS's were,

Daniels......-1.5
Diner.........+.5
Diogu........+4
Dunleavy...-.5
Foster.......+11
Graham.....-1
Granger.....+19.5
Harrison.....+1
Owens......+2
Rush........+.5
Tinsley......0
Williams.....-2.5

I've ordered the book so I can take a hard look at it.




That's an interesting way of calculating, but how is that going to show Ike's defensive liabilities? I do like the stat, but that certainly doesn't tell the whole story either. Naturally, such a stat fails to capture some of the player's intangibles, which is what I like about the +/-.

Indianapolis_girly
01-24-2008, 04:11 PM
Bleh, I've never liked Kirk Hinrich.
I don't know why, I just don't like him.

Danny was on fire last night.
That's the only really good thing.
Hopefully he can keep that up tonight!

Isaac
01-24-2008, 04:13 PM
Before the game I talked some defense with Dick Harter. We talked about strategies for rotating when you are fronting the post and whether or not this defense needs guys with a lot of lateral foot speed. Dick was clearly disheartened by the way this team has played defense this year and it was on display last night.

Since86
01-24-2008, 04:34 PM
That's an interesting way of calculating, but how is that going to show Ike's defensive liabilities? I do like the stat, but that certainly doesn't tell the whole story either. Naturally, such a stat fails to capture some of the player's intangibles, which is what I like about the +/-.

And how does the +/- stat capture some of the player's intangibles?

It doesn't. It only reflects the score when the player is in the game. If I'm in the game for 4mins, and there's a bad shot taken or a turnover committed by my teammates, my man never scores, and we go down 12 more points in the process, my +/- stat is a -12. How does that capture the intangibles that I bring to the floor?

It doesn't, especially over a one game span.

+/- stats are useful if you look at them over a period of time, meaning multiple games, or if you want to see how a particular unit does with each other. Other than that it's a **** poor number crunching stat that Hollingsworth (or whoever he is) uses, that sucks in reality.

Hicks
01-24-2008, 04:56 PM
Before the game I talked some defense with Dick Harter. We talked about strategies for rotating when you are fronting the post and whether or not this defense needs guys with a lot of lateral foot speed. Dick was clearly disheartened by the way this team has played defense this year and it was on display last night.

That's pretty cool. How'd you manage to get to talk with him?

Isaac
01-24-2008, 05:23 PM
That's pretty cool. How'd you manage to get to talk with him?

Every time the Pacers play in Chicago I come an hour and a half early to talk with guys. Its always extremely easy, especially the last couple years because I'm the only one there that is actually a Pacers fan.

Kofi
01-24-2008, 05:55 PM
Ike has played well in what little time he has seen the past few games. Hopefully he can slowly start getting more playing time.

MyFavMartin
01-24-2008, 06:07 PM
Ike has played well in what little time he has seen the past few games. Hopefully he can slowly start getting more playing time.

Article today stated that JOB is staying with small ball and Ike will be splitting time at center with Foster, Harrison, Murphy, and JO (when he returns)... 40 min divided by 4 or 5 guys = 8-10 minutes per.

I wish we'd return to big ball and move Dun to the bench...

Tin
Rush
Granger
Ike (til JO returns)
Foster

Daniels
Dun
Williams
Diener / Owens (dep on matchup)
Murphy
Graham

Though the way Graham played the other night, maybe he should get Daniels minutes...

Trade Dun while his stock is high and get an expiring and a 1st rounder.

high school hero
01-24-2008, 06:13 PM
And how does the +/- stat capture some of the player's intangibles?

It doesn't. It only reflects the score when the player is in the game. If I'm in the game for 4mins, and there's a bad shot taken or a turnover committed by my teammates, my man never scores, and we go down 12 more points in the process, my +/- stat is a -12. How does that capture the intangibles that I bring to the floor?

It doesn't, especially over a one game span.

+/- stats are useful if you look at them over a period of time, meaning multiple games, or if you want to see how a particular unit does with each other. Other than that it's a **** poor number crunching stat that Hollingsworth (or whoever he is) uses, that sucks in reality.


Well in your hypo it sounds like you don't have any intangibles :)
Intangibles such as people not wanting to bring it in the lane if you're a big guy, intangibles such as being able to lock down a solid perimeter player if you're a guard. You don't necessarily steal the ball or rebound to show your worth on a stat sheet, but if the other team is being forced into a lot of bad shots, and they aren't making them, your +/- will be higher.
If you provide an emotional spark for your team somehow, by hustle, or by a big block etc, yeah you'll get the credit for the block, but if your team gets hyped up and you go on a 6-0 run, and the other 4 guys start busting their butts because you're busting yours, that's an intangible.
Diving to save a ball as its going out of bounds (and will be a turnover) creates an extra possession for your team (a +2 opportunity) but that's not going to show up in the stats either.
There's plenty more, but hopefully you get the idea. I'm not saying its a perfect stat, but it helps to capture some of the intangibles.

As for whoever said its better to look at the whole year for trends etc, I generally agree, though some individual game +/- stats certainly show a high correspondance to what they objectively brought to that particular game.

Tom White
01-24-2008, 06:49 PM
Trade Dun while his stock is high and get an expiring and a 1st rounder.

I'm a fan of Dun, but still......

Who in the world is going to give a 1st to the Pacers for him?

Kofi
01-24-2008, 07:09 PM
I'm a fan of Dun, but still......

Who in the world is going to give a 1st to the Pacers for him?

With the way he's been playing this year, I think a lot of teams would. Not only a 1st, but a decent 1st. He has such a complete game (outside of defense) and is such an efficient scorer, he'd help a lot teams, either as a starter or a great 6th man.

Hicks
01-24-2008, 07:54 PM
I'm a fan of Dun, but still......

Who in the world is going to give a 1st to the Pacers for him?

I think more than a couple teams. We're talking about a nice complimentary player who puts up 18 points 6 rebounds and 3 assists (and I think a steal) a game. That's a good to very good player. A young one with a pretty fair contract. Antonio Davis got you the 5th pick in '99.

Since86
01-25-2008, 04:02 PM
Well in your hypo it sounds like you don't have any intangibles :)
Intangibles such as people not wanting to bring it in the lane if you're a big guy, intangibles such as being able to lock down a solid perimeter player if you're a guard. You don't necessarily steal the ball or rebound to show your worth on a stat sheet, but if the other team is being forced into a lot of bad shots, and they aren't making them, your +/- will be higher.
If you provide an emotional spark for your team somehow, by hustle, or by a big block etc, yeah you'll get the credit for the block, but if your team gets hyped up and you go on a 6-0 run, and the other 4 guys start busting their butts because you're busting yours, that's an intangible.
Diving to save a ball as its going out of bounds (and will be a turnover) creates an extra possession for your team (a +2 opportunity) but that's not going to show up in the stats either.
There's plenty more, but hopefully you get the idea. I'm not saying its a perfect stat, but it helps to capture some of the intangibles.

As for whoever said its better to look at the whole year for trends etc, I generally agree, though some individual game +/- stats certainly show a high correspondance to what they objectively brought to that particular game.

No it doesn't because the only time you get any change in your +/- score is when the actual game score changes. I could come up with a steal every possession I'm in the game, say for 3mins, but my team struggle on the offensive end and turn it right back over or just miss the shot. So what happens to my +/-? Nothing. Not a damn thing. It would remain at zero because the overall score of the game didn't change.

I could be a hustle player that dives after every loose ball, fights for every rebound, plays great on ball and helpside defense, take good shots, and doesn't turn the ball over, but if we get outscored by two points while I'm in the game my score is -2.

It doesn't measure anything other than the change in the overall game score, which is affected by 10 different players, which you just happen to be one of. So there are 9 other players that affect YOUR score directly.

It's a worthless stat because it only revolves around actual points scored. I find it funny that you say it measures the "intangibles" when the stat doesn't reflect FG%, rebounds, steals, assists, or any other measurable stat.

I sound like a broken record but it only reflects the change in the actual game score and nothing else.

Shade
01-26-2008, 11:27 AM
I think more than a couple teams. We're talking about a nice complimentary player who puts up 18 points 6 rebounds and 3 assists (and I think a steal) a game. That's a good to very good player. A young one with a pretty fair contract. Antonio Davis got you the 5th pick in '99.

Do you think we could combine our 1st rounder with Dun for a Top 5 pick?

Hicks
01-26-2008, 11:34 AM
Do you think we could combine our 1st rounder with Dun for a Top 5 pick?

Maybe.

Speed
01-26-2008, 12:11 PM
Do you think we could combine our 1st rounder with Dun for a Top 5 pick?

This is one good thing that may have come out of this season. Dunleavy is seen as a commodity instead of a drain on a salary cap. I really wonder if other GMs have noticed him playing well?