PDA

View Full Version : Pacers vs. Pistons Postgame



pianoman
01-14-2009, 10:43 PM
Great ot win! I didn't think we could pull it out but we did. I mentioned it earlier, i really like our starting lineup when our team is healthy! TJ is a beast! We really needed this, and I could see this as the beginning of a win streak!

Kstat
01-14-2009, 10:45 PM
better team won.

duke dynamite
01-14-2009, 10:47 PM
better team won.
Thank you. I admire your sportsmanship.

*The Pistons didn't play too bad themselves...

SoupIsGood
01-14-2009, 10:47 PM
:fireworks

NapTonius Monk
01-14-2009, 10:48 PM
I like it when TJ is aggressive. Complements Danny very well. This is the closest we've been to full strength this year. Can't wait until Marquis finally heals up. I think the Toronto game will be great!

Lord Helmet
01-14-2009, 10:50 PM
better team won.
:laugh:

You guys are clearly a lot better than us, all you have to do is look at your record vs. ours.

Obviously we played better tonight, but I still think you guys are better than us.

Kstat
01-14-2009, 10:53 PM
:laugh:

You guys are clearly a lot better than us, all you have to do is look at your record vs. ours.

Obviously we played better tonight, but I still think you guys are better than us.

As long as this roster and this coach stays intact, the Pistons will not make the playoffs. The Pacers might, but the Pistons won't.

I fully believe the Pacers would beat this team in a 7 game series. Curry would start Iverson at center if he could get away with it.

the only thing that can save them is another injury to either iverson or hamilton, or curry being fired.

Pacers#1Fan
01-14-2009, 10:53 PM
Nice win, like the consistency from Granger. Free throws killed Detroit.

LoneGranger33
01-14-2009, 10:53 PM
Old Reliable won this game for us, but Danny saved us from the loss.

pianoman
01-14-2009, 10:54 PM
Did anybody else think that this was one of those games that wasn't really ugly? Not too many turnovers, and it was really exciting to watch

Anthem
01-14-2009, 10:55 PM
So... does Ford go back to the starting lineup?

Dr. Awesome
01-14-2009, 10:55 PM
As long as this roster and this coach stays intact, the Pistons will not make the playoffs. The Pacers might, but the Pistons won't.

I fully believe the Pacers would beat this team in a 7 game series. Curry would start Iverson at center if he could get away with it.

Agreed. I called right away that trading Billups would ruin the Pistons this year. I think he is one of the most underrated players in the NBA year after year.

Agreed on Pacers winning in 7. I still think ya'll will make the playoffs.

Quis
01-14-2009, 10:56 PM
Granger looks to have some clutch in his game. I think he's hit more last second shots this season than J.O. did the entire time he was our 'team leader'.

pianoman
01-14-2009, 10:56 PM
So... does Ford go back to the starting lineup?

If he feels good, definately!

Kstat
01-14-2009, 10:56 PM
Agreed. I called right away that trading Billups would ruin the Pistons this year. I think he is one of the most underrated players in the NBA year after year.

Stuckey has more than repalced Billups.

The Pistons have the worst coach in franchise history dragging them down like a 15-ton anchor. He;s cost them at least 6 or 7 wins already this season.

LoneGranger33
01-14-2009, 10:57 PM
So... does Ford go back to the starting lineup?

Unless we have plans to trade him.

Frostwolf
01-14-2009, 11:02 PM
the pistons will be still a contender (and obviously much better than us) once they stop going small all the time.

CableKC
01-14-2009, 11:03 PM
I mentioned this in the game thread.....but limiting the scoring to 93 points in 4 QTRs seems very un-Pacers like. I know that it led to OT and we did score over 100+ points.....but there has to be something said about whatever we did here.

We took 12 less FGA then they did...yet we won....did we actually play solid defense?

or

Did the Pistons just play really bad?

or

Was it some combination of both?

Kstat
01-14-2009, 11:03 PM
the pistons will be still a contender (and obviously much better than us) once they stop going small all the time.

in other words, they won't.

shags
01-14-2009, 11:03 PM
The Pistons are like a more talented version of the past few years' Knicks teams. Lots of big names, but a horrendous fit. They're even as poorly coached.

I think The Sports Guy had it right.

And Allen Iverson isn't the greatest fit for the Pistons since he plays the exact same position as Rip Hamilton, he couldn't defend me at this point, and we just spent the past 12 years proving you can't win anything if Iverson's your point guard. At crunch time, they're screwed because they'll have to play Rip and Iverson at the same time and that's a disaster on a number of levels. That move was a straight salary dump by Dumars -- he gave up on the 2009 season and threw his fans off the scent by bringing in Iverson, period, end of story.

From http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/081114.

I think Dumars gave up on this season, and made the deal for cap space. Which, in retrospect, wasn't all that bad of an idea, since I don't think the Billups led team could have won the title this year. Plus Stuckey's development has been accelerated without Billups.

Frostwolf
01-14-2009, 11:04 PM
oh and, first double-double in quite a while from danny. i like how ge can both rebound and pass, soon he'll be doing both at the same time.

shags
01-14-2009, 11:05 PM
As for the Pacers, I thought when Ford and Jack got on quick scoring runs at the end of the third and fourth, when the Pistons were threatening to pull away, won the game for them. That and poor Piston free throw shooting.

Kstat
01-14-2009, 11:05 PM
Allen Iverson is not playing point guard, so sports guy didnt really get it right.

Dr. Hibbert
01-14-2009, 11:05 PM
Very impressive game by Ford, he hit some big shots throughout. Nice to know that even on an "off" night, Danny's still good for clutch shots and 20+.

The bigs on this team are a tale of haves and have-nots. Obviously they don't have a complete one yet. Murphy's probably the closest they have, and we all hope Hibbert can develop into one. But on any given night, it's guaranteed at least one of Murphy, Foster or Rasho is going to look awful out there. Hopefully JOB notes that early and goes with what's working rather than trying to force the issue.

Better defensive performance out there tonight. Not great, though. Pistons killed themselves from the foul line.

BlueNGold
01-14-2009, 11:06 PM
The Pistons have lost 4 of the last 5 including losses to dogs like Sacramento and Charlotte. They are just not playing well....but I know why.

Iversonitis.

Kstat
01-14-2009, 11:06 PM
As for the Pacers, I thought when Ford and Jack got on quick scoring runs at the end of the third and fourth, when the Pistons were threatening to pull away, won the game for them. That and poor Piston free throw shooting.

...don't forget curry repeatedly calling plays for prince, iverson and sheed down the stretch when Stuckey was scoring at will.

shags
01-14-2009, 11:11 PM
Allen Iverson is not playing point guard, so sports guy didnt really get it right.

He got it right. This was written originally right after the trade, and Iverson did play PG for awhile before the Pistons went small. It's spot on IMO.

YoSoyIndy
01-14-2009, 11:14 PM
Jack shouldn't have been on the court after getting the tech late in the 4th. I feel like Singletary, but "... Can't do it."

He was out of control. He should have been kicked out of the game.

I like Jack. I think he could become a Billups-like player, but before that can even be considered he has to become mentally and emotionally strong. That's why I always liked Billups.

Although Stuckey has done a great job, I don't think he's replaced Billups because Billups is a great leader who takes control of every situation and rarely -- if ever -- has a mental lapse.

Anthem
01-14-2009, 11:14 PM
Allen Iverson is not playing point guard, so sports guy didnt really get it right.
He never imagined that any NBA coach would start Ivy at the 2 and Rip at the 3 for more than one game.

count55
01-14-2009, 11:15 PM
I mentioned this in the game thread.....but limiting the scoring to 93 points in 4 QTRs seems very un-Pacers like. I know that it led to OT and we did score over 100+ points.....but there has to be something said about whatever we did here.

We took 12 less FGA then they did...yet we won....did we actually play solid defense?

or

Did the Pistons just play really bad?

or

Was it some combination of both?

Basically the Pistons slowed us down...we more or less played at their pace.

As to the 12 less FGA, we also took 15 more FT's.

Pacers played decent defense, but it helps when Rasheed decides he's going to take 11 threes.

Bball
01-14-2009, 11:17 PM
Iverson is not the answer?

-Bball

vnzla81
01-14-2009, 11:18 PM
Allen Iverson is not playing point guard, so sports guy didnt really get it right.

Joe dumars is really smart, I know the pistons are not winning many games this year, even though I think they are at least going to make it to the second round, he made that deal for iverson just to create cap space for next year, the piston are going to have Iverson and rasheed off the book, this two combined could be like 35mil, pistons are going to be one of does team trying to get boozer, trust me they be better next year they are not as bad as the pacers.

FireTheCoach
01-14-2009, 11:42 PM
I thought the Pistons played a pretty mediocre game except for Stuckey looked unstoppable most of the time.

JJack is quickly becoming my most unliked player on our team.... too many poor decisions from him game after game. When he threw that pass away at the 8 min mark of Q3.... I mean, WTF.. Stuckey is lightning fast and he was standing right there. Just poor court vision/stupid mistake on Jacks part. I dont care if he can hit a jumper or not, he can't play defense and he needs to start playing like he's in the NBA instead of college.

Unclebuck
01-14-2009, 11:43 PM
So... does Ford go back to the starting lineup?

No, he is no where near 100%. In fact he asked to be taken out after tweaking his back and the only reason he came back late in the 4th is because Jack got that T

theboyjwo
01-14-2009, 11:49 PM
What is with JOB during the press conference saying point totals don't matter? Only field goal percentage.....no wonder we lose so many games, the defense isn't geared toward limiting points, its geared towards how many shots the opposing team misses.

Pacers#1Fan
01-14-2009, 11:49 PM
The Pistons have the worst coach in franchise history dragging them down like a 15-ton anchor. He;s cost them at least 6 or 7 wins already this season.
You will be hard pressed to get sympathy for bad coaching around here lol. Antonio has been the one that's put the nail in the Pacers coffin the last few times we've met, he just wasn't playing his usual ball tonight.

BlueNGold
01-14-2009, 11:52 PM
Iverson is not the answer?

-Bball

Yes he is. He's the wrong answer....:devil:

The Pistons used to fit together like a puzzle. Now they are attempting to stick Iverson and Hamilton on the floor for long periods of time, and it's just not a good combination. It is hard to fit Iverson and Hamilton on the floor together without a midget line-up. As good as Stuckey may be, it is a mess. Maybe they'll figure it out, but I doubt it. Also, Iverson dominates the ball and Detroit was always at its very best when the ball was moving quickly.

So most of the problem is Iverson meshing with the other talent IMO. Honestly, I knew this would happen. We should dredge up some posts on this about now.

There could also be chemistry problems and players not being happy Billups is gone of course...but I don't think that's the main problem.

Unclebuck
01-14-2009, 11:57 PM
What is with JOB during the press conference saying point totals don't matter? Only field goal percentage.....no wonder we lose so many games, the defense isn't geared toward limiting points, its geared towards how many shots the opposing team misses.

No, OB is correct, defensive FG% is the most important defensive stats. Pacers are an excellent defensive rebounding team so a missed shot from the opponent is like a steal

McKeyFan
01-14-2009, 11:57 PM
No, he is no where near 100%. In fact he asked to be taken out after tweaking his back and the only reason he came back late in the 4th is because Jack got that T

I'm glad to hear this.

Because I thought JOB just chose to have Jack in at the end (before the Technical) and not Ford, apart from any other factors.

Jack did hit some big shots in the last few minutes. But when it's all being decided in the last minute or two, he makes me very uncomfortable. I think TJ is more clutch and I prefer him to play at the end.

Great win for the Pacers. Props to Murph.

CableKC
01-14-2009, 11:57 PM
What is with JOB during the press conference saying point totals don't matter? Only field goal percentage.....no wonder we lose so many games, the defense isn't geared toward limiting points, its geared towards how many shots the opposing team misses.
In a game where we are pushing the offensive tempo, I think it is as important to consider the opposing teams FG%.

Bball
01-15-2009, 12:06 AM
I don't think it hurt a bit, for whatever reason, that the score stayed close to 100 and that it wasn't 115-115 heading into overtime.

Infinite MAN_force
01-15-2009, 12:21 AM
What is with JOB during the press conference saying point totals don't matter? Only field goal percentage.....no wonder we lose so many games, the defense isn't geared toward limiting points, its geared towards how many shots the opposing team misses.

:hmm:

dohman
01-15-2009, 12:27 AM
What is with JOB during the press conference saying point totals don't matter? Only field goal percentage.....no wonder we lose so many games, the defense isn't geared toward limiting points, its geared towards how many shots the opposing team misses.

I can agree with this.

If the pace of the game dictates them scoring 115 ppg at a low percentage its not different then scoring 95 points at the same low percentage.

If you and the opposition both shoot the ball within the first 10-15 seconds of the shot clock you are going to have more possessions during the game which is going to allow for more scoring. That is a given, but if you can hold the team to a low shooting percentage then you are doing your job defensive.

Basically More possessions = More points no matter how good your defense is.

theboyjwo
01-15-2009, 12:35 AM
No, OB is correct, defensive FG% is the most important defensive stats. Pacers are an excellent defensive rebounding team so a missed shot from the opponent is like a steal

But in the same token, a team that wants to score in transition should be playing defense to limit shots and cause turn overs. Any decent team in the NBA is going to shoot above 45%. Heck if this is the most important stat to our defense, then we really suck, because give up open 3's in the corner all night long, and give up a ton of easy buckets close to the hoop. If you are gonna play uptempo, then you gotta defend the passing lanes, but we get beat every game by PGs who penetrate and dish off.

El Pacero
01-15-2009, 12:35 AM
JOB was saying during postgame interview that TJ looked like he had a steel rod in his back, he was playing that stiff, but was able to do some good things for the team. TJ said he is still not 100%, and is taking baby steps to get better, and he doesn't think it will last the rest of the season. So yeah, he's not there yet and probably won't be starting soon. JOB also started the interview complaining to the press about the sticky stuff on the mic that ruins his ties, and he just bought a new tie today and it's already ruined, and went on and on after he just won a game in overtime, ha. pretty funny.

I was at the game and it was so boring during the first half. The Pistons played super slow and we just matched their pace, and barely had any movement. Graham goes to the same position and just stands their almost every play, and didn't have any points until the second half. (wonder why, he's never open) Jack and Foster had some stupid mistakes, but luck went our way a lot of plays and the Pistons missed some shots.

First overtime we have won out of five this season. Glad to break that streak.

BlueNGold
01-15-2009, 12:38 AM
JOb is passing the kool-aide out and people are drinking it.

This is precisely the problem with his coaching philosophy. If you're team is used to a transition game and somehow "defending" well enough to keep the opposing team's FG% down....what happens when a good team slows the game down and forces half court sets? Utah did that several times last night and we looked foolish. San Antonio and Detroit thrived in the playoffs by doing that. Dallas and Phoenix died in the playoffs by doing the opposite. Why this lesson has not been learned yet, IDK.

...and please don't jump to conclusions and think we shut down a good team tonight. They just lost to Sacramento, Charlotte and were spanked hard by Utah too. These are not your father's Pistons. They're not even your mother's.

Bball
01-15-2009, 12:47 AM
JOb is passing the kool-aide out and people are drinking it.

This is precisely the problem with his coaching philosophy. If you're team is used to a transition game and somehow "defending" well enough to keep the opposing team's FG% down....what happens when a good team slows the game down and forces half court sets? Utah did that several times last night and we looked foolish. San Antonio and Detroit thrived in the playoffs by doing that. Dallas and Phoenix died in the playoffs by doing the opposite. Why this lesson has not been learned yet, IDK.

...and please don't jump to conclusions and think we shut down a good team tonight. They just lost to Sacramento, Charlotte and were spanked hard by Utah too. These are not your father's Pistons. They're not even your mother's.

The next thing you know you'll be telling us that wasn't great defense on Rip Hamilton forcing him to miss that potential game winner in regulation. Rather than forcing him into a contested shot and getting his adrenaline up, we left him undefended and caused him to miss from the shock of it. Brilliant strategy!!! :brilliant:

Infinite MAN_force
01-15-2009, 12:54 AM
JOb is passing the kool-aide out and people are drinking it.

This is precisely the problem with his coaching philosophy. If you're team is used to a transition game and somehow "defending" well enough to keep the opposing team's FG% down....what happens when a good team slows the game down and forces half court sets? Utah did that several times last night and we looked foolish. San Antonio and Detroit thrived in the playoffs by doing that. Dallas and Phoenix died in the playoffs by doing the opposite. Why this lesson has not been learned yet, IDK.



Isn't that prescisly what happened? Detroit slowed down the pace of the game and yet... we won? I don't understand your point.

I am not sure how Defensive rating is determined, but there is a lot more to it than Points allowed, and Opposing FG% is a big part. Generally, forcing your oppenents to take more contested shots is going to result in a lower FG%, allowing a layup line will result in a very high one... it is a very good indicator of defense. PPG is almost meaningless. Faster Pace = More Possesions = More points scored, by both teams. How do you win? Outscore your opponent.

Spirit
01-15-2009, 12:58 AM
I like Jack. I think he could become a Billups-like player, but before that can even be considered he has to become mentally and emotionally strong. That's why I always liked Billups.


He doesn't have the passing, handling, or shooting Billups has. He's at best a below average starter or good 2nd point guard.

CableKC
01-15-2009, 12:58 AM
Rather than forcing him into a contested shot and getting his adrenaline up, we left him undefended and caused him to miss from the shock of it. Brilliant strategy!!! :brilliant:
It's called the "Jeff Foster" manuever.

BlueNGold
01-15-2009, 01:00 AM
The next thing you know you'll be telling us that wasn't great defense on Rip Hamilton forcing him to miss that potential game winner in regulation. Rather than forcing him into a contested shot and getting his adrenaline up, we left him undefended and caused him to miss from the shock of it. Brilliant strategy!!! :brilliant:

Yes, the earth is flat too.

When I hear a coach say that giving up 50 points is great defense....absolutely great defense....I begin to wonder if I understand what defense is. Then I look at the Cavs and Celtics record and note they give up the least points in the NBA. Funny they lead their divisions. It seems with those teams that limiting the number of points is a good enough measure. Then I look at Golden State who give up the most points...and sure enough their record is .282. ...and things begin to make sense again.

Then I consider NBA champions like Detroit, San Antonio and even the Celtics last year. Then I consider transition teams like Phoenix and Dallas and begin counting their NBA championships. Hmmmmmm.

ilive4sports
01-15-2009, 01:01 AM
Found this little nugget on the Game Notes section of the recap on espn.com


http://espn.go.com/nba/recap?gameId=290114011
Granger has scored 20 or more points in 14 straight games, the longest streak in the league

theboyjwo
01-15-2009, 01:02 AM
Isn't that prescisly what happened? Detroit slowed down the pace of the game and yet... we won? I don't understand your point.

I am not sure how Defensive rating is determined, but there is a lot more to it than Points allowed, and Opposing FG% is a big part. Generally, forcing your oppenents to take more contested shots is going to result in a lower FG%, allowing a layup line will result in a very high one... it is a very good indicator of defense. PPG is almost meaningless. Faster Pace = More Possesions = More points scored, by both teams. How do you win? Outscore your opponent.

But this doesn't take foul shooting into consideration, which is exactly why we won tonight. Pistons had a terrible night at the line. Normally good teams can make up for a bad shooting night by getting to the foul line. Many times this season the opposing team has wont the Foul shot attempts.

Bball
01-15-2009, 01:03 AM
Has any Pacer individually ever had a season like Danny is having?

Bball
01-15-2009, 01:04 AM
But this doesn't take foul shooting into consideration, which is exactly why we won tonight. Pistons had a terrible night at the line. Normally good teams can make up for a bad shooting night by getting to the foul line. Many times this season the opposing team has wont the Foul shot attempts.

Our FT defense was awesome tonight.

;)

BlueNGold
01-15-2009, 01:04 AM
Isn't that prescisly what happened? Detroit slowed down the pace of the game and yet... we won? I don't understand your point.

I am not sure how Defensive rating is determined, but there is a lot more to it than Points allowed, and Opposing FG% is a big part. Generally, forcing your oppenents to take more contested shots is going to result in a lower FG%, allowing a layup line will result in a very high one... it is a very good indicator of defense. PPG is almost meaningless. Faster Pace = More Possesions = More points scored, by both teams. How do you win? Outscore your opponent.

I see you didn't quote...and may not have read the rest of my post.

Here's your answer:
...and please don't jump to conclusions and think we shut down a good team tonight. They just lost to Sacramento, Charlotte and were spanked hard by Utah too. These are not your father's Pistons. They're not even your mother's.

It's not hard to beat a team playing as bad as the Pistons regardless of your strategy. They are obviously out of sync and our "defense" was no better or worse than last night's beating. The reality is, we are better than some teams in the league...and that's not news.

How's that kool-aide btw? Cherry?

ilive4sports
01-15-2009, 01:04 AM
Yes, the earth is flat too.

When I hear a coach say that giving up 50 points is great defense....absolutely great defense....I begin to wonder if I understand what defense is. Then I look at the Cavs and Celtics record and note they give up the least points in the NBA. Funny they lead their divisions. It seems with those teams that limiting the number of points is a good enough measure. Then I look at Golden State who give up the most points...and sure enough their record is .282. ...and things begin to make sense again.

Then I consider NBA champions like Detroit, San Antonio and even the Celtics last year. Then I consider transition teams like Phoenix and Dallas and begin counting their NBA championships. Hmmmmmm.

Did you happen to see who leads the NBA in defensive FG%? Cleveland and Boston...

Oh and Orlando is number three in that category and the Lakers are number 8 where as in PPG allowed they are number 16.

BlueNGold
01-15-2009, 01:10 AM
Did you happen to see who leads the NBA in defensive FG%? Cleveland and Boston...

I'm not saying a good defensive FG% is not a good measure, but you cannot ignore points. I'm not the one ignoring part of the picture.

My point is that points scored has to be considered...or you have to throw most of the models out the window.

Bball
01-15-2009, 01:12 AM
If we averaged 120 and our opponents averaged 110 then I suppose things would look a lot better... but the reality is we allow more than we score. That's not going to work in a team's favor no matter how you slice and dice it. We also allow teams to shoot a higher percentage than us (or do we fail to shoot a higher percentage than the opposition?).

BlueNGold
01-15-2009, 01:14 AM
Did you happen to see who leads the NBA in defensive FG%? Cleveland and Boston...

Oh and Orlando is number three in that category and the Lakers are number 8 where as in PPG allowed they are number 16.

The Lakers also lost to the Celtics in the finals, didn't they?

ilive4sports
01-15-2009, 01:14 AM
Points scored should be considered, but if you are holding a team to a low FG% and they score a lot, something is telling me the problem isnt the defense, its more of rebounding so the other team gets multiple chances at the basket instead of one, or there are turnovers on the offensive side of the ball leading to some easy baskets for the opposition. Also you need to look at the amount of foul shots the opposition is taking. Teams can shoot 40% in a game, but if they get to the line often, well it makes things more difficult.

EDIT: what do the Lakers losing to the Celtics have to do with anything? The Celtics clearly had a better defense last season, allowed less points and had a better defensive FG%. Not quite sure what you are getting at.

BlueNGold
01-15-2009, 01:17 AM
This is all about probabilities. It is more likely you will have success by limiting points and % than simply focusing on %. History backs this up.

Shade
01-15-2009, 01:25 AM
We may not have the best record in the world, but a season in which we beat the Celtics, Lakers, Knicks, and Pistons can't be all bad. :D

Shade
01-15-2009, 01:29 AM
As long as this roster and this coach stays intact, the Pistons will not make the playoffs. The Pacers might, but the Pistons won't.

I fully believe the Pacers would beat this team in a 7 game series. Curry would start Iverson at center if he could get away with it.

the only thing that can save them is another injury to either iverson or hamilton, or curry being fired.

That's crazy talk.

You're crazy. :crazy:

theboyjwo
01-15-2009, 01:29 AM
This is all about probabilities. It is more likely you will have success by limiting points and % than simply focusing on %. History backs this up.

Exactly, and our dunce of a coach only cares about one. Like I said, its no wonder we lose so many games, we focus on shots missed. In the NBA all teams have players who make contested shots.

Shade
01-15-2009, 01:30 AM
Did you happen to see who leads the NBA in defensive FG%? Cleveland and Boston...

Oh and Orlando is number three in that category and the Lakers are number 8 where as in PPG allowed they are number 16.

The Lakers' defense is terrible, and is the reason they won't win the championship this season.

duke dynamite
01-15-2009, 01:31 AM
That's crazy talk.

You're crazy. :crazy:

<embed src="http://xml.truveo.com/eb/i/2746852793/a/4c86ff7dda1f7b769d520f50a4658f1d/p/1" quality="high" bgcolor="#000000" width=" 425" height=" 347" align="middle" allowScriptAccess="sameDomain" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer"></embed><div style="background-color:#315270; width:425px; height:14px;text-align:center;"><a href="http://www.truveo.com/" target="_blank" style="font-family:Arial; font-size:9px; font-weight:100; color:#C7D8E7;line-height:14px; text-decoration:none; letter-spacing:0.1em;">Find more videos like this on www.truveo.com.</a></div>

Trader Joe
01-15-2009, 01:50 AM
That's crazy talk.

You're crazy. :crazy:

They're dooooooooooooooooooomed.

Or something like that...

Midcoasted
01-15-2009, 01:50 AM
As long as this roster and this coach stays intact, the Pistons will not make the playoffs. The Pacers might, but the Pistons won't.

I fully believe the Pacers would beat this team in a 7 game series. Curry would start Iverson at center if he could get away with it.

the only thing that can save them is another injury to either iverson or hamilton, or curry being fired.

I think I agree with you for some reason. Losing Wallace and Billups, IMO, means you lost your two best players. I think the Pacers could take them maybe...I still think you will make the playoffs because the East will have someoone there winning like 40 percent of their games or less. For us it's a toss up but I'm pretty confident we will start winning games on the contrary to what most others think here. We are a good team. We aren't terrible because we are giving up a lot of points or we aren't winning close games. We are in every single game no matter what team it is and we will learn to start winning. People seem to forget we have like 7 or 8 new players this year. It takes a while to build team chemistry and continuity. The fact we have been close pretty much every game this year speaks volumes. Once our guys get healthy and the team chemistry starts to take off we will be a winning franchise again.

The days of JO are over. Granger is a beast and is proving he is definitely worthy of a shoe in for a top 10 player this year.

Anthem
01-15-2009, 02:09 AM
He doesn't have the passing, handling, or shooting Billups has.
Neither did Billups, early in his career. Dude was a classic late bloomer.

Will Galen
01-15-2009, 02:11 AM
Something to worry about.

It may be nothing, but after the game Mark was interviewing Dun and asked him how he was holding up, meaning health and knee wise, and Dun didn't answer. Mark asked him if he was there a couple times and was going to try to reconnect when Dun said, "I'm here."

I guess Dun was in the locker room so maybe he was just distracted, but Mark didn't go back to that question, so I'm thinking maybe Dun's knee is flaring up again, or something else is wrong.

It was a worrisome byplay.

imawhat
01-15-2009, 02:36 AM
Something to worry about.

It may be nothing, but after the game Mark was interviewing Dun and asked him how he was holding up, meaning health and knee wise, and Dun didn't answer. Mark asked him if he was there a couple times and was going to try to reconnect when Dun said, "I'm here."

I guess Dun was in the locker room so maybe he was just distracted, but Mark didn't go back to that question, so I'm thinking maybe Dun's knee is flaring up again, or something else is wrong.

It was a worrisome byplay.

:(

Reminds me of Bender's "it is what it is" comment right before he sat out several games and retired.

I saw him getting some extra treatment on the sidelines tonight. I'm sure his knee is going to be temperamental, but it didn't seem to affect him that much (the first thing I always notice with knee pain is players who are slow to pick up balls rolling on the court).

Lord Helmet
01-15-2009, 02:54 AM
Something to worry about.

It may be nothing, but after the game Mark was interviewing Dun and asked him how he was holding up, meaning health and knee wise, and Dun didn't answer. Mark asked him if he was there a couple times and was going to try to reconnect when Dun said, "I'm here."

I guess Dun was in the locker room so maybe he was just distracted, but Mark didn't go back to that question, so I'm thinking maybe Dun's knee is flaring up again, or something else is wrong.

It was a worrisome byplay.
Well on Pacers Post game they interviewed Mike in the locker room and he said the knee is feeling fine, and that he feels great with the limited minutes.

Suaveness
01-15-2009, 03:10 AM
I don't think it's been mentioned enough how much JOB sucks.

Peck
01-15-2009, 03:45 AM
I just hope that everybody does not get to high off of this win.

I'll take any win at this point and be happy about it, however I will re-emphasize that this is the worst I have seen the Detroit Pistons play since Joe Dumars took over.

I'm glad we won, really I am, but this is not a magic elixer for what ailes us.

As bad as Detroit played we still had to go to O.T. to take this and Rip could have won this in regulation if he hit that shot.

Good win, but there still is a LOT of work to do.

YoSoyIndy
01-15-2009, 09:34 AM
He doesn't have the passing, handling, or shooting Billups has. He's at best a below average starter or good 2nd point guard.

Did you watch Bilups during his first couple years? He was turnover-prone, a poor 3-point shooter, and didn't get many assists. Billups didn't become a consistent 3-pt shooter until a few years ago.

Obviously Jack isn't Billups now, but why can't he develop into one?

Players do develop additional skills in the NBA. Jason Richardson wasn't much of a 3-pt shooter in college - especially his frosh year -- and now he's shooting nearly 50%.

owl
01-15-2009, 09:45 AM
Stuckey has more than repalced Billups.

The Pistons have the worst coach in franchise history dragging them down like a 15-ton anchor. He;s cost them at least 6 or 7 wins already this season.


What I don't understand is the talk about bringing Rip off the bench instead of Iverson.
Iverson is a one and done player most likely so why not keep your leading scorer happy.
Stuckey is going to be star in the likes of Wade.

ABADays
01-15-2009, 10:07 AM
As long as this roster and this coach stays intact, the Pistons will not make the playoffs. The Pacers might, but the Pistons won't.

I fully believe the Pacers would beat this team in a 7 game series. Curry would start Iverson at center if he could get away with it.

the only thing that can save them is another injury to either iverson or hamilton, or curry being fired.

I'm speechless. :-o

owl
01-15-2009, 10:36 AM
I just hope that everybody does not get to high off of this win.

I'll take any win at this point and be happy about it, however I will re-emphasize that this is the worst I have seen the Detroit Pistons play since Joe Dumars took over.

I'm glad we won, really I am, but this is not a magic elixer for what ailes us.

As bad as Detroit played we still had to go to O.T. to take this and Rip could have won this in regulation if he hit that shot.

Good win, but there still is a LOT of work to do.


My impression while watching this game was how bad the defense is and thinking that it cannot improve. Wrong players(too slow) and maybe the wrong coach.

tde3000
01-15-2009, 10:40 AM
i really liked this:
6-20 FG but 10-11 FT.
even if he has a BAD shooting night he get's 24 Pts, which is great!

HeliumFear
01-15-2009, 03:54 PM
My favorite play of the night:

<i>TJ Ford,inside...missed it.
...
NO HE DIDN'T! NO HE DIDN'T!</i>

naptownmenace
01-15-2009, 04:28 PM
Stuckey has more than repalced Billups.

The Pistons have the worst coach in franchise history dragging them down like a 15-ton anchor. He;s cost them at least 6 or 7 wins already this season.

Sure the coaching hasn't been that good but I think you're understating the Billups effect. He was the glue that kept that team together and although Stuckey can match Billup's point production, he's only half the defender that Chauncey is.

They sacrificed defense for offense when they traded Billups for short guards like Iverson and Stuckey. That starting lineup has to be the smallest in the history of Pistons basketball. Until they figure out who to relegate to the bench, Rip or Iverson, they're gonna have nights like last night.

OakMoses
01-15-2009, 04:55 PM
I didn't get to see the game. Can someone explain all the Jack hatred that's going on in this thread? From the box score and play-by-play it doesn't look like he had a bad game at all and it looks like he came up pretty big in the 4th quarter and OT. Also, what was the deal with his technical? Did he deserve it? Was he fouled on the play?

duke dynamite
01-15-2009, 04:59 PM
I didn't get to see the game. Can someone explain all the Jack hatred that's going on in this thread? From the box score and play-by-play it doesn't look like he had a bad game at all and it looks like he came up pretty big in the 4th quarter and OT. Also, what was the deal with his technical? Did he deserve it? Was he fouled on the play?
He was fouled but no whistle. It led to a change in possession. He got very irate and in turn called for a T.

HeliumFear
01-15-2009, 05:01 PM
Rasheed hit him on the face,I think. I'd have been ticked too.

Unclebuck
01-15-2009, 05:04 PM
How come Bob Kravitz didn't write a column on the Pacers. He was at the game and was seated on press row

NuffSaid
01-15-2009, 05:19 PM
Nice win, like the consistency from Granger. Free throws killed Detroit.

It's about time the Pacers had a free throw advantage in a game. I've gotten so tired of the FT shooting being so lopsided.

The bigs on this team are a tale of haves and have-nots. Obviously they don't have a complete one yet. Murphy's probably the closest they have, and we all hope Hibbert can develop into one. But on any given night, it's guaranteed at least one of Murphy, Foster or Rasho is going to look awful out there.
And such was the case last night w/foster and Rasho. Btwn them, I estimate they left 20 pts right at the rim by way of either missed FT, tip-ins or easy layups. The game could have been a complete blow-out otherwise. Still, I'll take a win in OT against one of the NBA's elite anyday!

Justin Tyme
01-15-2009, 05:26 PM
I didn't get to see the game. Can someone explain all the Jack hatred that's going on in this thread? From the box score and play-by-play it doesn't look like he had a bad game at all and it looks like he came up pretty big in the 4th quarter and OT. Also, what was the deal with his technical? Did he deserve it? Was he fouled on the play?



Jack got fouled by Wallace on drive to the basket with no foul called. Yes, Jack lost it and got a "T", but the Pistons missed the tech shot. It didn't cost the Pacers. Unfortunately, Jack haters are looking for anything to complain about. Same as always.

If they want to complain, then let them complain about the layup Foster missed at the beginning of the game or any of the foul shots he missed. If he had hit any of them or if Granger hit any of the 14 shots he missed, the game would never have gone into OT, but it's always eazier for the Jack haters to complain about Jack.

count55
01-15-2009, 09:54 PM
I think Jack's T was a cumulative explosion. The last two or three games (at least) the P's have been getting in the lane, drawing contact, and not getting calls. For Danny alone, I thought he should've had 8 more FT's in the Utah game, and 4 or 6 more last night.

On the other hand, there have been a number of touch fouls called on the Pacers.

Yes, it was a mistake on Jack's part, but I understood his reaction perfectly.

YoSoyIndy
01-15-2009, 10:56 PM
Rasheed hit him on the face,I think. I'd have been ticked too.


I would have been upset, too, but it wouldn't rationalize nearly losing the game for us. He got fouled. It should upset him. It shouldn't get us a T in the final stages of a close game.

I wouldn't have played him the rest of the game. Can't trust him in that emotional state.

BRushWithDeath
01-15-2009, 11:26 PM
I wouldn't have played him the rest of the game. Can't trust him in that emotional state.

You can't trust him at the end of any close game. He's guaranteed to make some boneheaded mistake in the end nearly every game. In the last 3 minutes of the game if they want two point guards on the floor you're better off with Diener. Or at least offense/defense subs.

jeffg-body
01-16-2009, 01:16 AM
I didn't get to see the game. Can someone explain all the Jack hatred that's going on in this thread? From the box score and play-by-play it doesn't look like he had a bad game at all and it looks like he came up pretty big in the 4th quarter and OT. Also, what was the deal with his technical? Did he deserve it? Was he fouled on the play?

I cannot fathom all of the Jack hate that is going around myself. The guy plays hard and has a positive attitude. Yes, he is back-up material so there are gonna be flaws. With the tech he got it was a culmutive effect. There were several "no calls" on our offensive end and we were getting some "ticky tac" fouls called upon us. I was glad to see some emotion and fire from some person out there. I don't see this as a breakdown or anything because he is not regularly pulling an "Artest".

I did remember seeing a blog that said if Diener's brain could be in Jack's body we'd have a great point guard.

:deadhorse

OakMoses
01-16-2009, 01:45 AM
I did remember seeing a blog that said if Diener's brain could be in Jack's body we'd have a great point guard.

:deadhorse
I think I might have posted this in another thread around here. If not, I've certainly thought it.