PDA

View Full Version : Pacers @ Thunder Postgame - McRoberts gets 0 minutes again



BRushWithDeath
01-09-2010, 10:46 PM
:bs::picardriker:

At least A.J. got a chance. Can't wait to see him go back to the bench.

PaceBalls
01-09-2010, 10:51 PM
Yea no doubt, McBob couldn't see anytime even when Murph was playing center. It will take a trade a massive blowout or another injury for him to get on the floor again I think, especially after Jeff and Tyler get back.

Brad8888
01-09-2010, 10:56 PM
:bs::picardriker:

At least A.J. got a chance. Can't wait to see him go back to the bench.

Me, neither. AJ is playing too well not to end up being treated like Harrison Bergeron.

Sarcasm Alert And enough about that McRoberts guy. He could not possibly have had any fouls or energy to give against a clearly more athletic interior presence of Krstic or Collison. It would have been an epic mismatch.

Hicks
01-09-2010, 10:58 PM
Sometimes handing minutes to the rookie is a bad thing. Then there are times like these with AJ Price.

Just think. If TJ had even played mediocre ball this year, we'd have no clue he was capable of what he did tonight and might not for another year+.

You can give the minutes without promising to give them an unlimited supply. It pays to see what they've got.

Brad8888
01-09-2010, 11:02 PM
Sometimes handing minutes to the rookie is a bad thing. Then there are times like these with AJ Price.

Just think. If TJ had even played mediocre ball this year, we'd have no clue he was capable of what he did tonight and might not for another year+.

You can give the minutes without promising to give them an unlimited supply. It pays to see what they've got.

Why do I think, then, that we will play TJ against the Raptors, and AJ will end up benched because Ford has the speed to match Calderon, and Watson is our new Jack?

If that is indeed what happens, what a disservice to AJ and the franchise.

Sorry about the derail.

Hicks
01-09-2010, 11:03 PM
TJ isn't playing Monday unless there's an injury.

gummy
01-09-2010, 11:05 PM
Dahntay Jones plays 6 minutes. I am happy AJ is getting quality time but puzzled as to why DJones barely played and wonder what McBob did that was so bad he is riding the bench again even though we have two bigs out in Foster and Hans. Seemed to me that he played well in the minutes he was given, certainly worth a continued look since we're short up front. Once again I have to say I do not understand the logic underlying the rotation. One step forward (AJ) two steps back (DJones, McBob), I guess.

Putnam
01-09-2010, 11:08 PM
I only listened to the last quarter. But Slick Leonard seemed to be saying that Granger was making a lot of mental mistakes. The problem wasn't Granger's timing, but his thinking.

At one point, Slick said, "Danny's made three decisions in a row and all of them were wrong.

Did it look to others like Danny wasn't thinking well?


.

Brad8888
01-09-2010, 11:10 PM
TJ isn't playing Monday unless there's an injury.

I so much hope that you are right.

Star light
Star bright
First star I see tonight
I wish I may
I wish I might
Have this wish I wish tonight!

Please have AJ play, and while you are at it, please have McRoberts get about 15 meaningful minutes.

kester99
01-09-2010, 11:11 PM
Did it look to others like Danny wasn't thinking well?


.
Before he was injured, as well...yes.

It's the number of 3PAs and when they're taken in the offensive sequence...too many, too soon...and not enough penetration.

gummy
01-09-2010, 11:16 PM
I only listened to the last quarter. But Slick Leonard seemed to be saying that Granger was making a lot of mental mistakes. The problem wasn't Granger's timing, but his thinking.

At one point, Slick said, "Danny's made three decisions in a row and all of them were wrong.

Did it look to others like Danny wasn't thinking well?


.

Yes. I'm willing to make excuses about coming back from injuries, getting in game shape and so on - and those things probably play a big role. But I'm disappointed that Danny's whole season has basically looked like this so far.

LoneGranger33
01-09-2010, 11:17 PM
Yes, he looked downright ****ty, and like Kester said, it isn't the first time this season. I would like to understand why though.

imawhat
01-09-2010, 11:21 PM
I only listened to the last quarter. But Slick Leonard seemed to be saying that Granger was making a lot of mental mistakes. The problem wasn't Granger's timing, but his thinking.

At one point, Slick said, "Danny's made three decisions in a row and all of them were wrong.

Did it look to others like Danny wasn't thinking well?


.

Unfortunately yes. His shot selection this season is arguably the worst on the team. Granger is nowhere close to the player he was at any point last season. It looks like he's purposely taking bad shots.

Durant was amazing tonight. He's progressed very well all season.

A.J. gave us the best pg play we've seen all season, but he was out of gas at the end of the game.

It's not a surprise to give up 100 points when your two best defenders average 16 minutes/game.

Still a nice comeback, although our offense stalled at the end. If only we had a low post threat to run the offense through when things get tough.

Anthem
01-09-2010, 11:25 PM
Yes, he looked downright ****ty, and like Kester said, it isn't the first time this season. I would like to understand why though.
I thought we'd agreed that he was frustrated with Obie's extension? Am I wrong in that?

His heel's been a problem, sure, but his head's not been right all season. And I don't think it's because he's fallen in love with scoring a lot of points or being "the man." I think he heard "Well this year doesn't matter but in a couple years we'll be pretty good" one too many times.

If the goal was to win this year, we'd have already moved TJ/Murphy/Obie. The fact that they're all still here (and that Obie got an extension) proves that management's just marking time and waiting for contracts to expire.

Make no little plans. They have no magic to stir men's blood...

McKeyFan
01-09-2010, 11:28 PM
This team is getting hard to root for.

I'm losing motivation.

Dahntay Jones six minutes? That's a travesty.

Hibbert with 15 minutes. And he sat the bench the final 8 or so minutes.

Jim O'Brien does not value defense and does not desire a low post presence. He doesn't choose to play fundamental, sound basketball. I don't like it.

At the 2:30 mark and at the 1:30 mark, critical points in the game, JOS had Murph at the five jockeying for position down low. First, since when was Murph a solid option down low? He never posts up. Why is this the brilliant plan at the end of the game?

Don't we have a really good low post player on the team? Why was he nowhere to be found?

Anyway, so Murph is the five on both of these critical plays and the other players, particularly Granger, kinda shuffle around the perimeter until somebody chucks up a three. No movement. No screens. No plays. No penetration. Are we supposed to be impressed with this? Does this really represent Indiana?

I am very close to moving into the realms of the darkside, with Jay, Shade, BBall, Peck and others who realized long ago that Jim O'Stubborn's uptempo three happy, defense in lip service only coaching style will never take us anywhere good. We can only wait and grumble and hope the younger players improve until the day another coach graces our franchise.

This whole thing was a tease. Injuries forced JOB to play a team that gave us wins. I assumed that such obvious facts would cause him to make adjustments. Instead, Dahntay Jones gets six minutes tonight. I think that is like spitting in the face of everything Indiana stands for.

JOB said this summer he needed defensive players. Yeah, right.

LoneGranger33
01-09-2010, 11:29 PM
Anthem - Yeah, I believe that's what I saw in the first three games of the season, but I wanted to know what others thought about it. And, of course, since O'Brien is such a blame hog, I just wanted to keep an open mind to other explanations.

kester99
01-09-2010, 11:30 PM
The only thing I can think is that Danny wants that three to fall regularly before he starts concentrating on other things. When he sees it back 'in shape', he'll show a more varied game.

I have no idea whether the above is true. It's just the only rationale I can think of that even seems slightly plausible.

----------------------

Which means, I guess, that i don't buy the 'frustrated with JOB's extension' reasoning.

LoneGranger33
01-09-2010, 11:32 PM
Well, let's try to rule some explanations out - Does anyone think he's just lazy and prefers to settle?

BlueNGold
01-09-2010, 11:38 PM
This team is getting hard to root for.

I'm losing motivation.

Dahntay Jones six minutes? That's a travesty.

Hibbert with 15 minutes. And he sat the bench the final 8 or so minutes.


The strategy is very wrong OR they are trying to lose OR winning is not the #1 priority. I'm thinking it's the last one.

McKeyFan
01-09-2010, 11:39 PM
I think Danny is not real impressed with JOS and has a mentality of "Okay, this is what you want. This is what you'll get."

I think Danny is fed up with the lack of offensive movement and lack of screens, etc, in our offense. I think he realizes that unless he jacks something up when he gets a chance, not much will happen with our offense. And he's right.

Now, if Roy is in the game, some things can happen. And Danny and Roy work well off each other. Roy wasn't in at the end tonight. Because Jim is stubborn.

One other thing: Danny isn't used to playing with AJ Price. Price can actually make some good things happen, and when he's in, Danny doesn't have to chuck up garbage. Danny hasn't quite figured that out yet.

Anthem, I don't think it's been proven that Danny was the player upset at JOS's extension. But it sure seems like he is a likely candidate.

McKeyFan
01-09-2010, 11:40 PM
The strategy is very wrong OR they are trying to lose OR winning is not the #1 priority. I'm thinking it's the last one.

No, I just think JOS has a really pitiful strategy for how to win.

BlueNGold
01-09-2010, 11:40 PM
Well, let's try to rule some explanations out - Does anyone think he's just lazy and prefers to settle?

He's probably just doing whatever JOb is telling him to do...and doing it badly. I think the idea is that JOb wants that shot to start falling.

Sadly, Granger has many other skills that just get thrown in the trash with that strategy.

kester99
01-09-2010, 11:41 PM
Well, let's try to rule some explanations out - Does anyone think he's just lazy and prefers to settle?

I'd see that one's likelihood a bit less than the JOB extension.


He's probably just doing whatever JOb is telling him to do...and doing it badly. I think the idea is that JOb wants that shot to start falling.

That's higher on the list, to me.

BlueNGold
01-09-2010, 11:42 PM
No, I just think JOS has a really pitiful strategy for how to win.

I'm telling you, it cannot be that bad. No one in their right mind would do it. It HAS to be something else.

McKeyFan
01-09-2010, 11:48 PM
I'm telling you, it cannot be that bad. No one in their right mind would do it. It HAS to be something else.

A bunch of guys on this board defend his strategies.

McKeyFan
01-09-2010, 11:50 PM
I'm telling you, it cannot be that bad. No one in their right mind would do it. It HAS to be something else.

If he's playing Murphy for trade value, why does Murph have to play the last five minutes of the last two games? Why does Hibbert not play at all?

It's not about trade value. It's about who JOS thinks gives us the best chance down the stretch.

Yes, he is that dumb-stubborn.

BlueNGold
01-09-2010, 11:55 PM
A bunch of guys on this board defend his strategies.

I think we all need to move on to discussing this issue from a different, more productive angle. For example, can anyone articulate why JOb may think his strategy is the best one for this team? Why he doesn't look at the mountain of evidence to the contrary? Does he think this team is bound to turn it around somehow and "get it"? I've heard some of the players imply that eventually they will get the system. Why in the world is this system so hard to "get"...and what value is it if it takes years to master?...if ever?

vnzla81
01-09-2010, 11:57 PM
A bunch of guys on this board defend his strategies.

bunch of guys like who?:stirthepo

duke dynamite
01-10-2010, 12:01 AM
I thought AJ Price played well...

LoneGranger33
01-10-2010, 12:01 AM
I'll tell you why I think the JOB extension is the root of all evil for Danny. Danny has shown time and time again how badly he wants to win. He's lost teeth diving for loose balls and we've seen his frustration boil over this season when he left the lockerroom without answering any media questions - an event admittedly blown out of proportion. Like many fans, I would guess that he doesn't think this team is built to win, and he probably saw that extension - of a guy who has yet to guide this team anywhere worth being - as the harbinger of another wasted year.

All the guys on this team know that Danny is the face of the franchise, and thus the de facto leader. When the leader doesn't believe in what he's doing, that attitude becomes contagious. If Danny was busting his *** off every night, I guarantee that Brandon would be doing the same (I'm not condoning it, I'm just observing it). In fact, the only guys who have really performed well this year are those who have something to prove - the new guys (Hibbert has been on and off, as is to be expected when there is no consistency from one game to the next). This is why he and Dahntay seem to lock horns - Dahntay probably thought he'd be the missing piece in a playoff run, but this team is not competing and hasn't competed since Day 1.

Do I think Jim O'Brien is the worst coach in the world? No, but I do honestly believe that he's lost a lot of the players, and that's something we cannot allow to fester for an entire season. Our "bunch of milk-drinkers" are professionals - they won't complain publicly. But I can't sit here and say that there's anything great going on in that lockerroom. Not a single player on the team is playing better than they were last year. That's a systemic failure.

kester99
01-10-2010, 12:02 AM
I'm telling you, it cannot be that bad. No one in their right mind would do it. It HAS to be something else.

You look at media around the league, and they always refer to Murph's presence on the floor as something the Pacers have been anxiously awaiting. You read pacers.com, and there's very little reference to any murph-virus effect at all, if any. The only place you hear this is on a couple of Pacers fan sites.

JOB's 'vision' of a great offense, I believe, involves that 3-pt hitting PF, and he was probably so happy that he had just the guy in Troy.

He just benched TJ...although realistically we don't know if that was driven by input from higher up...quite a while after it became what many here saw as obvious that TJ was not helping the team win.

It's going to be even longer, if ever, before JOB sees Troy as a liability. I mean, how could he be? A PF that hits the three? That's exactly what you need. JOB will be the last guy, dragged kicking and screaming about stats and offensive strategy, to enter the bench-Troy camp.

(Unless that's all hooey, and they're trying to showcase him for a trade. But if that's the case, they've been showcasing for some time now.)

--------------------------------

I think your post above has a great ring of truth about it there, LG. I still don't think I'd attribute DG's shot selection to that dissatisfaction, though. But I'm not in the locker room or inside DG's brain, so who knows.

duke dynamite
01-10-2010, 12:04 AM
It's really, really cold in OKC.

LoneGranger33
01-10-2010, 12:07 AM
It's really, really cold in OKC.

Three questions: What was the atmosphere like in that arena? Were there a lot of fans wearing jerseys? And mostly young folks?

PaceBalls
01-10-2010, 12:09 AM
I think we all need to move on to discussing this issue from a different, more productive angle. For example, can anyone articulate why JOb may think his strategy is the best one for this team? Why he doesn't look at the mountain of evidence to the contrary? Does he think this team is bound to turn it around somehow and "get it"? I've heard some of the players imply that eventually they will get the system. Why in the world is this system so hard to "get"...and what value is it if it takes years to master?...if ever?

Man, I ponder this question so often. When does logic and reason become apparent? When does the mountain of evidence become convincing? I don't know. I think alot of people are just stubborn. For instance, 40% of the USA thinks the earth is less than 10,000 years old, in spite of every geologist on the planet saying the contrary. Beliefs in systems are hard for people to critically think about. Well, mostly if it is your own system.

I think there is a bit of that stubborness going on.

Will Galen
01-10-2010, 12:09 AM
I thought AJ Price played well...

A voice it the wilderness, while others are giving their opinion of what someone else is thinking!

PaceBalls
01-10-2010, 12:11 AM
It's really, really cold in OKC.

It's really really cold in Indiana too. You should feel at home ;)

Cool you guys got to see AJ Price take over the game there for a while in person.

duke dynamite
01-10-2010, 12:12 AM
Three questions: What was the atmosphere like in that arena? Were there a lot of fans wearing jerseys? And mostly young folks?
It was a mix, and it seems like people are still catching on that you could buy a jersey to wear, but there were a ton of t-shirts worn.

It was cozy, not too big. Very, very loud. Every possession on both sides they had piped-in music, played loudly.

PaceBalls
01-10-2010, 12:14 AM
You look at media around the league, and they always refer to Murph's presence on the floor as something the Pacers have been anxiously awaiting.

You are right, and that is my great hope.
Tonight the OKC announcers were praising Murphy. Calling him a Beast on the boards, and a Man on the inside. They clearly thought he was the best player out there until AJ starting heating up in the 4th.

BlueNGold
01-10-2010, 12:15 AM
Man, I ponder this question so often. When does logic and reason become apparent? When does the mountain of evidence become convincing? I don't know. I think alot of people are just stubborn. For instance, 40% of the USA thinks the earth is less than 10,000 years old, in spite of every geologist on the planet saying the contrary. Beliefs in systems are hard for people to critically think about. Well, mostly if it is your own system.

I think there is a bit of that stubborness going on.

99% of the world thought the earth was flat less than 10,000 years ago...and that included the greatest scientific minds on the planet.

Oh, we are all so very smart and stubborn.

Squirrelz
01-10-2010, 12:17 AM
John Wall here we come!!!

19-63 FTW!!!

PaceBalls
01-10-2010, 12:22 AM
John Wall here we come!!!

19-63 FTW!!!

Don't look now, but the Pistons are 11-24 vs our 11-25 record. It would really break my balls for them to get John Wall and we end up with that kid from Lithuania. :buttkick:

Anthem
01-10-2010, 12:24 AM
I'll tell you why I think the JOB extension is the root of all evil for Danny. Danny has shown time and time again how badly he wants to win. He's lost teeth diving for loose balls and we've seen his frustration boil over this season when he left the lockerroom without answering any media questions - an event admittedly blown out of proportion. Like many fans, I would guess that he doesn't think this team is built to win, and he probably saw that extension - of a guy who has yet to guide this team anywhere worth being - as the harbinger of another wasted year.

All the guys on this team know that Danny is the face of the franchise, and thus the de facto leader. When the leader doesn't believe in what he's doing, that attitude becomes contagious. If Danny was busting his *** off every night, I guarantee that Brandon would be doing the same (I'm not condoning it, I'm just observing it). In fact, the only guys who have really performed well this year are those who have something to prove - the new guys (Hibbert has been on and off, as is to be expected when there is no consistency from one game to the next). This is why he and Dahntay seem to lock horns - Dahntay probably thought he'd be the missing piece in a playoff run, but this team is not competing and hasn't competed since Day 1.

Do I think Jim O'Brien is the worst coach in the world? No, but I do honestly believe that he's lost a lot of the players, and that's something we cannot allow to fester for an entire season. Our "bunch of milk-drinkers" are professionals - they won't complain publicly. But I can't sit here and say that there's anything great going on in that lockerroom. Not a single player on the team is playing better than they were last year. That's a systemic failure.
Great post. I don't agree that no player is better... I think Roy is better. But overall... yeah.

LoneGranger33
01-10-2010, 12:32 AM
Great post. I don't agree that no player is better... I think Roy is better. But overall... yeah.

Thank you, and you're absolutely right. Hard to overlook a 7-footer, but I did it.

I hate to keep harping on the negative, I really do. After all, I didn't become a Pacers fan to complain, but I see little progress and a lot of regression these past couple months, and it worries and upsets me that what happens now could have a deleterious long-term effect on our franchise. Maybe I'm just a half-empty kind of guy.

Will Galen
01-10-2010, 12:53 AM
Don't look now, but the Pistons are 11-24 vs our 11-25 record. It would really break my balls for them to get John Wall and we end up with that kid from Lithuania. :buttkick:

I've been watching their losing streak and hoping they don't luck into the #1.

It's bad of me I know, but I hope Dumars picks another Darko.

Sollozzo
01-10-2010, 01:13 AM
It's really, really cold in OKC.

I bet. This cold wave is nuts. I think 3/4 of the country is frigid right now. The low in Miami tomorrow night is going to be 35 degrees. That's insane!

OakMoses
01-10-2010, 01:20 AM
AJ Price is good - possibly starting PG for years to come good. There are a couple of things I wanted to point out about his game tonight.

1. He had a lot of success playing against Russel Westbrook - a good defender.
2. If we were shooting well, he'd have had 6-7 assists instead of 3. Dunleavy, Rush, and Granger all missed wide open shots that AJ created for them.

The 3rd thing is the thing I find the most interesting. I hate to phrase it this way because it brings back my least favorite night of the JO'B era, but...

We haven't seen a PG have as much freedom as Price did in the 4th in O'Brien's offense since the OT Tinsley show in Phoenix. I don't like comparing the two things because I want to draw entirely different conclusions. Back then I wanted to demonize Tinsley (and I did) and kick O'Brien for letting it happen. Tonight I see it as a combination of two factors: 1. The offense (as much as there is one) wasn't working, so let's throw it out the window. 2. Maybe when JO'B has a PG he thinks he can trust, we can play some moderately conventional basketball and have some success.

4. I thought there were only going to be 3, but I just remembered another: Price does lots of smart little things - the open court steal from Durant and the jump ball with Westbrook are 2 examples.

As for the other players...

Say what you want about Murphy's defense - I'll probably agree with you - but he played a pretty nice offensive game tonight. He even carried the team for a stretch.

I don't really have anything good to say about anyone else.

LG33 - Your ideas about Danny seem to ring a little true, but I hope your dead wrong. If your right, I think Larry needs to have a little finger-to-chest talk with him. Right now Danny's as much of the problem as anyone on offense. Of the 19 games he's played this year, I count 6 good games. Last year Granger looked like he was on par with guys like Durant and Anthony. Tonight Durant looked light years ahead of him.

I don't see what everybody else does in Solomon Jones. If we were fully healthy he'd be #6 in my big man rotation and would be inactive almost every night. Maybe I don't value protecting the rim as much as I should, but I don't see how he represents a net gain over any of our other 5 bigs.

Before tonight I was thinking I'd start a thread asking when AJ Price's fantastic numbers stopped being subject to the claims of small sample size and diminishing returns. Hopefully it's too late for that now.

It's late here. I'm going to bed. I'm praying for this starting lineup for the rest of the season:

Price - Jones - Rush - Granger - Hibbert

To bad I don't believe in an interventionist God.

graphic-er
01-10-2010, 02:58 AM
I really do not know why no one is stopping Danny from taking 10 three's a game. Its a terrible habit that will cost us alot of games this year, because half of them are rushed, or desperation shots.

Naptown_Seth
01-10-2010, 04:31 AM
Sometimes handing minutes to the rookie is a bad thing. Then there are times like these with AJ Price.

Just think. If TJ had even played mediocre ball this year, we'd have no clue he was capable of what he did tonight and might not for another year+.

You can give the minutes without promising to give them an unlimited supply. It pays to see what they've got.
And that's all I've ever said about McBob too. The worst part is he plays really well and then gets the DNP. He's the 2nd best eFG% on the team right now. He's blocking 1.2 p36, 3rd on the team behind Roy and Solo. He's got the 3rd best OFF and DEF reb %.


I think with Price, Hibbert, Rush, and McRoberts they actually have more talent than their record suggests. One of the big problems is that when JOB has started to use someone he'll just abuse them instead of applying them aptly.

For example, I really like Luther Head's offense and he's a solid spark. But he doesn't fit every situation. Rush is a much more genericly applicable SG. So when you need more offensive punch at times you got to Head, or if you get the chance where you don't need a big SG and can afford some defensive risk at SG he fits.

But it seems like JOB will just ride a guy right into the dirt even on bad matchups, while leaving good solutions on the bench either totally or until it's way too late.

It's not like he doesn't hcange at all, he changes lots of things. But the changes are awkward, ill-timed, or taken to the extreme.



Should we even get into the 3PA thing. Another 26, 10 by Danny, and all while facing an OKC team that features deluxe shooters like Durant, Sefolosha, Harden and Westbrook and they took 13. Meanwhile the shot over 50% from the field in total, compared to the sub-40% by the Pacers. And the outside shooting once again got them badly beat on FTA/FTMs.

Peck
01-10-2010, 04:44 AM
And that's all I've ever said about McBob too. The worst part is he plays really well and then gets the DNP. He's the 2nd best eFG% on the team right now. He's blocking 1.2 p36, 3rd on the team behind Roy and Solo. He's got the 3rd best OFF and DEF reb %.


I think with Price, Hibbert, Rush, and McRoberts they actually have more talent than their record suggests. One of the big problems is that when JOB has started to use someone he'll just abuse them instead of applying them aptly.

For example, I really like Luther Head's offense and he's a solid spark. But he doesn't fit every situation. Rush is a much more genericly applicable SG. So when you need more offensive punch at times you got to Head, or if you get the chance where you don't need a big SG and can afford some defensive risk at SG he fits.

But it seems like JOB will just ride a guy right into the dirt even on bad matchups, while leaving good solutions on the bench either totally or until it's way too late.

It's not like he doesn't hcange at all, he changes lots of things. But the changes are awkward, ill-timed, or taken to the extreme.



Should we even get into the 3PA thing. Another 26, 10 by Danny, and all while facing an OKC team that features deluxe shooters like Durant, Sefolosha, Harden and Westbrook and they took 13. Meanwhile the shot over 50% from the field in total, compared to the sub-40% by the Pacers. And the outside shooting once again got them badly beat on FTA/FTMs.

You know in the pre-season I will admit that I was very dissapointed in Josh. The few games I saw it looked like he added nothing to his offensive game and I gave JOB the benefit of the doubt there.

However this spurt of games that he has played in recently changed my mind. He looked like he was more comfortable on the floor and did something other than imitate Brandon Rush on the offensive end.

The fact that we are now back to DNP-CD and I'm sure we will also soon have a few game of being inactive just drives me up the wall.

It doesn't suprise me mind you, it just makes me.... well mad.

I have to see Troy Murphy play center for the past two games while there was a stretch in there that Mike Dunleavy was the 4.

Is Josh a world beater? No.

But I am going to disagree with Uncle Buck and say that while I do not think he will ever be anything more than a rotational player at best I do think he has enough game to be in the NBA.

But let's be honest here, he is just not the type of player the O'Brien likes and until he is gone or we somehow thin out the crop of players that he can stick at the 4 Josh will only get situational min. every now and then.

I just wish I knew what the true thought by Bird is on him. I only ask because he has gone out of his way to praise Josh in the past even when he was not the subject of the conversation.

Naptown_Seth
01-10-2010, 05:14 AM
Just to toot my own horn a bit, this is from 2/5/08

AJ Price on the other hand is really making an impression. He's got pretty solid ball control, solid deep range, pretty strong passing though not star quality, decent defense. I like Price more than Collison right now, and at times more than Bayless even though he's not the athlete either of them are.


Bayless is bigger and looks stronger going to the rim. I don't think he runs the show like a true PG still, certainly not like Price sets people up. He's not a star defender and in the UCLA game he seemed more likely to take advantage of UCLA's weaker players than he did vs their top guys. He did beat Westbrook once on a pretty strong move.




Peck, I'll have to say that I think McBob actually can be better than just a void filler, much like Price can. The reasons for liking them are the same as why I liked Westbrook or Love or Rush. It's the choices they make and the physical abilities they can apply to those choices.

Like as a contrast Earl Clark. Clearly he was more polished at L'ville than TWill, but was totally unable to read the floor and anticipate the unfolding of the game. TWill needs a jumper, Clark needs everything else.


McRoberts reads the floor, especially this year. There is no doubting his hops, his decent quickness and speed, his handles for a big. He's got some sense of good passing opportunities and spacing. So he can see plays and he has the skills to make those plays. Players make plays, too much focus goes toward pure shooting. I'm more concerned with a guy that can counter a good defensive or offensive attack that comes up suddenly, when a player is forced to make one of those plays.

For now I'm just looking for a backup energy big to play a quality physical game. But as with Price I can see a team doing fairly well playing him in a pretty regular role.


Regardless there is no longer anything close to a reasonable defense for not playing him right now. Not playing him, or Price previously, or taking more advantage of Roy sooner...these are the choices that cause losses and cost people jobs.

PaceBalls
01-10-2010, 05:30 AM
Yeah Seth and Peck I am with you.
For the love of GOD LARRY BIRD...
Please get a us a new coach!!!

If that one guy who sits behind Larry at Conseco, that fellow who wears the leather jacket and seems to have Larry's ear sees this, please tell him to fire JOB for the love all that is holy!!! (Is that his brother or something?)

This season has become absurd, if Larry is any GM worth his salt at all he would see the writing on the wall.

We at PD write on the wall.

FIRE JOB BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE

Naptown_Seth
01-10-2010, 05:51 AM
I think Danny is not real impressed with JOS and has a mentality of "Okay, this is what you want. This is what you'll get."

I think Danny is fed up with the lack of offensive movement and lack of screens, etc, in our offense. I think he realizes that unless he jacks something up when he gets a chance, not much will happen with our offense. And he's right.

Now, if Roy is in the game, some things can happen. And Danny and Roy work well off each other. Roy wasn't in at the end tonight. Because Jim is stubborn.

One other thing: Danny isn't used to playing with AJ Price. Price can actually make some good things happen, and when he's in, Danny doesn't have to chuck up garbage. Danny hasn't quite figured that out yet.

Anthem, I don't think it's been proven that Danny was the player upset at JOS's extension. But it sure seems like he is a likely candidate.
Yeah, it sure seems like Danny is doing it intentionally. I also think that some of the contrast between the youth and the vets is that the younger guys aren't as confident in defying the coach or intentionally playing poorly.

I think that might be part of the overall issue, the mash up of views on the coach and the direction of the team. Guys are definitely bringing totally different outlooks to the arena.


Could this explain Dun too?

able
01-10-2010, 06:02 AM
Murphy had 15 pts and 14 reb (as well as 4 turnovers) at the 5.24 mark in the 3rd Q

I rest the case.

I am no longer staying up all night and all hours to watch the games, I can't even be arsed to see this crapola in the morning, I'll read about it here, more then enough attention as far as I am concerned.

What even Versace wasn't able to do, Larry Bird has succeeded, he has turned me off.

cinotimz
01-10-2010, 06:22 AM
Dont know why all the despair. Only two teams have worse records than the Pacers now. That puts us square in the middle of the John Wall sweepstakes.

cinotimz
01-10-2010, 06:41 AM
I really do not know why no one is stopping Danny from taking 10 three's a game. Its a terrible habit that will cost us alot of games this year, because half of them are rushed, or desperation shots.

Hes 59-166 (.355) from 3
Hes 84-191 (.440) from 2

With those numbers I think I would rather him shoot only 3's. Tell him if hes not getting dunks or layups he better be shooting the 3. We are better off.

In the 2 games back hes 7-20 from 3 and 6-20 from 2.

I think hes one guy you want shooting as many 3's as is possible. In theory, it should make his driving to the hoop more effective as teams cant back off him. Of course you want him taking decent looks, but he obviously has the green light at all times, and I would find it hard to argue with that.

Putnam
01-10-2010, 08:31 AM
I really do not know why no one is stopping Danny from taking 10 three's a game.


Should we even get into the 3PA thing?

The Pacers missed 39 of 65 from 2-point range. It's not like they were giving up easy points on the inside. Their percentage from two was almost identical to their percentage from three (.40 to .38). And that means their eFG% was .80 from two and 1.15 from three.

If they'd taken about a dozen more three-pointers, they might have won despite everything else they did badly.


cinotimz says it here:


I think Granger is one guy you want shooting as many 3's as is possible. In theory, it should make his driving to the hoop more effective as teams cant back off him. Of course you want him taking decent looks, but he obviously has the green light at all times, and I would find it hard to argue with that.




And the outside shooting once again got them badly beat on FTA/FTMs.

Is this proven? I certainly makes sense, but is there proof that a team that takes X more three-point attempts gets Y fewer free throws? I've look for a way to demonstrate this correlation, and I can't find one.

Bball
01-10-2010, 08:48 AM
I think Danny is not real impressed with JOS and has a mentality of "Okay, this is what you want. This is what you'll get."

I think Danny is fed up with the lack of offensive movement and lack of screens, etc, in our offense. I think he realizes that unless he jacks something up when he gets a chance, not much will happen with our offense.

But if this is true, why rush back from injury? Why not just milk the injury for as long as possible? With a 4-6 week timeline to heal, if the coaching strategy frustrates you, just take all 6 weeks rather than rushing back and then playing some kind of "If this is what you want then this is what you get" selfish style of ball.

I think a better answer is that Danny is just playing like O'Brien wants... or he thinks O'Brien wants...

Same with Troy Murphy...




Now, if Roy is in the game, some things can happen. And Danny and Roy work well off each other. Roy wasn't in at the end tonight. Because Jim is stubborn.

I'm coming to another idea. I'm beginning to believe that Jim O'Brien is just an awful coach. Before, I didn't think he was 'bad'... not like an Isiah Thomas or Dick Versace. I still think he could coach a better game... at least I thought that. Now? I'm starting to think his name belongs right there with those coaches. He has no ability (or maybe it's desire) to veer from his flawed strategy and go with a more fundamental approach to the game that when forced to, has shown it paid dividends.

I'm thinking he knows this is his last basketball stop in his career (or close to it) and he wants his system played out. He wants to put his stamp on the game of basketball. But the system is just too flawed to continue. It's flawed fundamentally in the first place, and delusional to think there's a group of players anywhere that could fit in and play playoff basketball with this system anyway.

He's not a genius ahead of his time. He's just trying to reinvent the wheel and ignoring the possibility that his invention isn't any better than the wheel that's already rolling the world over.

How many times do you have to go back to your system and see it fail before you realize you need to scrap it? Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result is insanity.

Even if I'm not the visionary that O'Brien is and can't see how this system would be so wonderful with the right personnel... we don't have the right personnel.! This is the NBA with guaranteed contracts, salary caps, declining ticket sales, and a tough economy. You can't just put together the 'perfect' team for an inflexible system. What you can do is figure out your team's strengths and weaknesses and put together a perfect system for your team.

Therefore... JOS shouldn't stand for Jim O'Stubborn. It should stand for Jim O'Stupid.

Bball
01-10-2010, 08:52 AM
Hes 59-166 (.355) from 3
Hes 84-191 (.440) from 2

With those numbers I think I would rather him shoot only 3's. Tell him if hes not getting dunks or layups he better be shooting the 3. We are better off.

In the 2 games back hes 7-20 from 3 and 6-20 from 2.

I think hes one guy you want shooting as many 3's as is possible. In theory, it should make his driving to the hoop more effective as teams cant back off him. Of course you want him taking decent looks, but he obviously has the green light at all times, and I would find it hard to argue with that.

This ignore the problem of quick and/or bad 3's.... If you don't hit it then the odds are good the offense isn't set, the other team gets the rebound, and the other teams has an advantage going the other way.

So even if a 3 is statistically someone's 'best' shot (for scoring the most points), you have to balance that with what you give up in scoring going the other way.

You can't just look at that stat alone. In fact, I'm not sure there is a stat to show you what you'd need to know to say whether or not he's better shooting 3's than taking 2's.... But there's something better than stats for that: Just watching the game.

Unclebuck
01-10-2010, 09:12 AM
I'm telling you, it cannot be that bad. No one in their right mind would do it. It HAS to be something else.

I'd be more than willing to defend his strategies for tonight's games, because I have yet to see a game that he coached where there wasn't a logical explanation for what he does. You might not agre with what he does. Only problem tonight is I didn't see any of the game, so I can't tonight.

Unclebuck
01-10-2010, 09:13 AM
bunch of guys like who?:stirthepo


me

MagicRat
01-10-2010, 09:30 AM
I think Danny is not real impressed with JOS and has a mentality of "Okay, this is what you want. This is what you'll get."

I think Danny is fed up with the lack of offensive movement and lack of screens, etc, in our offense. I think he realizes that unless he jacks something up when he gets a chance, not much will happen with our offense. And he's right.

Think Jamaal Tinsley-Phoenix. Then run Danny out of town on a rail........

Putnam
01-10-2010, 09:33 AM
Last night the Pacers took 26 three-point attempts and shot 40% from three.

I just looked at basketball reference data for all teams in the past 4 1/2 years that did that or better. Two things stand out:


1. It happened 318 times, so the Pacers aren't the only team doing it. (Pacers did it 16 times -- Phoenix 40, Orlando 43 times.)

2. Teams that shot 26+ attempts and hit 40%+ won 68 percent of the time. So it isn't right to say shooting lots of threes necessarily makes you lose.


The Pacers are relying heavily on three-pointers, and they are playing badly. But that isn't sufficient to conclude that the threes are making them lose.

There are other faults.


EDIT: Looking again at the numbers, I should have said they shot 40% from 2 and 38% from 3. That would make a small change in the numbers, but the point would still hold.

.

Unclebuck
01-10-2010, 09:43 AM
Last night the Pacers took 26 three-point attempts and shot 40% from three.

I just looked at basketball reference data for all teams in the past 4 1/2 years that did that or better. Two things stand out:


1. It happened 318 times, so the Pacers aren't the only team doing it. (Pacers did it 16 times -- Phoenix 40, Orlando 43 times.)

2. Teams that shot 26+ attempts and hit 40%+ won 68 percent of the time. So it isn't right to say shooting lots of threes necessarily makes you lose.


The Pacers are relying heavily on three-pointers, and they are playing badly. But that isn't sufficient to conclude that the threes are making them lose.

There are other faults.

.

Thank you

Looking at the last two games box scores (I did not see any of either game) I think the three point shooting allowed the Pacers have a chance to win both games, where otherwise were it not for the three point shooting the Pacers lose by 20 pts in both games and have no chance to be in the games.

Bball
01-10-2010, 10:04 AM
Thanks you

Looking at the last two games box scores (I did not see any of either game) I think the three point shooting allowed the Pacers have a chance to win both games, where otherwise were it not for the three point shooting the Pacers lose by 20 pts in both games and have no chance to be in the games.

So we have to spray and pray because we can't stop anyone, can't get in the paint and collect fouls, and have no low post presence.

So if we can trade 3's for 2's with the opposition we can remain close....

If that is a team's only chance then why bother to even show up?

How about digging in and playing defense and valuing each offensive possession instead?

Putnam
01-10-2010, 10:53 AM
So we have to spray and pray because we can't stop anyone, can't get in the paint and collect fouls, and have no low post presence.

Is "Spray and Pray" a fair description? The Pacers are better at shooting 3-pointer than they are at other aspects of the game. Shooting lots of 3s is playing to their strengths when Roy is off the floor.

How is the Pacers shooting 3s instead of 2s any different than a football team wanting to score touchdowns instead of field goals? Nobody complains that the Colts are wasting opportunity on some crazy madcap gamble when they don't automatically kick every time they reach the 30 yard line.

When the Pacers shoot a 3 instead of a 2, they are forfeiting a very small probability (last night it was a 2% difference) of making the shot in exchange for a 50% increase in the value of the made shot. It is emminently sensible.



So if we can trade 3's for 2's with the opposition we can remain close....

If that is a team's only chance then why bother to even show up?

'Cause it sometimes works!



How about digging in and playing defense and valuing each offensive possession instead?

:Carlisle: If "valuing each possession" means wasting the clock, then no thanks. Carlisle made the team use the clock, but his Pacers also shot more threes than ever before.

Carlisle's teams would often forfeit offensive rebounds in order to hurry back to defend after a missed 3.

Should the current team make more of an effort to do that? (I'm asking this earnestly.)

Bball
01-10-2010, 11:08 AM
Carlisle's teams would often forfeit offensive rebounds in order to hurry back to defend after a missed 3.

Should the current team make more of an effort to do that? (I'm asking this earnestly.)

I'd say it's a strong probability. If you're going to take a bunch of quick 3's you're creating a lot of offensive opportunities for the OTHER team. I wouldn't be promoting a lot of 3's and especially a lot of quick 3's but I think if I was forced to do it then I'd want the team loosening up on the chance of an offensive rebound and instead getting down the court to defend that opportunity we just gift-wrapped for the other team.

Carlisle is 20 times the coach Jim O'Brien is.

---
It's one thing for a team to be quick... but we get in a hurry... I think the flawed system and bad coaching demands it. It's just bad basketball IMHO.

sportfireman
01-10-2010, 11:45 AM
I'd say it's a strong probability. If you're going to take a bunch of quick 3's you're creating a lot of offensive opportunities for the OTHER team. I wouldn't be promoting a lot of 3's and especially a lot of quick 3's but I think if I was forced to do it then I'd want the team loosening up on the chance of an offensive rebound and instead getting down the court to defend that opportunity we just gift-wrapped for the other team.

Carlisle is 20 times the coach Jim O'Brien is.

---
It's one thing for a team to be quick... but we get in a hurry... I think the flawed system and bad coaching demands it. It's just bad basketball IMHO.

or just dont take as many 3's.................. anyways on another note i have two words for everyone Anthony Jordan!!!!!!!!

Bball
01-10-2010, 12:05 PM
or just dont take as many 3's..................

Putman didn't give me that option in his question... although I tossed that same answer as you in there anyway. ;)

ksuttonjr76
01-10-2010, 12:42 PM
With the #1 pick of the 2010 NBA Draft, Indiana selects...John Wall of Kentucky.

Just fire JOS after the season. He would have served his purpose by then. However, looking at the roster, Indiana (this is going to sound stupid) needs to trade off a lot players, because we have TOO many players that give solid production at MULTIPLE positions when given minutes. Luther can play PG/SG. McRoberts/Solo can play PF/C. Danny Granger can play SG/SF/PF. D. Jones can play SG/SF (honestly he should never play PF, but JOS is stupid when he puts him there). Rush can play SG/SF. I'm in the small minority for this camp, but Ford is a solid PG in the RIGHT system. If I was the GM, and I would make a list of who I want on the team, and just get rid of everyone else. After that, I would just get a coach to fit the player. My ideal Pacers team...

Price/Ford/Earl Watson (yes, I would make Earl the 3rd string PG)
D. Jones/Rush/Head (yes, I would make Head a 3rd string SG)
Granger/Dunleavy
Hans/S. Jones/McRoberts
Hibbert/Foster/S. Jones (Personally, I would want a better backup C)

JOS needs to create a starting 5 and establish rotation, AND STICK WITH IT. He tweaks the lineups way too much for me. Ultimately, I guess Murphy and Diener would be gone. Call me crazy, but in the NBA draft, I would draft a PF, and entertain the idea of sliding Hans to the SF, and Granger to the SG. Obviously, if we get John Wall crossing fingers), then I would get rid of Ford and Watson, and get a "coaching vet" PG for Price and Wall.

Price/Ford
Granger/Rush
Hansbrough/D. Jones/Dunleavy
Rookie/S. Jones/McRoberts
Hibbert/Foster/S. Jones

OR

Wall/Price
D. Jones/Rush
Granger/Dunleavy
Hansbrough/S. Jones
Hibbert/Foster

sportfireman
01-10-2010, 12:47 PM
With the #1 pick of the 2010 NBA Draft, Indiana selects...John Wall of Kentucky.

Just fire JOS after the season. He would have served his purpose by then. However, looking at the roster, Indiana (this is going to sound stupid) needs to trade off a lot players, because we have TOO many players that give solid production at MULTIPLE positions when given minutes. Luther can play PG/SG. McRoberts/Solo can play PF/C. Danny Granger can play SG/SF/PF. D. Jones can play SG/SF (honestly he should never play PF, but JOS is stupid when he puts him there). Rush can play SG/SF. I'm in the small minority for this camp, but Ford is a solid PG in the RIGHT system. If I was the GM, and I would make a list of who I want on the team, and just get rid of everyone else. After that, I would just get a coach to fit the player. My ideal Pacers team...

Price/Ford/Earl Watson (yes, I would make Earl the 3rd string PG)
D. Jones/Rush/Head (yes, I would make Head a 3rd string SG)
Granger/Dunleavy
Hans/S. Jones/McRoberts
Hibbert/Foster/S. Jones (Personally, I would want a better backup C)

JOS needs to create a starting 5 and establish rotation, AND STICK WITH IT. He tweaks the lineups way too much for me. Ultimately, I guess Murphy and Diener would be gone. Call me crazy, but in the NBA draft, I would draft a PF, and entertain the idea of sliding Hans to the SF, and Granger to the SG. Obviously, if we get John Wall crossing fingers), then I would get rid of Ford and Watson, and get a "coaching vet" PG for Price and Wall.

i agree but i would start Rush at SG...... to me he's as good as a defender as jones and fits in the flow of a structured offense better than jones.

ksuttonjr76
01-10-2010, 12:59 PM
i agree but i would start Rush at SG...... to me he's as good as a defender as jones and fits in the flow of a structured offense better than jones.

Ideally, I would, but Rush never plays that good when he's in the starting 5 for some reason. I would just recreate the role that D. Jones had in Denver. D. Jones started, but J.R. Smith played the bulk of the minutes at the SG spot.

Will Galen
01-10-2010, 02:41 PM
It's one thing for a team to be quick... but we get in a hurry... I think the flawed system and bad coaching demands it. It's just bad basketball IMHO.

But clever deniable tanking.

Peck
01-10-2010, 02:57 PM
Think Jamaal Tinsley-Phoenix. Then run Danny out of town on a rail........

If you'll recall I wanted O'Brien ran out of town on a rail after that game.

Bball
01-10-2010, 03:26 PM
But clever deniable tanking.

I hope so.... ...But I dunno...

When Bird came out and gave O'Brien that vote of confidence it was a blow to the gut for me. Any hopes that the front office saw O'Brien as anything but a seat warmer were crushed... not that the extension didn't have an impact as well. But with the extension I was willing to delude myself into thinking it wasn't so much to keep him around an extra year as just giving him a bonus for taking over this team when it was all but ashes.

But the extension and a public vote of confidence??

Neither were really necessary (and especially that extension for an allegedly cash-strapped team) if you just wanted plausible deniability that you weren't tanking.

And I'm not sure 'tanking' in this way is smart anyway. I think Uncle Buck only supports O'Brien because he feels sorry for him at this point... ;)
We don't need to tank with bad coaching... it's time to get some discipline back in the offense... defense.... some fundamental basketball being drilled, expected, and required...defense... and plenty of burn for younger players to prepare them for the future.... and defense. Then work on and stress defense some more.

O'Brien is turning even hard core fans apathetic with his flawed and losing brand of basketball.

Just bring in or promote an interim coach who's charged not with winning but with erasing the last remnants of O'Briens awful system from the team.

...While we still have a team in Indpls...

McKeyFan
01-10-2010, 03:37 PM
losing brand of basketball.


I caught that.

Nicely done.

CableKC
01-10-2010, 03:49 PM
Say what you want about Murphy's defense - I'll probably agree with you - but he played a pretty nice offensive game tonight. He even carried the team for a stretch.
That's what I've been saying....I don't think that Murphy is 100% useless.....he obviously has skills that our other PF/C do not possess.....I just think that it's a matter of how he's used and how much JO'B depends on him. Murphy should not be playing anywhere near 37 mpg....due to clear lack of energy and lift he has in his legs by the end of the 3rd QTR......he should be limited to IMHO about 26 mpg...give or take 2 minute depending on how he does.

Will Galen
01-10-2010, 04:37 PM
I hope so.... ...But I dunno...

When Bird came out and gave O'Brien that vote of confidence it was a blow to the gut for me. Any hopes that the front office saw O'Brien as anything but a seat warmer were crushed...

But the extension and a public vote of confidence??

Neither were really necessary (and especially that extension for an allegedly cash-strapped team) if you just wanted plausible deniability that you weren't tanking.

Bird is a really smart guy. He's all about winning but he's learned a few things. One, his buddy Danny Angie tanked and although it didn't work out the way planned, he turned it into Garnett and still got Boston a title. Two, tanking is the fast way to restock, but Bird didn't want to go back to square one like Chicago did after MJ.

Three, what coach is going to tank his last year? Even if you have an okay from the front office? None! Remember Darko said a couple weeks ago that the NBA is full of liar's. And it's been said NBA front office's have to lie. So you want a coach to tank, you extend him a year.

Remember we are in the middle of a three year rebuilding plan, so really what did it hurt? JOB's contract is up the same time as all the big contracts come off the payroll.

It's also been said that JOB's coaching doesn't make sense, but it does if he's tanking.

Everyone agrees we need another stud to go along with Danny, getting a pick near the top of the draft is our best chance of getting one.

Having to pay another coach at this point doesn't make sense, especially if you want to tank, and Bird doesn't want the job. And Bird being Bird isn't going to say he's tanking. He probably hates tanking, but with everyone doing it, it's the price of doing business in the NBA now days.

This way things will be a lot better in a year and a half. Firing JOB and getting another coach and picking from the middle of the pack just insures we continue in the middle of the pack.

I hate to lose too, but I can wait a year and a half.

Naptown_Seth
01-10-2010, 04:51 PM
The Pacers missed 39 of 65 from 2-point range. It's not like they were giving up easy points on the inside. Their percentage from two was almost identical to their percentage from three (.40 to .38). And that means their eFG% was .80 from two and 1.15 from three.
Um...;)

eFG% from 2 only is the same as the 2P%, so still 40%. Not a points thing directly, although you can multiply the 3P% by 3/2 to get the eFG% for that. With the 2 you would be multiplying by 2/2, or 1. Kinda easy math on that one. :D


The point is sad really, that they are shooting the 2 so poorly it's not worth it.


HOWEVER, you generate GOOD 2PA with good play that goes beyond "come down, dribble over a screen and shoot a long jumper". This is why you grind an offensive set out, to get that 2P% up.

And when you grind them you also improve the PPS with FTAs, and those fouls slow down the defense or even take a guy off the court which removes his offense (like Kobe fouling out goes beyond defense). Every AND ONE is worth a 3PM plus the bonus of giving them a foul. Even helps get you in the bonus quicker so you are shooting on any D foul.


So while you do have the straight more points per attempt if you chuck 3s, you lose all the other back end stuff that comes from sticking to a deeper playbook and doing the dirty offensive work.

Naptown_Seth
01-10-2010, 04:55 PM
Is this proven? I certainly makes sense, but is there proof that a team that takes X more three-point attempts gets Y fewer free throws? I've look for a way to demonstrate this correlation, and I can't find one. GD you right to hell.

Must resist desire to do hours of stat work, trying to ignore overwhelming curiousity, need to do home repairs instead....
:borg:


Hopefully Count or some other sucker will pull the 3PA vs FTA for a ton of teams, or even by some games to get a feel for the relationship. But a good study is a lot of work. I concede that it would be far better if it was proven rather than assumed.

Hicks
01-10-2010, 05:54 PM
Hoop Data (thanks for making me aware of it, count) keeps track of "Free Throw Rate", which is FT attempted divided by FG attempted.

We rank 19th right now.

However, they also keep track of your opponent's FTR, and then they also let you sort by the DIFFERENCE between your FTR and your opponents. In other words, you want this # to be as high as possible.

We rank 29th in the league at -6.50, second only to the abysmal Bucks at -14.50.

Also, they track your OffEff and DefEff as well as my favorite, the difference between the two, where we rank 27th (shocking!)

http://hoopdata.com/teamff.aspx

Brad8888
01-10-2010, 06:57 PM
GD you right to hell.

Must resist desire to do hours of stat work, trying to ignore overwhelming curiousity, need to do home repairs instead....
:borg:


Hopefully Count or some other sucker will pull the 3PA vs FTA for a ton of teams, or even by some games to get a feel for the relationship. But a good study is a lot of work. I concede that it would be far better if it was proven rather than assumed.

It is just a shame that Putnam did not ask for a solution to determining both position and momentum simultaneously, as in the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, or the most current and up to date EXACT value of the ratio of the area of a circle to the square of its radius with no rounding allowed at any time.

Here is my legitimate (!) attempt, though not a statistical take, to explain why I believe there are more free throws shot by teams who shoot less threes, or vice versa.

By extremely rough guess, it seems likely that, given all other things being equal, that teams who shoot threes are far less likely to be fouled while shooting them due to the distance out from the basket that those players are and the higher amount of energy required to cover a greater surface area defensively, coupled with the fact that overall the three point shot is a lower percentage shot at worst, and only an equivalent shot if the arc is perfectly balanced distance wise to make players be equally productive from a point production standpoint when comparing shots from inside and outside the arc.

If we also assume that teams naturally position their defenses between offensive players and the basket, it also seems natural to assume that if the ball is advanced inside the three point arc that there is more likelihood of meeting defensive resistance, which would increase as the player approaches the basket due to the number of players who still would be trying to be between the shooter and the basket. Therefore, if there is more contact between the players due to their relatively close proximities, ther should also be more fouls called, and generally more free throws as a result.

sportfireman
01-10-2010, 06:59 PM
Ideally, I would, but Rush never plays that good when he's in the starting 5 for some reason. I would just recreate the role that D. Jones had in Denver. D. Jones started, but J.R. Smith played the bulk of the minutes at the SG spot.


i think the wrong thing is expected of Rush....if Rush is looked at the player he is and not what we want, then he can be appreciated. i posted this before........didnt feel like retyping it so here goes........




i think and hope rush can and will turn into a bruce bowen type player........ a smart good defensive minded player that can hit the open shot.... and a key part of our championship team.


EDIT: if u look at their style its kind of similiar..........bowen isn't an attacker on offense, neither is rush but bowen will hit the open jumper when given to him...... not the in transition jumper, the half court offense im in the corner open jumper. thats what i think rush can develop into.

but on defense bowen is aggressive thats what i see in rush he likes playing defensive......he and all the rest of our players are just too tired from running up and down the floor with obriens offensive style that he can't play defense as effective as he can.

Anthem
01-10-2010, 07:57 PM
But if this is true, why rush back from injury? Why not just milk the injury for as long as possible? With a 4-6 week timeline to heal, if the coaching strategy frustrates you, just take all 6 weeks rather than rushing back and then playing some kind of "If this is what you want then this is what you get" selfish style of ball.
That's a good point.