PDA

View Full Version : Rasho and Hibbert together



McKeyFan
10-14-2008, 12:57 PM
Is there a scenario where Rasho and Hibbert could play together on the floor? Why or why not?

Houston had the twin towers.

My yearning is obvious. When was the last time we had two bigs on the floor who were basically decent at both offense AND defense?

HC
10-14-2008, 01:01 PM
I think there are definitely some scenarios. Especially if getting a defensive stop is the sole purpose of a play. I have not seen enough from either of them though to determine whether or not they could play for an extended period of time together. The only reason being whether they can both get up and down the court quick enough.

dohman
10-14-2008, 01:09 PM
I play with them together all game long on 2k9 :)

OakMoses
10-14-2008, 01:15 PM
When was the last time we had two bigs on the floor who were basically decent at both offense AND defense?

Brad Miller & JO?

I guess you could play them together. The speed issue has already been mentioned. You could never do it against a team with quick bigs like Detroit. Johnson and Wallace would eat us alive in transition. You could also never do it against a team with a small ball type PF like Marion or Jamison.

I just really don't see it being a feasable possibility.

We just need to look toward the future and be realistic. Rasho's the starter and he'll get 25 mpg this year. Roy will back him up at 10-15 mpg. Foster will pick up the rest. Next year, Rasho will be gone and hopefully Hibbert can move into the starting role with Foster backing him up. All the while, we're out looking for our PF of the future.

One thing I wanted to see during the Chicago game (and we got close to this in the 4th quarter) was a lineup of Jack, Rush, Granger, McRoberts, and Hibbert. I was just imagining that lineup with someone saying "Ladies and Gentlemen, your future Indiana Pacers!" I'm not exactly sold on Jack and McRoberts as the PG and PF of the future, but I don't think it's a totally ridiculous proposition to think that could be our starting lineup in 2 years, and if Granger, Rush, and Hibbert develop like many think they could, it could be a pretty good one.

Jonathan
10-14-2008, 01:21 PM
If we are starting Jack and McRoberts; we are playing for lottery balls. I am not sold at all on Jack. He is a career backup in the NBA. McRoberts is an energy player, that shoots poorly from the outside. Troy Murphy & Ford are going to be a great combo. Look for Murphy to get the balk of minutes at the 4 spot this year w/Foster as his backup.

A more likely scenerio of two bigs playing a lot together this year is Foster and Hibbert.

Speed
10-14-2008, 01:23 PM
I've thought about this, you could go uber small and super big with this team.

Unclebuck
10-14-2008, 01:32 PM
I hope not

RamBo_Lamar
10-14-2008, 01:49 PM
DD and Smits did pretty good together for a long time.

Yeah, those two could definately be called "twin towers".

duke dynamite
10-14-2008, 01:59 PM
DD and Smits did pretty good together for a long time.

Yeah, those two could definately be called "twin towers".
Agreed.

I could see these two playing side-by-side, but I don't want to do anything just yet. I want to see Hibbert's level of consistency first.

Shade
10-14-2008, 01:59 PM
I've actually thought about this scenario as well.

Our center spot appears to be better than initially expected, especially if Roy continues his pace of improvement. You've got to think he'll hit the rookie wall at some point, though.

Our 4 spot is pretty bad, just loaded with back-ups, but it could be worse.

Our 3, 2, and 1 spots all look solid.

On paper, this should be a playoff team this year, and an above .500 one at that. But I'm just not convinced that JOB is the right coach for the job.

count55
10-14-2008, 02:29 PM
DD and Smits did pretty good together for a long time.

Yeah, those two could definately be called "twin towers".

Well, the difference here is the DD was a classic PF, while Smits was a classic C, both complementing each other. Smits was strong on offense and weak on defense, Dale was the opposite. I really don't think this pairing is analogous to Rasho and Roy.

Both Hibbert and Rasho are natural Centers. They could play together, but they'd probably get in each other's way. It strikes me as a bad idea, primarily because you won't be able to optimize either player's performance...or, at best, you'll optimize one of them, but really hurt the other by forcing him to play out of position.

2minutes twowa
10-14-2008, 02:36 PM
I don't quite understand why everyone is so down on Murph. He averaged 12 pts, 7 rbs, 2 asts per game. Our main scoring is going to come from the 1,2 and 3 spot, so Murph doesn't have to score 15-20 pts per game in order to win. I think his scoring average will increase with Ford on the floor getting him wide open looks, especially if they play some pick and pop. He's overpaid, not an outstanding defender, but I think his is more than capable of being our fourth scoring option.

Infinite MAN_force
10-14-2008, 02:37 PM
One thing I wanted to see during the Chicago game (and we got close to this in the 4th quarter) was a lineup of Jack, Rush, Granger, McRoberts, and Hibbert. I was just imagining that lineup with someone saying "Ladies and Gentlemen, your future Indiana Pacers!" I'm not exactly sold on Jack and McRoberts as the PG and PF of the future, but I don't think it's a totally ridiculous proposition to think that could be our starting lineup in 2 years, and if Granger, Rush, and Hibbert develop like many think they could, it could be a pretty good one.


Curious as to why you couldn't see TJ as PG of the future, considering he is actually the same age as Granger. I like Jack but I think of him as more of a "quality role player".

Mcroberts I don't know. I like what I saw out of him in the two games, he is quick and athletic, and he played with a lot of hustle. He seems to have a lot of skills, but he needs more of a killer instinct or something. Very passive offensively. In high school he was considered one of the top players in the country and might have been a lottery pick coming out... you have to imagine the potential could maybe be there. He is pretty young afterall. Seems like he needs to put some more muscle on that frame too, might improve his rebounding.

Major Cold
10-14-2008, 02:40 PM
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Mn60NIh2NGU&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Mn60NIh2NGU&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

OakMoses
10-14-2008, 02:56 PM
Curious as to why you couldn't see TJ as PG of the future, considering he is actually the same age as Granger. I like Jack but I think of him as more of a "quality role player".


That is an interesting question. It's probably because Ford's worn out his welcome with two teams already, and I've always assumed that we wouldn't resign him when his contract's up in two years. I like Ford a lot as a player, and I'd have no problem watching him as the Pacers PG for the next 5 years or so.

I see Jack the same way that you do right now. However, I don't like to think that players can't improve. If he develops better handles and a more consistent outside shot, he changes from quality role player to quality starting PG.

McRoberts is a very unique player. He is skilled and athletic and plays with both smarts and energy. I think the problem he ran into at Duke was that he doesn't not have the "star" mentality. He's never the kind of guy that's going to be able to carry a team. He's also interesting from a developmental standpoint because he can go in a couple of different directions. If you try to force him to bulk up and become a "classic PF", you run the risk of compromising his athletcism and not taking advantage of his ball-handling and passing skills. If you encourage him to become a perimeter PF like Murphy or Antoine Walker, you turn him into the type of player that many on this board refer to as "gimmicky". I'd like to see him add a few pounds of muscle, develop two go-to post moves and a consistent mid-range jumpshot. He'll never be great player, but I do believe he could be a contributing member of a very good team either by being paired with a dominant center or by being the first big man off the bench.

Putnam
10-14-2008, 03:29 PM
I hope to see it when the Pacers play Toronto.



.

Anthem
10-14-2008, 03:39 PM
Both Hibbert and Rasho are natural Centers. They could play together, but they'd probably get in each other's way. It strikes me as a bad idea, primarily because you won't be able to optimize either player's performance...or, at best, you'll optimize one of them, but really hurt the other by forcing him to play out of position.
Yeah, that's where I'm at as well.

I'd be curious, though, to see more Hibbert/McBob together. I saw them from some highlights, but haven't actually seen a minute of gametime yet.

Infinite MAN_force
10-14-2008, 03:46 PM
That is an interesting question. It's probably because Ford's worn out his welcome with two teams already, and I've always assumed that we wouldn't resign him when his contract's up in two years. I like Ford a lot as a player, and I'd have no problem watching him as the Pacers PG for the next 5 years or so.

I see Jack the same way that you do right now. However, I don't like to think that players can't improve. If he develops better handles and a more consistent outside shot, he changes from quality role player to quality starting PG.

McRoberts is a very unique player. He is skilled and athletic and plays with both smarts and energy. I think the problem he ran into at Duke was that he doesn't not have the "star" mentality. He's never the kind of guy that's going to be able to carry a team. He's also interesting from a developmental standpoint because he can go in a couple of different directions. If you try to force him to bulk up and become a "classic PF", you run the risk of compromising his athletcism and not taking advantage of his ball-handling and passing skills. If you encourage him to become a perimeter PF like Murphy or Antoine Walker, you turn him into the type of player that many on this board refer to as "gimmicky". I'd like to see him add a few pounds of muscle, develop two go-to post moves and a consistent mid-range jumpshot. He'll never be great player, but I do believe he could be a contributing member of a very good team either by being paired with a dominant center or by being the first big man off the bench.


I agree with your assement of Mcroberts. I see his "ceiling" as maybe a solid starter (if paired with better players) or 1st big off the bench. I almost think working on perimeter skills might be a good direction for him. If he could model his offensive game off Murphy and work on his shooting... he would be like a more mobile Troy Murphy that plays good defense. Which sounds like a good player to me. Obrien's ideal 4. That could work playing next to a guy like Hibbert.