PDA

View Full Version : Wells says O'Brien considering another lineup change



Hicks
01-20-2010, 11:55 PM
Per Twitter:


o'brien says another possible lineup change because they don't defend or run. they're running out of options with all the lineup changes

Why do I have the feeling Troy Murphy will still be starting despite the call for defense and running.

I realize he's not typical starter-quality (though honestly, a lot of our players aren't; it's just a matter of hwo much), I could strongly consider McRobert at the 5 if I REALLY wanted to say, "Eff it, let's run"

Watson
Head or Rush
Jones or Rush
Granger
McRoberts

No obviously you couldn't play this line up all the time, but if I really wanted to start each game by trying to run the ball down the other team's collective throat, I'd give this a look and I'd be encouraging McRobert to haul *** down the floor after every rebound to try to get as many easy baskets as possible.

You could probably put Solomon in there instead of Josh, but from what I've seen of both lately, I'd rather try Josh.

What would your fast lineup be?

As for what I think Jim might actually do:

Watson
Head or Rush
Jones
Granger
Murphy

What do you think?

imawhat
01-20-2010, 11:59 PM
It'll be interesting to see who he thinks "doesn't defend and run".

Really, could it be anybody but Hibbert?


I give him credit for trying new things.

Brad8888
01-21-2010, 12:00 AM
And, off the bench and banishment he comes, O'B's favorite, the player O'B thinks who takes high percentage shots to close out games and is one of the fastest point guards in the league -- TJ Ford.

Key word in Wells tweet, "run".

Bball
01-21-2010, 12:00 AM
Change the coach... not the lineup.

Hicks
01-21-2010, 12:02 AM
And, off the bench and banishment he comes, O'B's favorite, the player O'B thinks who takes high percentage shots to close out games and is one of the fastest point guards in the league -- TJ Ford.

Key word in Wells tweet, "run".

Ford
Head
Jones or Rush
Granger
Murphy

Damn, you may be right!

DGPR
01-21-2010, 12:16 AM
If Murphy starts at the 5 position I'll go into convulsions.

Brad8888
01-21-2010, 12:28 AM
If Murphy starts at the 5 position I'll go into convulsions.

Just to make sure, keep a rolled towel handy to bite to prevent injury, and try to relax and take deep, cleansing breaths until the feeling passes.

Also would not hurt to have someone else in the same room, or in an adjacent room with some kind of audio monitoring device (it would be difficult to expect someone else having much desire to watch a Pacers game, therefore reducing the likelihood of them being in the same room with you during your possible trigger time). That way they can help you stay comfortable until you recover.

CableKC
01-21-2010, 12:55 AM
In other news....the Sun rises in the East.

Someone....do some quick math for me. How many different 5 man combinations on a 15 man roster can we go through? Have we hit the halfway mark yet in the # of different combinations?

As for who will be in the next Starting lineup?

I'll go out on a limb and say:

Watson
BRush
Granger
Murphy
Solo

tadscout
01-21-2010, 01:07 AM
If he stops starting Hibbert and his min. start to dip below 20 min a game, Bird better get the You Fired Hammer out ASAP... b/c that's not how you use your franchise center... and yes I said franchise center b/c he has shown he can be it if used properly... it's just JoB can't :censored: stick to that method more than a couple games in a row of running the offense inside out through Roy...

If either Hibbert gets benched, or Ford starts starting again, I'm going to puke! (Especially if Solo starts ahead of Roy, or if Ford playing again means no more Price... if either happens I say we start a PD fire JoB mob party outside of the fieldhouse!:mad:)

Los Angeles
01-21-2010, 01:11 AM
I could give a **** what Wells has to say anymore. He's not exactly improving my experience as a fan.

BornReady
01-21-2010, 01:16 AM
im gonna guess

watson
rush
jones
granger
murphy

tadscout
01-21-2010, 01:19 AM
im gonna guess

watson
rush
jones
granger
murphy

Probably best guess, but I hate it... :mad:

PaceBalls
01-21-2010, 01:30 AM
I think Jim is running out of mathematical possibilities to make a starting lineup built around Troy Murphy. Could this be the lineup that has Murph on the bench!!?
lol.. who am I kidding...

I am thinking it will be something like this.
Earl
AJ
Dun
Danny
Murphy

Hicks
01-21-2010, 01:30 AM
I could give a **** what Wells has to say anymore. He's not exactly improving my experience as a fan.

What does that have to do with what he's saying here?

Kuq_e_Zi91
01-21-2010, 02:14 AM
I don't want to guess what it might be because it'll probably just make me more angry, but this is what I want:

Price
Jones
Rush
Granger
Hibbert

But honestly, it doesn't matter who starts. I know that sounds cliche but with O'Brien it couldn't be more true. We all know who he'll go with when it's crunch time. Though I guess it's hard to be in crunch time when you're down 20 all game.

Peck
01-21-2010, 02:21 AM
It's a good thing he made this statement after I gave him a half season grade.

pwee31
01-21-2010, 03:01 AM
im gonna guess

watson
rush
jones
granger
murphy


I agree with you based off of what I tonight

Dr. Awesome
01-21-2010, 04:08 AM
Ford
Head
Jones or Rush
Granger
Murphy

Damn, you may be right!

Even the Nets would be laughing at that lineup.

Peck
01-21-2010, 04:45 AM
[yt]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/tqZt3jk6RtQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/tqZt3jk6RtQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[yt]

D-BONE
01-21-2010, 05:21 AM
I take it this is JOB trying to make a point to the guy(s) that get "demoted" because in terms of improving our win totals, it's basically irrelevant what combo we start with this collection of players.

Kuq_e_Zi91
01-21-2010, 05:23 AM
[yt]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/tqZt3jk6RtQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/tqZt3jk6RtQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[yt]


Post of the Year.

PaceBalls
01-21-2010, 05:54 AM
[yt]<EMBED height=344 type=application/x-shockwave-flash width=425 src=http://www.youtube.com/v/tqZt3jk6RtQ&hl=en_US&fs=1& allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always"></EMBED>[yt]

HAHA that was awesome

AlexAustin
01-21-2010, 06:22 AM
Post of the Year.

More like post of the millennium, that **** was priceless!

DrFife
01-21-2010, 07:17 AM
[yt]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/tqZt3jk6RtQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/tqZt3jk6RtQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[yt]

Davey & Goliath, you've come a LONG way!

Very cool, Peck; thanks!

Brad8888
01-21-2010, 07:56 AM
[yt]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/tqZt3jk6RtQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/tqZt3jk6RtQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[yt]

Brilliant way to start the day! Thanks Peck! I will laugh heartily at life in general after that :laugh::laugh::laugh:!

Unclebuck
01-21-2010, 07:59 AM
Is anything O'Brien said wrong. It is true the big lineup (which is essentially Murph and Roy) is not working, they are too slow. And isn't it true the starting lineup all season has been horrible as evidenced by the poor starts this team gets off to.

able
01-21-2010, 09:12 AM
Now what are you all going to say if he benches Murphy ??

PaceBalls
01-21-2010, 09:13 AM
Now what are you all going to say if he benches Murphy ??

Our coach has had a brief moment of clarity... :devil:

Even if it is Murph that gets benched. He will be playing 30+ mins, if not that game then the next one.

sportfireman
01-21-2010, 09:14 AM
Now what are you all going to say if he benches Murphy ??

Thank GOD!!!!!!!

Brad8888
01-21-2010, 09:14 AM
Now what are you all going to say if he benches Murphy ??

Please Jim, NO?!?!? :laugh::laugh::laugh:

Is this the right color green for sarcasm now?

Unclebuck
01-21-2010, 09:26 AM
I think there is a better than 50/50 chance that Murphy is taken out of the starting lineup and Granger is started at power forward.

diamonddave00
01-21-2010, 09:32 AM
Welcome back to the bench Roy. Time for T J Ford to back into the starting line up too.

tadscout
01-21-2010, 09:48 AM
Welcome back to the bench Roy. Time for T J Ford to back into the starting line up too.

Where's the green! where's the green my man! :(:cry::mad:

90'sNBARocked
01-21-2010, 10:08 AM
I could give a **** what Wells has to say anymore. He's not exactly improving my experience as a fan.

Hey Cali,

Whats your beef with Wells?

I thik he is just doing his job, which is I am sure very restricted by the star

Brad8888
01-21-2010, 10:16 AM
Where's the green! where's the green my man! :(:cry::mad:

No green required.

Only the blues, man, only the blues...:(

tadscout
01-21-2010, 10:42 AM
No green required.

Only the blues, man, only the blues...:(

If either Ford comes back into the picture or Hibbert gets his min. reduced I'm diffidently going to get the blues... :(

BillS
01-21-2010, 10:43 AM
Now what are you all going to say if he benches Murphy ??

10. Ole!
9. We want McRoberts! We want McRoberts!
8. All Hail the 5 Game Streak!
7. Ia! Ia! Cthulu ftagn!
6. "Hear that, Elizabeth? I'm comin' to join ya honey!"
5. Now what do we do with all those "Jim O' Stubborn" bumper stickers?
4. Whoa, that acid in 1972 was more powerful than I thought.
3. Golly, Toto, we're not in Indiana any more.
2. Now, magic lamp, for my SECOND wish...

and the number one thing someone will say if O'Brien benches Murphy:

1. The negatives! He got the negatives!

BornReady
01-21-2010, 11:40 AM
question: if obie wants to run more and play a smaller lineup, will this mean hansbrough gets LESS time? :/

90'sNBARocked
01-21-2010, 11:49 AM
question: if obie wants to run more and play a smaller lineup, will this mean hansbrough gets LESS time? :/

I dont think so

Obie has been pretty consistent getting Tyler some time, I doubt that changes

Spirit
01-21-2010, 11:55 AM
Diener
Head
Dunleavy
Granger
McRoberts

Please.

90'sNBARocked
01-21-2010, 11:57 AM
Diener
Head
Dunleavy
Granger
McRoberts

Please.

Please , as in please get us the number one lottery pick?

no dis but that line up would get us beat by some D League teams

Easy
01-21-2010, 12:06 PM
There has been lots of talk that the players do not fit the coach. Yes, coaches have styles and preferneces and excel with certain types of offenses and defenses. But, if a coach is in a situation where he does not have his optimal type of players then why not--for freakin' sakes--can he just be a coach and adapt his style in such a way in order to accumulate production out of his players and wins in the process?

It just seems ridiculous for JOB to continue to search for the mix of players to fit his vision instead of finding a vision to fit the team. This seems to be where the chasm is and looms.
Based on the (lack of) production on the court everyone knows it but no one is fessing up and doing anything to change the situation.

For better--not worse--let's hope a deadline deal helps alter this situation.

No way Roy should be coming off the bench.

vnzla81
01-21-2010, 12:28 PM
did anybody here hear A Smith on the radio this morning? he was talking about the pacers and saying that with JOB the pacers would never win and the he feels the same with Larry, he also agree with them not trying to go to the playoffs for what? he said

MillerTime
01-21-2010, 12:38 PM
Considering another line change?? How about he consider a change of profession

ksuttonjr76
01-21-2010, 09:41 PM
Now what are you all going to say if he benches Murphy ??

I'll be d*mned.

jhondog28
01-21-2010, 10:30 PM
I wonder if we could get Peyton Manning to coach this team. He could probably figure out what is wrong in 5 minutes.

On the serious side of things the fastest line up we probably have is

Ford PG
Jones SG
Dun SF
Granger PF
McRoberts C

But then again I would **** cubes if this ever happened

Hicks
01-21-2010, 10:34 PM
I would love to HEAR Manning coach the Pacers.

"Pass the ****ing ball, Dahntay! We're gonna pass! Don't ****ing tell me we're not going to pass!"

"*** DAMN IT, TJ!"

No matter what play he calls, the signal is always, "Buffalo! Buffalo! Buckle up!"

:laugh:

jhondog28
01-21-2010, 10:40 PM
I would love to HEAR Manning coach the Pacers.

"Pass the ****ing ball, Dahntay! We're gonna pass! Don't ****ing tell me we're not going to pass!"

"*** DAMN IT, TJ!"

No matter what play he calls, the signal is always, "Buffalo! Buffalo! Buckle up!"

:laugh:

LOL yea I can see it. Hell if he can run the Oreo licking league he could coach the Pacers

judicata
01-21-2010, 10:41 PM
question: if obie wants to run more and play a smaller lineup, will this mean hansbrough gets LESS time? :/

It wouldn't make a lot of sense. The kid went to Carolina, he's used to running, and he runs hard. I've yet to see him beaten down the court by the other team's bigs, and he often gets their before our guards and wings.

Kuq_e_Zi91
01-22-2010, 01:01 AM
It wouldn't make a lot of sense. The kid went to Carolina, he's used to running, and he runs hard. I've yet to see him beaten down the court by the other team's bigs, and he often gets their before our guards and wings.

To add to that, it'll be pretty difficult to cut down Tyler's minutes any further.

Kemo
01-22-2010, 01:27 AM
6. "Hear that, Elizabeth? I'm comin' to join ya honey!"





HAHAHA NICE Fred G. Sanford reference.... "The G stands for Grateful" ..LOL... Definitely my favorite of the bunch ..... "SHOULD" be number 1 IMO..





.

imawhat
01-22-2010, 01:39 AM
"*** DAMN IT, TJ!"


:laugh:

I was wondering if anyone else caught that during the game.

CableKC
01-22-2010, 01:42 AM
Okay....you all have to tell me.....was Hibbert's defense bad enough that it warrants a benching?

To be fair.....don't be a homer and say that his defense wasn't that bad....if Hibbert is the guy to bench....is JO'B justified in doing so?

Anthem
01-22-2010, 08:13 AM
Now what are you all going to say if he benches Murphy ??
"Good win tonight."

McKeyFan
01-22-2010, 08:33 AM
Okay....you all have to tell me.....was Hibbert's defense bad enough that it warrants a benching?

To be fair.....don't be a homer and say that his defense wasn't that bad....if Hibbert is the guy to bench....is JO'B justified in doing so?

It wasn't any worse than Murphy's defense (Howard had a season high of 32 points).

Roy and Murph both bring a strong offense. Roy has the potential of bringing decent defense. Murph does not.

Roy should have remained in the game with the hopes of him turning things around after getting smoked early by Howard.

Going with Murphy instead of Roy, there simply is no hope.

Unclebuck
01-22-2010, 10:00 AM
Roy should have remained in the game with the hopes of him turning things around after getting smoked early by Howard.

Going with Murphy instead of Roy, there simply is no hope.


Not to beat a dead horse, but here it goes.

Roy played 11 of the first 16 minutes in the Magic game. He started and played the first 7 minutes (pacers were trailing 22-8 when he was replaced - that is very much a normal rotation, 7 mins is about as long as Rioy can go at any 1 time) Roy was brought back in to start the second quarter and plays the first 4 minutes. Roy's +/- during those 11 minutes is -18. Roy plays 11 of the first 16 minutes of the game and his +/- is -18 and you want him to play more.


Roy then plays the final 7 minutes if the third quarter his +/- is 0 for those 7 minutes.

So Roy played 18 of the first 36 minutes of the game his +/- during those 18 minutes is -18 and you think he should have played more minutes in this game in order to give the pacers the best chance to win the game?

McKeyFan
01-22-2010, 10:24 AM
Not to beat a dead horse, but here it goes.

Roy played 11 of the first 16 minutes in the Magic game. He started and played the first 7 minutes (pacers were trailing 22-8 when he was replaced - that is very much a normal rotation, 7 mins is about as long as Rioy can go at any 1 time) Roy was brought back in to start the second quarter and plays the first 4 minutes. Roy's +/- during those 11 minutes is -18. Roy plays 11 of the first 16 minutes of the game and his +/- is -18 and you want him to play more.


Roy then plays the final 7 minutes if the third quarter his +/- is 0 for those 7 minutes.

So Roy played 18 of the first 36 minutes of the game his +/- during those 18 minutes is -18 and you think he should have played more minutes in this game in order to give the pacers the best chance to win the game?

Yes.

Roy needs to be in the game because at any time he can turn around his game to become a high +/- player. Murphy rarely can do that.

Roy should not be yanked out of the game, just like Danny shouldn't if he happens to be cold, because Roy is one of our best players. We need to build his confidence, not destroy it.

It is worth Roy having one bad game, and letting him play through it, because he has shown that he is likely to have several good ones to follow. But messing with his confidence puts all that in jeopardy. Murphy provides none of that strong upside.

Why do you all of the sudden bring up +/- in isolation like this? In total, Murph's +/- are way below Hibberts. If you wanted to do this every game, Murph would never see 30 minutes on the floor, because his +/- is almost always the worst on the team. Should he be yanked in the first half every game?

Unclebuck
01-22-2010, 10:40 AM
Yes.

Roy needs to be in the game because at any time he can turn around his game to become a high +/- player. Murphy rarely can do that.

Roy should not be yanked out of the game, just like Danny shouldn't if he happens to be cold, because Roy is one of our best players. We need to build his confidence, not destroy it.

It is worth Roy having one bad game, and letting him play through it, because he has shown that he is likely to have several good ones to follow. But messing with his confidence puts all that in jeopardy. Murphy provides none of that strong upside.

Why do you all of the sudden bring up +/- in isolation like this? In total, Murph's +/- are way below Hibberts. If you wanted to do this every game, Murph would never see 30 minutes on the floor, because his +/- is almost always the worst on the team. Should he be yanked in the first half every game?


I only brought the stupid +/- into it because everyone else always does. I would rather just go by what I see as I watch the game and from what I saw Roy played horribly in Orlando, but then again so did every other Pacers player although Roy just didn't have it that night, so I don't think playing more in that game helps him or the pacers. Sometimes with a young player it is better to sit, have them re-group and come back again the next game. The comeback late in the fourth quarter doesn't mean anything to me.

But I responded with my comments and the plus/minus stuff because you and others were upset that Roy didn't play more and of course chastising JOB as a horrible coach for not playing Roy more - so I felt like I should respond with my opinion.

If i were coaching the pacers and if the trailed by 20 points in the 4th quarter, i would in an effort to try and maybe get back into the game go really small speed the game up and shoot a lot of threes. That is what most coaches tend to do to try and make up a large deficit late in a game. Usually it is futile in the end

Other point I was trying to make is that through three quarters Roy played about his normal minutes, I mean if the game was close and if he would have played 7 minutes in the 4th quarter that would have put him at 25 mins for the game which is a normal and reasonable amount of minutes.

edit: I do have a general question on Jim O'Brien. Does he get any credit from Pacers fans for benching TJ Ford. many were calling for Price to get time many wanted Ford benched and Jim did it, but I'm not sure I've seen any compliments thrown JOB's way for doing so - benching a player than makes 9M

pacergod2
01-22-2010, 10:53 AM
Being down by 18 after the first 7 minutes of the game, every player out there would have had a -18, but Roy is the one that takes the fall for the team and the other players stay out there to make a come back? Obviously it wasn't a five for five substitution, which it probably should have been. That sounds to me like terrible shot selection having only 4 baskets in 7 minutes on our part (that's on pace for a 13 point quarter). Settling for too many contested threes are we? Also, if Hibbert is struggling on defense guarding Dwight Howard, then why would we go smaller? Wouldn't you bring in a bigger lineup to help defend him? Oh wait, we only think about basketball from an offensive standpoint.

I pray that Bill Lambier is our biggest off-season acquisition in the summer of2011.

Unclebuck
01-22-2010, 11:08 AM
Being down by 18 after the first 7 minutes of the game, every player out there would have had a -18, but Roy is the one that takes the fall for the team and the other players stay out there to make a come back? Obviously it wasn't a five for five substitution, which it probably should have been.

Roy's +/- was worse than the other starters because he didn't play any in the fourth quarter when some of the deficit was made up.

I am in no way what-so-ever blaming Roy for the loss. He played his normal minutes through 3 quarters

Brad8888
01-22-2010, 11:34 AM
I do have a general question on Jim O'Brien. Does he get any credit from Pacers fans for benching TJ Ford. many were calling for Price to get time many wanted Ford benched and Jim did it, but I'm not sure I've seen any compliments thrown JOB's way for doing so - benching a player than makes 9M

If he was behind it, he will not play him in whatever new lineup he is concocting now per the Wells rumors.

My guess is that O'B has been lobbying Bird a lot recently, and that he will be playing, if not starting, in the very near future, possibly tonight, because he is exactly what Jim said he wants offensively -- smaller, quicker, and more speed throughout the lineup. In my opinion, Jim likes him, and only benched him due to Bird telling him to play Price to make sure we could afford to trade another of our guards, whether it be TJ (highly unlikely IMO) or Watson, or heaven forbid to showcase Price.

Tough crowd, us O'B bashers. No credit, as if he has approximately a 350 credit score on his report and is wanting to refinance his house that he currently owes 20% more than its appraised value in an effort to receive more affordable payments since he will be downsized about the end of April.

Unclebuck
01-22-2010, 11:57 AM
If he was behind it, he will not play him in whatever new lineup he is concocting now per the Wells rumors.

My guess is that O'B has been lobbying Bird a lot recently, and that he will be playing, if not starting, in the very near future, possibly tonight, because he is exactly what Jim said he wants offensively -- smaller, quicker, and more speed throughout the lineup. In my opinion, Jim likes him, and only benched him due to Bird telling him to play Price to make sure we could afford to trade another of our guards, whether it be TJ (highly unlikely IMO) or Watson, or heaven forbid to showcase Price.

.

I don't have any idea how you can possibly say that JOB likes Ford. They have never gotten along, he benched him last season, he wanted him traded in the summer. Jim hates the way Ford dominates the ball.

Brad8888
01-22-2010, 12:23 PM
Jim hates the way Ford dominates the ball.

In the same way that virtually every pg who has played here not named Travis Diener has, especially in late game situations.

Almost to a man they have taken the ball and driven into traffic and either attempted to finish or kick to the perimeter for 3's, especially as the games have wound down and the games are close.

Just wait. TJ is coming.

Peck
01-22-2010, 12:53 PM
Not to beat a dead horse, but here it goes.

Roy played 11 of the first 16 minutes in the Magic game. He started and played the first 7 minutes (pacers were trailing 22-8 when he was replaced - that is very much a normal rotation, 7 mins is about as long as Rioy can go at any 1 time) Roy was brought back in to start the second quarter and plays the first 4 minutes. Roy's +/- during those 11 minutes is -18. Roy plays 11 of the first 16 minutes of the game and his +/- is -18 and you want him to play more.


Roy then plays the final 7 minutes if the third quarter his +/- is 0 for those 7 minutes.

So Roy played 18 of the first 36 minutes of the game his +/- during those 18 minutes is -18 and you think he should have played more minutes in this game in order to give the pacers the best chance to win the game?

I will not ever listen to an argument of a players playing time based on +/- until I see that Troy Murphy is not dead last in that departement while still being one of the players who starts everytime he can and one of our leading min. played people.

I don't think much of the stat to begin with however if that is going to be the criteria for the discussion then it is absolutely meaningless until that situation changes.

Bball
01-22-2010, 01:17 PM
If i were coaching the pacers and if the trailed by 20 points in the 4th quarter, i would in an effort to try and maybe get back into the game go really small speed the game up and shoot a lot of threes. That is what most coaches tend to do to try and make up a large deficit late in a game.



Or you could just do that for the whole game. Make that the gameplan!



Usually it is futile in the end

Well there is that...

But isn't that the gameplan... and isn't that the problem?

MyFavMartin
01-22-2010, 10:26 PM
I think this team really misses Jack...

Jack sparked the team and got them fired up and provided leadership. I really wish we still had him, as I think this year we would be much better.

Unclebuck
01-22-2010, 10:28 PM
Anyone want to amend their comments

Hicks
01-22-2010, 11:06 PM
Anyone want to amend their comments

Why? Deciding not to change the lineup doesn't mean Roy wouldn't have been the one to get yanked had he actually gone through with a change. Sure, we don't know that 100%, but it's certainly no worse than 51%.

BlueNGold
01-22-2010, 11:07 PM
Change the coach... not the lineup.

Every day that passes...and every lineup that changes...and every draft or trade we see materialize.....I think a coaching change is in order.

I have virtually no doubt a coaching change will be made when his contract is up.

Brad8888
01-22-2010, 11:29 PM
Anyone want to amend their comments

This should make you happy, especially the next to last paragraph!

Congratulations to Brandon for carrying his part of the scoring load by going 5 for 8 from the arc, which offset yet another overall weak effort from the arc for the rest of the team of 4 for 17 as is the usual. With normal production from him, it probably would have been yet another loss, despite the uninspired Pistons shooting an abysmal 1 for 9 from the arc. I cannot credit O'B for those things which were materially significant to the result. Brandon is finally finding his own way, for now.

Whoopee.

Murphy was not last in the +/- for players who played at least half of the game. AJ Price who missed his 3's was at -9. Troy at least limited his three point attempts this evening. Congratulations to Roy Hibbert for blowing everyone else away with a +29.

Some good things from O'B, though. O'B actually allowed Hibbert to play, and hopefully O'B was responsible for having Danny reduce his 3's and drive to the basket to get his points from the line, and did not have to play the 4 as much. I would say that O'B and what appears to be a strategic tweak had a hand in winning this game, while not going to smaller ball as he was considering, and that is pretty much the first time I recall thinking that in his tenure here.

TJ is still coming, IMO, and it may well be in an effort to match up against Iverson. TJ is probably the only guard we have who could, if he wanted to, stay in front of Iverson and prevent Iverson from destroying us with foul trouble due to dribble penetration.

kester99
01-22-2010, 11:42 PM
The only change I noticed was a lack of Solomon.

BlueNGold
01-23-2010, 12:12 AM
There is nothing magical going on here. No coaching brilliance. Nothing new at all.

The Pistons play at a snail's pace which works to Mr. Hibbert's benefit....which is precisely why he was positive 29. Also, their offense is primarily midrange from what I can see. IOW, they do not attack the basket...and therefore interior defense is unnecessary...another big plus for TrRoy.

Combine all this with the fact they're not that good, and you have a recipe' for a Pacer victory.

BTW, TrRoy is my new name for our dominant defensive minded C and PF.

Anthem
01-23-2010, 08:57 AM
BTW, TrRoy is my new name for our dominant defensive minded C and PF.
Love it.

Tom White
01-23-2010, 09:53 AM
Not to beat a dead horse, but here it goes.

Roy played 11 of the first 16 minutes in the Magic game. He started and played the first 7 minutes (pacers were trailing 22-8 when he was replaced - that is very much a normal rotation, 7 mins is about as long as Rioy can go at any 1 time) Roy was brought back in to start the second quarter and plays the first 4 minutes. Roy's +/- during those 11 minutes is -18. Roy plays 11 of the first 16 minutes of the game and his +/- is -18 and you want him to play more.


Roy then plays the final 7 minutes if the third quarter his +/- is 0 for those 7 minutes.

So Roy played 18 of the first 36 minutes of the game his +/- during those 18 minutes is -18 and you think he should have played more minutes in this game in order to give the pacers the best chance to win the game?

I'm not big on the +/- thing, but can you tell me what the whole team's +/- was for that time period? Not individuals, but the team's +/-?

McKeyFan
01-23-2010, 09:56 AM
Was does TrRoy mean?

Turtle Roy, tricycle Roy, Terrible verson of Roy?

Brad8888
01-23-2010, 10:15 AM
There is nothing magical going on here. No coaching brilliance. Nothing new at all.

The Pistons play at a snail's pace which works to Mr. Hibbert's benefit....which is precisely why he was positive 29. Also, their offense is primarily midrange from what I can see. IOW, they do not attack the basket...and therefore interior defense is unnecessary...another big plus for TrRoy.

Combine all this with the fact they're not that good, and you have a recipe' for a Pacer victory.

BTW, TrRoy is my new name for our dominant defensive minded C and PF.

I stand corrected by all of you, after sleeping on it. I believe that I was in a better mood than normal when thinking about this game due to other non-game related things, not the least of which was a good dinner with Cheddar Bay biscuits from Red Lobster earlier in the evening.

Obviously we still shot way more threes than we should have, and thankfully Brandon hit his for once, and due to the lack of attacking the basket by the Pistons, Roy survived to do what he does, with all of the good and bad that entails.

Really, the only thing that may be attributable to O'B is Danny shooting fewer 3's and getting to the line a little more than usual, because I think I recall reports that there has been a discussion between them regarding that issue.

I guess I was so ready to see Roy benched that I gave credit to O'B for NOT benching him, which is obviously BS. The reasons that Roy got to play are exactly as you say, and the fact that as a result of those things he stayed out of foul trouble.

So, you guys are definitely right, there actually wasn't anything different, and my fleeting feeling of giving O'B credit has now passed. My apologies to those of us who want O'B gone. I now realize that O'B really did nothing to deserve ANY credit for winning this game in any way, the Pistons simply lost due to their dysfunctionality and uninspired play, much like the level we are accustomed to seeing from the Pacers.

Live by not dying by the three?

Brad8888
01-23-2010, 10:25 AM
Was does TrRoy mean?

Turtle Roy, tricycle Roy, Terrible verson of Roy?

It means a dude who is awkward around the basket on both ends of the floor who gets into foul trouble due to inexperience who can also hit the trailing three at the top of the arc as long as he is allowed to by the opposition, and who can shoot a baby hook and block a few shots despite being constantly being blown by on dribble penetrations, who also gets some rebounds by capitalizing on the blocking out of his teammates and stealing them out of their hands to pad his stat line, hopefully making "Tr" Tr-adeable. :D

McKeyFan
01-23-2010, 11:22 AM
Oops. I get it now. It's two guys, like Murphleavy.

Brad8888
01-23-2010, 12:00 PM
Oops. I get it now. It's two guys, like Murphleavy.

Yeppers. Murphy is a player who can never stand alone on his own merits (or "dismerits"). :D

BillS
01-23-2010, 01:29 PM
There is nothing magical going on here. No coaching brilliance. Nothing new at all.

The Pistons play at a snail's pace which works to Mr. Hibbert's benefit....which is precisely why he was positive 29. Also, their offense is primarily midrange from what I can see. IOW, they do not attack the basket...and therefore interior defense is unnecessary...another big plus for TrRoy.

Combine all this with the fact they're not that good, and you have a recipe' for a Pacer victory.

BTW, TrRoy is my new name for our dominant defensive minded C and PF.

Why not? There are people here absolutely convinced that JOB is too stupid and/or stubborn to change his underwear daily. For those people, even doing something as obvious as taking advantage of your big slow players against Detroit needs to be acknowledged.

Hicks
01-23-2010, 02:56 PM
TrRoy only works visually. It sounds the same as Troy to say (unless you say, Tuh-roy?).

I like T-Roy. It's like T-Rex.

McKeyFan
01-23-2010, 03:52 PM
How bout the Trojan Horse?

BlueNGold
01-23-2010, 05:17 PM
Why not? There are people here absolutely convinced that JOB is too stupid and/or stubborn to change his underwear daily. For those people, even doing something as obvious as taking advantage of your big slow players against Detroit needs to be acknowledged.

Maybe. I still think he obviously made a wrong decision by leaving Watson and Price in the game...I think maybe in the 2nd period. He had a couple PF's rotting on the bench he should have put in there instead.

The fact is, we have the personnell to match-up with the Pistons...but if you go small like that they can actually beat you.

So, while he gets some credit for leaving Roy in the game against the Pistons, I think a 10 year old child would know to do that. I expect more from an NBA coach.

BlueNGold
01-23-2010, 05:18 PM
TrRoy only works visually. It sounds the same as Troy to say (unless you say, Tuh-roy?).

I like T-Roy. It's like T-Rex.

I think you have me sold. T-Roy it is.

BTW, I think we could use a T-Rex instead in the paint...