PDA

View Full Version : REAL GM Auditing the Pacers



andreialta
05-11-2008, 07:48 PM
http://pacers.realgm.com/articles/133/20080508/auditing_the_pacers_2007-08_season/
Auditing The Pacers 2007-08 Season
Authored by Christopher Reina - May 8, 2008 - 7:56 pm


Nearly everything that made the Pacers a title contender between 2002 and 2005 has been wiped away; Rick Carlisle, Ron Artest and Stephen Jackson are now long gone, Donnie Walsh is in New York and Jermaine O'Neal was a shadow of himself this season when he was even on the floor.

This has become Danny Granger's team with Mike Dunleavy as his running mate, but there is a severe lack of quality frontline players beyond these two and are unlikely to get a franchise-caliber player in the draft due to their late lottery slot.

The Pacers were 19th in FIC differential at -3.8 per game, which was a decrease from last season when they were at -0.9 per game. They have the kind of team that will be mediocre indefinitely, winning 30-35 games per year unless they allow themselves to get bad.

Player: Overall Rank, Season FIC, Per 40 FIC, Reina Value

- Mike Dunleavy: 38th, 1018, 13.8, +46%

Fans in Oakland that lost Dunleavy from their radar would be shocked to learn he was the 38th most productive player in the NBA and 'deserved' to make $12 million. Last season Dunleavy had a per 40 FIC of 11.5, so Hedo Turkoglu's jump from 10.1 to 14.0 clearly is in a whole different strata, but it is a sizable improvement nonetheless.

He is physically and mentally stronger than he ever was in Golden State and his shooting percentage rose to 47.6% as he shot fewer jumpers than ever before in his career. The Warriors came to learn that Dunleavy wasn't a pure shooter but he did make 165 of the 389 3-pointers he attempted (42.4%).

He still is a liability on the defensive end of the floor but is one of the only reliable players on their club. If they can get an infusion of talent (at the point guard position) through the draft, Dunleavy will be a nice fourth piece.

Furthermore, Dunleavy had the highest on/off net on the Pacers with a +7.9.

- Danny Granger: 46th, 938, 13.0, +602%

Granger trailed Dunleavy by a few slots in overall FIC, but was probably the most important player on their roster night in/night out.

The Pacers were 5.3 points per 100 possessions better when Granger was off the floor, which flies in the face of people who believe he is a significantly better defender than Dunleavy.

His field goal percentage had decreased in each of his first three seasons, but his 3-point shooting has improved. His shot selection has remained fairly static, but he is creating more of his own offense than ever before.

He improved as the season progressed and was averaging 24.8 and 7.0 on 47.9% shooting (44.8% from three) in the month of April.

Like Dunleavy, Granger has great versatility for a player of his size, but doesn't have the necessary skills to be anything more than a complementary player.

- Troy Murphy: 73rd, 782, 14.9, -9%

Murphy's rebound rate remains down from his stat padding days on an apathetic on the glass Golden State team, but he improved in this area from last season and upticked his per 40 FIC from 12.6 in 06-07 to almost 15.0 this year.

He had an excellent assist/turnover ratio of 1.7 and shot 39.8% from 3-point territory despite shooting more than three per game.

- Jeff Foster: 75th, 773, 16.4, +51%

Foster had an even better A/TO ratio than Murphy coming in at 2.08 while rebounding at a better rate and shooting 55.0% from the field, an increase from 47.1% a year ago which puts him back to his stretch from 03-05.

- Jamaal Tinsley: 184th, 415, 12.8, -46%

Tinsley got off to a very nice start, but his knee limited him to just 39 games and the point guard position is unquestionably where they will be looking in June's draft. He really is a shadow of that 04-05 Tinsley, but he has become steadier while on the floor, increasing his A/TO ratio to 2.5. He is unreliable to stay healthy and his performance is inconsistent from night to night when he is on the floor.

He is owed an additional $21.45 million over the next three seasons, but fortunately Indiana's starting point guard (hopefully D.J. Augustin if they don't move up to the top-3) will likely be making the affordable rookie scale.

- Jermaine O'Neal: 197th, 388, 12.9, -84%

To think less than 12 months ago Kobe Bryant tried to trade Andrew Bynum and Lamar Odom for O'Neal.

O'Neal played in just 42 games, but he hasn't played in 70 since the 03-04 season due to suspensions and injuries.

His rebound rate has plummeted and his shooting percentage has decreased to 43.9%; O'Neal has never ecliped the 50% mark from his career.

This all adds up to a per 40 FIC that is very average for a player of his caliber, who is accustomed to the following lines:

06-07: 15.1
05-06: 15.6
04-05: 14.9
03-04: 15.7
02-03: 16.7
01-02: 14.8

Is this the beginning of the end or can he get healthy again? Either way, his days of dominance are likely over and will primarily be useful on the defensive end.

- Travis Diener: 199th, 381, 11.2, +104%

With more minutes (20.5 per game) and appearances (66) than he ever saw in Orlando, Diener had an above the median season for the Pacers, primarily because he had an outstanding 4.6 A/TO ratio. His shooting percentage dropped to 37.0% from the floor and 31.8% from 3-point territory; he came into the league shooting 43.9% from three and 42% from the floor.

- Marquis Daniels: 206th, 371, 9.6, -54%

What happened to that player in Dallas who had a 14.5 per 40 FIC in 03-04 in his rookie season? Back then he shot 49.4% from the floor and had a 2.6 A/TO ratio; now he is a 43% shooter and a 1.2 A/TO.

- Kareem Rush: 231th, 311, 8.3, +217%

Rush returned to the NBA and really had the best season of his career, shooting 40.1% from the floor. He was a very good bargain and was a wise offeseason signing.

- Shawne Williams: 247th, 251, 10.4, +45%

Williams had a few good stretches including a great stint in November, but he shot just 36.1% after the All-Star break compared to 45.1% during the first 46 games of 07-08.

- Flip Murray: 256th, 230, 10.5, NA

Murray was a disappointment in Detroit, but he was a much better player once he joined the Pacers.

- David Harrison: 314th, 119, 6.7, -36%

Harrison played limited minutes yet again and wasn't terribly productive with those minutes, though he did shoot 52.9%.

- Ike Diogu: 325th 102, 13.3, -57%

Some people believed Diogu would tip the scales in Indiana's way with the Golden State trade, but he has hardly looked like a lottery pick and will someday be known as the guy picked one slot ahead of Andrew Bynum.

His per 40 FIC is solid, but the Pacers were -10.4 points per 100 possessions worse with Diogu on the floor.

Diogu's low post game hasn't adapted to the NBA and he still hasn't developed a dependable jumper.

- Andre Owens: 334th, 88, 9.0, +32%

Owens shot 37.4% from the floor and 45.0% from 3-point territory.

- Stephen Graham: 370th, 52, 16.3, +0%

Graham only played 22 games but was 2.8 points per 100 possessions better when he was on the floor.

Trader Joe
05-11-2008, 07:55 PM
lol. +602%

croz24
05-11-2008, 09:33 PM
"This has become Danny Granger's team with Mike Dunleavy as his running mate, but there is a severe lack of quality frontline players beyond these two and are unlikely to get a franchise-caliber player in the draft due to their late lottery slot.

The Pacers were 19th in FIC differential at -3.8 per game, which was a decrease from last season when they were at -0.9 per game. They have the kind of team that will be mediocre indefinitely, winning 30-35 games per year unless they allow themselves to get bad."

is this not what i've been trying to tell you people? IT'S ALL ABOUT A TOP 5 PICK!!! even realgm agrees with me...

MyFavMartin
05-11-2008, 09:48 PM
"... but there is a severe lack of quality frontline players

Insert healthy....

JO is quality.

And I think Foster holds his own.

That being said, I think if this team gets a quality starting PG with this group to replace Tinsley, next year should be much different.

(Of course, this assumes a healthy season for the Pacers.)

I wouldn't be surprised if a move is made to get back into the draft (Portland's pick) to get a quality post player as well as addressing our PG needs.

Westbrook and Speights, New Pacers Running Mates '08!

Hicks
05-11-2008, 09:51 PM
What does FIC stand for?

It seems like some kind of +/- and it's being used to say that Dunleavy and Granger are on the same level defensively. I'm not sure about that at all.

Anthem
05-11-2008, 10:39 PM
The Pacers were 5.3 points per 100 possessions better when Granger was off the floor, which flies in the face of people who believe he is a significantly better defender than Dunleavy.
Can anybody explain this to me?

Anthem
05-11-2008, 10:40 PM
is this not what i've been trying to tell you people? IT'S ALL ABOUT A TOP 5 PICK!!! even realgm agrees with me...
Um, nope. That's not what you've been telling us.

Nobody is saying a top-5 pick wouldn't be nice. If they have I've missed it.

croz24
05-11-2008, 11:04 PM
Um, nope. That's not what you've been telling us.

Nobody is saying a top-5 pick wouldn't be nice. If they have I've missed it.

lol then what have i been saying for the past year + on this message board?

rexnom
05-12-2008, 01:09 AM
lol then what have i been saying for the past year + on this message board?
Dude, settle. You've been telling us to trade Danny Granger for a top five pick. I don't think anybody here would mind a top-5 pick - we're just not so anxious to trade Danny for something that has only the potential to be amazing (remember Jonathan Bender?).

MyFavMartin
05-12-2008, 02:50 AM
Can anybody explain this to me?

danny guards the best player on the opposing team.

when that player gets taken out of the game for a break, danny does too. opposing teams offense goes down without their star (i.e., McGrady, Kobe, Vince, whomever). This explains Danny's negative +/- for last season. (No one doubts that he's the best player on the team.)


the per 100 possessions is to control for game pace.

croz24
05-12-2008, 02:52 AM
i've said to trade danny for the pick b/c it's now the only way...i've been in favor of tanking for the past 2 years for that pick which would have probably resulted in me wanting to KEEP granger. i've been in favor of trading jo for the past 4 years to try to acquire that pick...granger is now just the only option left the pacers have of getting the franchise player we need...i don't dislike granger. i just believe the pacers need to do whatever they can to find their franchise player. and then we can build around him with the danny grangers of the world...

MyFavMartin
05-12-2008, 02:58 AM
i've said to trade danny for the pick b/c it's now the only way...i've been in favor of tanking for the past 2 years for that pick which would have probably resulted in me wanting to KEEP granger. i've been in favor of trading jo for the past 4 years to try to acquire that pick...granger is now just the only option left the pacers have of getting the franchise player we need...i don't dislike granger. i just believe the pacers need to do whatever they can to find their franchise player. and then we can build around him with the danny grangers of the world...

danny is a top 5 player. the only reason he dropped was due to knee concerns, which he's way past.

trading him to get another does not improve us and justs sets us back another couple years.

Danny is paul pierce - keep DG and build around him.

i do wish we were sitting at #7 rather than #11, but Bird and JOB didn't want to mail it in. We should still get a good player.... Really need to address PG and hope JO has a healthy season and the Pacers will be back in the playoffs next year.

croz24
05-12-2008, 04:40 AM
danny is paul pierce? that's stretching it a bit don't you think? by the time paul pierce was danny's age now, he had already been named an all-star, to an all-nba squad, as well as putting up the following point totals/game 16.5, 19.5, 25.3, 26.1. AND he led his team to the conference finals...

set us back a couple of years? we're already as far back as we can go. but quite honestly, the best thing that could happen to us next year is being even worse than we were this year. at least at that point we could draft somebody who could make an impact for us right away as opposed to reaching on an augustin or love which we're bound to do...

DGPR
05-12-2008, 06:19 AM
http://pacers.realgm.com/articles/133/20080508/auditing_the_pacers_2007-08_season/
He is owed an additional $21.45 million over the next three seasons, but fortunately Indiana's starting point guard (hopefully D.J. Augustin if they don't move up to the top-3) will likely be making the affordable rookie scale.
.

I hope.

Tom White
05-12-2008, 09:31 AM
lol then what have i been saying for the past year + on this message board?

Well, we're still trying to figure that out.:laugh:

OakMoses
05-12-2008, 11:14 AM
Jamaal Tinsley: 184th, 415, 12.8, -46%

Tinsley got off to a very nice start, but his knee limited him to just 39 games and the point guard position is unquestionably where they will be looking in June's draft. He really is a shadow of that 04-05 Tinsley, but he has become steadier while on the floor, increasing his A/TO ratio to 2.5. He is unreliable to stay healthy and his performance is inconsistent from night to night when he is on the floor.

He is owed an additional $21.45 million over the next three seasons, but fortunately Indiana's starting point guard (hopefully D.J. Augustin if they don't move up to the top-3) will likely be making the affordable rookie scale.

- Ike Diogu: 325th 102, 13.3, -57%

Some people believed Diogu would tip the scales in Indiana's way with the Golden State trade, but he has hardly looked like a lottery pick and will someday be known as the guy picked one slot ahead of Andrew Bynum.

His per 40 FIC is solid, but the Pacers were -10.4 points per 100 possessions worse with Diogu on the floor.

Diogu's low post game hasn't adapted to the NBA and he still hasn't developed a dependable jumper.


These two write-ups make me seriously question how closely this guy follows the team. With Tinsley, I don't see how you can not address his nearly constant off-court issues, his extreme lack of popularity with the fans, and his own coach saying that he doesn't see him as a part of the team's future. To read this, you'd think that injuries are Tinsley's only problem.

Also, there's been plenty of talk about Diogu since he got here, but I think that most people on this board would agree that his low-post skills and jumper are not the things that keep him from getting court time. Diogu is the best one-on-one low post scorer on the roster, and his jumper is no worse than Troy or JO's, he just doesn't have Troy's range. What keeps Diogu off the court is his lack of understanding of the offensive and defensive systems and his inability to pass out of double-teams.

Unclebuck
05-12-2008, 11:32 AM
Reading that article makes my head hurt. Did Dunleavy get a raise?

Putnam
05-12-2008, 12:02 PM
What does FIC stand for?.


"Floor Impact Counter."


He explains it here:

http://www.realgm.com/src_fromtherafters/138/20080109/the_reina_value/




Here is the formula I use to determine the FIC:

(Points
+ Offensive Rebounds
+ .75 Defensive Rebounds
+ Assists
+ Steals
+ Blocks
- .75 Field Goal Attempts
- .375 Free Throw Attempts
- Turnovers
- .5 Personal Fouls)

Applying this formula to the box scores of countless games that I have watched, the players with the highest FIC, nearly without fail, had the most productive games. It passes my personal eye test better than any other system I have compared it to and it also isn’t unnecessarily complicated. In order to give the rating some context, here are a few statistics:

Top FIC (Per 40 Minutes) For Each Season Since 1990

89-90: Michael Jordan (http://www.realgm.com/src_playerfile/596/michael_jordan/) (23.90)
90-91: David Robinson (http://www.realgm.com/src_playerfile/316/david_robinson/) (24.80)
91-92: David Robinson (http://www.realgm.com/src_playerfile/316/david_robinson/) (24.99)
92-93: Hakeem Olajuwon (http://www.realgm.com/src_playerfile/283/hakeem_olajuwon/) (24.03)
93-94: Shaquille O’Neal (23.63)
94-95: David Robinson (http://www.realgm.com/src_playerfile/316/david_robinson/) (23.47)
95-96: David Robinson (http://www.realgm.com/src_playerfile/316/david_robinson/) (24.47)
96-97: Karl Malone (http://www.realgm.com/src_playerfile/343/karl_malone/) (22.07)
97-98: Shaquille O’Neal (22.06)
98-99: Shaquille O’Neal (21.38)
99-00: Shaquille O’Neal (24.06)
00-01: Shaquille O’Neal (22.62)
01-02: Shaquille O’Neal (22.02)
02-03: Kevin Garnett (http://www.realgm.com/src_playerfile/332/kevin_garnett/) (22.64)
03-04: Kevin Garnett (http://www.realgm.com/src_playerfile/332/kevin_garnett/) (23.69)
04-05: Kevin Garnett (http://www.realgm.com/src_playerfile/332/kevin_garnett/) (23.81)
05-06: Kevin Garnett (http://www.realgm.com/src_playerfile/332/kevin_garnett/) (21.53)
06-07: Tim Duncan (http://www.realgm.com/src_playerfile/324/tim_duncan/) (20.96)




It doesn't put a value on defense, and it doesn't assign a value to "the little things that help you win." But the little things don't begin to matter until and unless you've got people who are scoring and getting rebounds.

Did anybody else notice that Foster has the highest FIC (per 40 minutes) of any of the Pacers?



.

Naptown_Seth
05-12-2008, 12:58 PM
Can anybody explain this to me?
There is no denying that Danny has struggled to have a good +/- most of the time. IMO this is directly due to awareness problems at both ends, thus how I can acknowledge that he often hurts the team and feel like he has Pippen caliber levels to reach (and so far is doing so statistically).

He makes great defensive plays, but he also makes huge TEAM defense mistakes. The same is true at the other end where he can take care of his own offense but has yet to find a way to make others better.

I'm just willing to ride out those costly mistakes because if he fixes those he's got a huge upside.

Naptown_Seth
05-12-2008, 01:03 PM
These two write-ups make me seriously question how closely this guy follows the team. With Tinsley, I don't see how you can not address his nearly constant off-court issues, his extreme lack of popularity with the fans, and his own coach saying that he doesn't see him as a part of the team's future. To read this, you'd think that injuries are Tinsley's only problem.

Also, there's been plenty of talk about Diogu since he got here, but I think that most people on this board would agree that his low-post skills and jumper are not the things that keep him from getting court time. Diogu is the best one-on-one low post scorer on the roster, and his jumper is no worse than Troy or JO's, he just doesn't have Troy's range. What keeps Diogu off the court is his lack of understanding of the offensive and defensive systems and his inability to pass out of double-teams.


He is owed an additional $21.45 million over the next three seasons, but fortunately Indiana's starting point guard (hopefully D.J. Augustin if they don't move up to the top-3) will likely be making the affordable rookie scale.

ie, Tinsley's long gone in his opinion, so I don't think he's overlooked the off-court stuff.

As for Ike, I think "post game hasn't adapted" means "can't pass out of the low post double" which is 100% true and his main flaw. Lost on other parts you could perhaps take if you could lean on him as a post threat, but his reactions to doubles makes even that a high risk situation. So it's more like his main asset is too flawed to cover his other flaws and keep him on the court.

Foster is so good on the boards that you overlook his offensive issues, for example. So if he stopped rebounding as well you'd bench him, not because of offense but because he lost the factor that kept him out there in the first place.

Naptown_Seth
05-12-2008, 01:06 PM
Kobe was a top 5 pick? Or do you mean Kobe's not good enough to win a title with?

I mean because clearly only top 5 picks can carry a team. And the only way out of low 30 wins is a top 5 pick. Just ask Rick and the Pistons.

NuffSaid
05-12-2008, 01:06 PM
"Floor Impact Counter."


He explains it here:

http://www.realgm.com/src_fromtherafters/138/20080109/the_reina_value/


Did anybody else notice that Foster has the highest FIC (per 40 minutes) of any of the Pacers?
That's not too surprising considering the formula. Foster's not doing alot of those things that count against a player's FIC rating, i.e., he's not going to turn the ball over much because he doesn't handle the ball except when setting high Screens or on PnR plays. Frankly, you'll rarely ever see him put the ball on the floor. Nor is he going to take many shots from the field which would go against his FIC rating as opposed to the number of "gimmy" layup attempts although I'd say he did take more open shots from the field this year than at any point in his career (not to mention he had more FGAs overall this year - .550 - than any other year for his career). He will get to the foul line if the refs show him 'nuff respect. To Foster's credit, he is a very good FT shooter (.593 on the year). So, his high FT% counts for him, not against him. About the only negative Foster gets according to the FIC rating formula are fouls (nearly 3 per game - .290). So, it stands to reason Foster's FIC ranks high among active Pacers for 2007-2008.

It's not a knock on Jeff by any means, though. You just have to see the numbers for what they really are.

MyFavMartin
05-12-2008, 01:21 PM
by the time paul pierce was danny's age now...

That's stretching it a bit, isn't it? Pierce goes pro after his junior year and Danny lost a year after transfering from Bradley and stayed on to finish college.

It'd be better just to compare where Pierce was after his 3rd year and where Danny is right now, having just completed his 3rd year in the NBA as well, right?

As for the ppg, Pierce got more shots. They're shooting percents are close (DG's are actually better) and their ppg aren't off by much.

I stand by the comparison and the fact that this team should build around Granger, which I believe Bird has indicated the same.

Mourning
05-12-2008, 01:35 PM
There is no denying that Danny has struggled to have a good +/- most of the time. IMO this is directly due to awareness problems at both ends, thus how I can acknowledge that he often hurts the team and feel like he has Pippen caliber levels to reach (and so far is doing so statistically).

He makes great defensive plays, but he also makes huge TEAM defense mistakes. The same is true at the other end where he can take care of his own offense but has yet to find a way to make others better.

I'm just willing to ride out those costly mistakes because if he fixes those he's got a huge upside.


Could be me, but I just think the author of the article made a mistake with his own sentence instead of:


"The Pacers were 5.3 points per 100 possessions better when Granger was off the floor, which flies in the face of people who believe he is a significantly better defender than Dunleavy."

really meant this:

"The Pacers were 5.3 points per 100 possessions better when Granger was ON the floor, which flies in the face of people who believe he is a significantly better defender than Dunleavy."

Could be me though.

Regards,

Mourning :cool:

Mourning
05-12-2008, 01:42 PM
Kobe was a top 5 pick? Or do you mean Kobe's not good enough to win a title with?

I mean because clearly only top 5 picks can carry a team. And the only way out of low 30 wins is a top 5 pick. Just ask Rick and the Pistons.

You're taking his position to the extreme. I don't aggree with letting Danny go for a top-5 pick (unless his name happenned to be Rose ;)), but I do believe that the chance of achieving success is exponentially better when you get a player who becomes an all-star/top-tier player whom can carry your team.

Now the chance of that player having been a top-5 pick I think we can all aggree on is quite enormous. Offcourse, there are exceptions, but those are definitely a lot harder to come by. And even then most of the remaining players in that category of players you want on your team fall in the 6-10 category.

That doesn't mean that a top-5 pick is a guarantee for success. But, then again ... is that what is beying said?

Regards,

Mourning :cool:

Anthem
05-12-2008, 06:27 PM
set us back a couple of years? we're already as far back as we can go.
:laugh: Ah, I get it now. You're a recent fan who doesn't remember true suckiness.