PDA

View Full Version : Mike Dunleavy our best player?



Dr. Awesome
12-29-2008, 01:02 PM
http://www.indystar.com/article/20081228/SPORTS04/812280403
By: Mike Wells From: IndyStar

"My mind changed a little bit on how we could do because I feel he's our best all-around player," Bird said about Dunleavy.

Is anyone else getting tired of Bird saying this? Bird has a bad habit of spitting in the faces of our best players. He used to do it a lot with JO, now hes doing it to Danny. You see other NBA Presidents campaigning to get their players in the All-Star game, then Bird telling everyone Granger isn't even our best player. How do you think Granger feels about this? He goes out every night, putting up one of the best seasons ever statistically, then Bird says hes not even the best player.

All that being said, I love what Bird has done with this team from a GM perspective, but bashing our best player is a mistake. How can Dunleavy be an all around better player than Danny, when he only does well on offense? Absolutely nothing good comes of Bird saying this, it makes no sense to spit in the face of the new face of the franchise for a guy who frankly should be traded.

This also pretty much shows that Dunleavy will not be traded - so whats that mean for Brandon Rush? Why would we draft a guy in the lottery if he had no future starting on our team? Bird seriously made a mistake by confessing his love for Dunleavy. I like Dunleavy - he was great for us last year, but I've said it since the draft: He needs to be traded for a 1st round pick, or a Bargnani type prospect. The future of our wings should be Granger and Rush. Thoughts?

MiaDragon
12-29-2008, 01:11 PM
Yea Im not sure where he is going with all this as well/

joew8302
12-29-2008, 01:13 PM
I agree with everything you said until your praised Larry Bird as GM. As his control has increased so too have the losses. I am going to save other analysis and look at that fact alone to show he is not a very good gm. Calling MDJ our best player is not only inaccurate, but dumb as well.

deekay85
12-29-2008, 01:13 PM
"He's our best all-around player" not our BEST Player!!

Trader Joe
12-29-2008, 01:13 PM
1.) Author and site.

2.) I don't think Granger is of the personality type to give two hoots about this.

MrSparko
12-29-2008, 01:14 PM
I agree with everything you said until your praised Larry Bird as GM. As his control has increased so too have the losses. I am going to save other analysis and look at that fact alone to show he is not a very good gm. Calling MDJ our best player is not only inaccurate, but dumb as well.


You're right. Bird should have demanded at the very least Bosh for O'Neal!:confused:

joew8302
12-29-2008, 01:16 PM
You're right. Bird should have demanded at the very least Bosh for O'Neal!:confused:


Because that is clearly what I meant. Comprehension doesn't seem to be your strongsuite.

Dr. Awesome
12-29-2008, 01:23 PM
I agree with everything you said until your praised Larry Bird as GM. As his control has increased so too have the losses. I am going to save other analysis and look at that fact alone to show he is not a very good gm. Calling MDJ our best player is not only inaccurate, but dumb as well.

If your looking for a scapegoat look no further than a player on the Rockets. Bird was given a team with nothing but players who got injured/suspended/and tremendously lowered their trade value. We were not going to win with the team he had. Teams have to rebuild, they cannot stay competitive forever. Blaming Bird for our losses is not logical, it was going to happen with or without him. The fact is hes done a nice job of making sure it doesn't happen in the future as well.

PR07
12-29-2008, 01:42 PM
How is Dunleavy our best all-around player? He's below average defensively.

MrSparko
12-29-2008, 01:45 PM
This is probably more to pump Dunleavy up (to himself and potential trade partners) in the lowest point of his career than it is a mark against Danny.

Unclebuck
12-29-2008, 01:46 PM
I thought last season he was our most important and most valuable player.

MillerTime
12-29-2008, 01:55 PM
1.) Author and site.

2.) I don't think Granger is of the personality type to give two hoots about this.

Exactly, Granger could care less, he had more class.

And theres no way Dunleavy is out best all around player. He might be our best all around offensive player, but certainly not our best at defense. Theres 2 aspects to ones game; offense and defense. Dunleavy clearly lacks the characteristics of being an elite defender.

I would definately put Granger as our best all around player over Dunleavy any day

duke dynamite
12-29-2008, 02:02 PM
I agree with Bird.

Danny is a great spot shooter, but Mike can control the ball, as well as pass it. He is able to get through the lane and lay it in, and jump shoot.

His defense, I can't say other than based off of last year's play, but I can't argue this call.

Boyle stated (last night on the call-in show) that Danny at the beginning of the season really was one-dimensional, and didn't rebound or assist, but he is coming around. In that case, until Mike comes back, that is where Bird is wrong.

All-in-all, I agree with Larry Legend.

Roaming Gnome
12-29-2008, 03:01 PM
I agree with Bird.

Danny is a great spot shooter, but Mike can control the ball, as well as pass it. He is able to get through the lane and lay it in, and jump shoot.

His defense, I can't say other than based off of last year's play, but I can't argue this call.

Boyle stated (last night on the call-in show) that Danny at the beginning of the season really was one-dimensional, and didn't rebound or assist, but he is coming around. In that case, until Mike comes back, that is where Bird is wrong.

All-in-all, I agree with Larry Legend.

Defense is 50% of the ball game. Mike is a decent team defender, but a turnstile on man defense. I honestly feel that Danny is more of a complete player when defense is figured into the equation.

As for Bird in his comment, I think it was more of a throw away comment then anything else.

Justin Tyme
12-29-2008, 03:01 PM
It's nice that Bird at least waited until Danny signed an extension b4 making that statement. Nothing like making that statement about a player who hasn't even played a game so far this year, and only had one really good year in the NBA while Granger has progressed each year and is pushing towards an allstar season this year. Brilliant statement from your team's GM! Some times I wonder if Walsh didn't hire Bird to be his successor, so Bird would make him look better after he was gone.

Justin Tyme
12-29-2008, 03:17 PM
Defense is 50% of the ball game. Mike is a decent team defender, but a turnstile on man defense. I honestly feel that Danny is more of a complete player when defense is figured into the equation.

As for Bird in his comment, I think it was more of a throw away comment then anything else.


You may be right about it being a throw away comment, but you don't throw it away to the media. That's just not smart.

Bird may truly feel that way about Dunleavy, BUT he should have better sense as to who he's making that type of comments to. The old saying about "one should engage brain before opening one's mouth" truly applies here. He has to remember he's in a position that whatever comes out of his mouth will be printed for all to see when he's talking to the media.

Justin Tyme
12-29-2008, 03:32 PM
Defense is 50% of the ball game.


I couldn't agree with you more. Unfortunately, the Pacers' coach doesn't have the same belief.

Hicks
12-29-2008, 04:29 PM
Because that is clearly what I meant. Comprehension doesn't seem to be your strongsuite.

Let's keep a general level of respect going, please.

pwee31
12-29-2008, 05:52 PM
I don't feel that Bird is taking a cheap shot at Granger at all. He's simply stating that Dunleavy is a very important part of our team because of what he brings to the table.

I personally think Dunleavy does a lot of things well, and that is what makes him so important. He can handle the ball, pass the ball, shoot the ball, rebound the ball, move well without the ball, and I think he's a pretty good TEAM defender.

And I presonally feel Danny and Mike compliment each other well, and fit well into the system. A lot of you don't feel that Dunleavy will make that big of difference when he returns, but I have to kindly disagree.

Though Marquis Daniels has had a really good season so far, and is doing a lot of things well... he's no Mike Dunleavy. For one Mike Dunleavy can shoot and stretch the defense. Which I think will help our PG duo a lot. He also passes the ball well, and gets others involved.

He's a bigger body at 6'9 and he'll bring depth to the wing position, so Jack doesn't have to play the 2.

Didn't I mention he spreads the floor, which only Danny has been able to do, with Murph, Diener and Rush sometimes being the exception.

Brad8888
12-29-2008, 06:00 PM
From a pure basketball IQ standpoint, I believe that Dunleavy is indeed our best player. He understands the type of offense that we have currently installed better than any current player on the roster, including our best (?) point guard, TJ. Granger is still learning the nuances of both our offense and defense (?), and his occasionally tentative play due to his uncertainty at some points leads to weak passes for turnovers, or poor decisions that leave whoever he passes the ball to in bad positions offensively.

From a purely athletic standpoint, Granger is currently our best player, though. He should benefit from Dunleavy's return due to improved offensive flow. Longer term, he should benefit from the presence of Brandon Rush on the roster to practice against. Brandon may not have picked up the concepts of team defense yet, but he is definitely an effective and athletic man to man defender with both the quickness and leaping ability to make things far more challenging for Danny going forward in practice. Conversely, Rush should benefit greatly from being mentored by Danny. Hopefully Danny's work ethic and character will help Brandon mature more quickly as a person and a player and make Brandon a force to be reckoned with sooner than later as his potential seems to suggest.

Our most important player so far this season, though, IMO is the surprising Marquis Daniels. He probably has the most overall impact on both ends of the floor, defensively with his deflections / steals, offensively with his insane ability to penetrate. He definitely has major flaws, though, from outside shooting to bad decision making at times. When he has things going, he is probably much more effective than nearly anyone would have given him credit for in the past.

Spirit
12-29-2008, 06:51 PM
I thought last season he was our most important and most valuable player.Bingo. Agreed.

BRushWithDeath
12-30-2008, 03:05 AM
Dunleavy was clearly the best player last year. If he can come back the same as he was last year he will be again.

Trader Joe
12-30-2008, 03:09 AM
Dun isn't our "best" player, but he is extremely valuable to the team in many ways. The argument could be made last year that Dun was our best player (though a more accurate descriptor would probably be that they were equals). However, Granger has stepped his game up to a notch I don't believe Dun is capable of, and I'm not knocking Dun when I say that.

Although, I'm certainly not in the "When (if) Dun comes back this season our problems will be solved" camp. Quis has done a very solid job as a stand in and about the only place I see Dun providing a significant improvement over Quis is in the jump shooting department.
I think it's very possible we'll also see Quis regress when he hits the bench, but that is a discussion for another day.

The one thing I worry about, is that Danny will defer to Dun. Like it or not, chances are Dunleavy isn't a Pacer for the long term (unless Bird really loves him). So I don't want to see us focus on him too much. What I mean by this is that I would be a bit surprised if Dunleavy is still our starting shooting guard at the end of the 2009-2010 season or more aptly the beginning of the 2010-2011 season.

You know what I see the most when I look at a comment like this, a guy who has a tendency for hyperbole and also doesn't always think when he speaks. (See a certain comment about the race of certain people and how he felt about them guarding him) I think we're just seeing Bird get ahead of himself here more than anything else.

BRushWithDeath
12-30-2008, 03:13 AM
However, Granger has stepped his game up to a notch I don't believe Dun is capable of, and I'm not knocking Dun when I say that.



The only real phase of Granger's game that has been stepped up is his scoring. I attribute a lot of that to Dunleavy's absence. I think Granger is the Pacers best player. But if Dun could come back at 100% he'd reclaim that title. And for the record, I am very skeptical that he will.

Trader Joe
12-30-2008, 03:15 AM
Danny's "scoring" has increased as a result of him improving several facets of his game most notably his ball handling ability, and his ability to get to the line. About the only part of Dunleavy's game where he has a notable advantage over Granger is his passing/decision making. Otherwise they are about equal or Granger is superior. If you look at Quis as Dun's replacement, and Rush as Quis's replacement from last year, you see that there isn't a HUGE difference in stats. (Ignoring intangibles) As long as, Granger doesn't go into a shell a la the JO syndrome he exhibited, I think you'll see his score numbers stay between 22-24 ppg all season.

count55
12-30-2008, 08:00 AM
The only real phase of Granger's game that has been stepped up is his scoring. I attribute a lot of that to Dunleavy's absence. I think Granger is the Pacers best player. But if Dun could come back at 100% he'd reclaim that title. And for the record, I am very skeptical that he will.


Danny's "scoring" has increased as a result of him improving several facets of his game most notably his ball handling ability, and his ability to get to the line. About the only part of Dunleavy's game where he has a notable advantage over Granger is his passing/decision making. Otherwise they are about equal or Granger is superior. If you look at Quis as Dun's replacement, and Rush as Quis's replacement from last year, you see that there isn't a HUGE difference in stats. (Ignoring intangibles) As long as, Granger doesn't go into a shell a la the JO syndrome he exhibited, I think you'll see his score numbers stay between 22-24 ppg all season.

While I think it's true that Dunleavy was a more complete player than Danny last year, I also agree that Danny has definitely developed more offensively than just his scoring. He has become a better passer, and he attacks the basket better (though not as consistently as he should). His ballhandling is better, but he still has a relatively weak handle.

I believe Danny is the better player now, but I think his advantage over Dunleavy on the defensive end, while still significant, is overblown. I consider Danny an average defender (but a good shot blocker). I tend to be a little disappointed in his defensive decision making and positioning.

I seriously doubt Danny has any problem with Bird's comments about Dunleavy. I'm sure that Danny considers the $64mm extension as ample proof of Bird's belief in his game.

jhondog28
12-30-2008, 09:55 AM
All I know is watching this team vs. last years team I can see heart every game. I honestly think that Granger misses Dunleavy out there and I know Dunleavy has never played with someone as talented as Granger. I feel that both these players compliment eachother very well. I think Bird sees a lot of himself in Dunleavy when he is out on the court. I do not mean by overall talent but how Dun sees the floor and his passion for the game. I think that is why Bird loves Dun so much. Granger overall has more talent than Dun as far as athleticism and defense, but I think they both need eachother on the court to make the "team" successful and I believe they cannot wait to be on the court together.

count55
12-30-2008, 10:19 AM
All I know is watching this team vs. last years team I can see heart every game. I honestly think that Granger misses Dunleavy out there and I know Dunleavy has never played with someone as talented as Granger. I feel that both these players compliment eachother very well. I think Bird sees a lot of himself in Dunleavy when he is out on the court. I do not mean by overall talent but how Dun sees the floor and his passion for the game. I think that is why Bird loves Dun so much. Granger overall has more talent than Dun as far as athleticism and defense, but I think they both need eachother on the court to make the "team" successful and I believe they cannot wait to be on the court together.

I would agree. I think Danny would love to have Dunleavy back out there to share some of the load.

Jonathan
12-30-2008, 10:21 AM
I am excited to see how Dunleavy matches up with Rasho. The ball will be going into the basket without even a dribble.

JayRedd
12-30-2008, 08:31 PM
While I think it's true that Dunleavy was a more complete player than Danny last year, I also agree that Danny has definitely developed more offensively than just his scoring. He has become a better passer, and he attacks the basket better (though not as consistently as he should). His ballhandling is better, but he still has a relatively weak handle.

I believe Danny is the better player now, but I think his advantage over Dunleavy on the defensive end, while still significant, is overblown. I consider Danny an average defender (but a good shot blocker). I tend to be a little disappointed in his defensive decision making and positioning.

I seriously doubt Danny has any problem with Bird's comments about Dunleavy. I'm sure that Danny considers the $64mm extension as ample proof of Bird's belief in his game.

Co-sign on every word of this.

Dunleavy was the MVP last season. Danny has since evolved. But given the large $ extension plus the "can't lose your position when your injured" theory (being extended to your MVP position in this extrapolation), it's not outrageous for Bird to say such things.