PDA

View Full Version : Lakers postgame



McKeyFan
01-27-2010, 10:15 PM
Is it just me, or does it seem like, game after game, Roy comes in and we go on a run? Roy goes out and we lose steam.

Once in a while its the opposite, but it seems to go the way I said most of the time, game after game.

Against the Lakers, Roy had the best plus/minus. Murphy the worst.

Sookie
01-27-2010, 10:18 PM
When Roy's playing well, it's pretty true, unless of course Troy is in the game with him. Then the other team goes on a run.

I don't think the sky is falling after this. Kobe missed like one shot..and Rush did as good of a job as anyone could defending him..he's just Kobe Bryant. And when that happens..a team like the Pacers loses pretty badly.

Ownagedood
01-27-2010, 10:19 PM
Omg, im gonna kill something. Haven't been on here in forever but i was inspired to get on and rant at the disgrace tonight. Tonight is the loudest i have heard conseco in a pretty long time.... And it was MVP chants coming from all the laker fans. I was embarrassed and felt like it was a disgrace to have the home team out cheered by the away team, especially chants of MVP for a player. Im extremely frustrated.

*Props to Roy Hibbert, the only pacers to show up tonight.*

MyFavMartin
01-27-2010, 10:22 PM
we only got outrebounded by 20.

And Bynum and Gasol shot for ~66%.

yeah smallball! :dance:

Unclebuck
01-27-2010, 10:22 PM
What I've notice is that a typical NBA game has runs back and forth. So whoever starts and if the pacers fall behind as they typically do by 10-15 points, then it only makes sense that the Pacers will make a run and that often times happens when the bench comes in. The opponents let up. Teams makes runs back and forth. Our opponents put their bench into the game and unlike our opponents, our bench is as good as our starters and have been all season long.

My point is that there are many more factors going on then just whether Roy or Troy are in the game.

Tonights game it was just a matter of being outclassed at every position. The talent, experience, and know how advantage by the lakers at every position was striking. Lakers toyed with us for awhile and then turned it on for a few minutes and the game ws over - simple as that. lakers knew where our bad defense is its weakest and that is inside and they destroyed us

McKeyFan
01-27-2010, 10:25 PM
What I've notice is that a typical NBA game has runs back and forth. So whoever starts and if the pacers fall behind as they typically do by 10-15 points, then it only makes sense that the Pacers will make a run and that often times happens when the bench comes in. The opponents let up. Teams makes runs back and forth. Our opponents put their bench into the game and unlike our opponents, our bench is as good as our starters and have been all season long.

My point is that there are many more factors going on then just whether Roy or Troy are in the game.

Maybe so.

I'm getting tired of fighting it. I feel like I'm in a dream or a deja vu.

Just give me morphine.

vnzla81
01-27-2010, 10:25 PM
Omg, im gonna kill something. Haven't been on here in forever but i was inspired to get on and rant at the disgrace tonight. Tonight is the loudest i have heard conseco in a pretty long time.... And it was MVP chants coming from all the laker fans. I was embarrassed and felt like it was a disgrace to have the home team out cheered by the away team, especially chants of MVP for a player. Im extremely frustrated.

*Props to Roy Hibbert, the only pacers to show up tonight.*

I don't think JOB think the same thing, according to Lee on the radio Jim said that Roy did not play a good game tonight.:confused:

McKeyFan
01-27-2010, 10:27 PM
I don't think JOB think the same thing, according to Lee on the radio Jim said that Roy did not play a good game tonight.:confused:

Up is down. Down is up.

Roy is bad. Troy is good.

Fast is slow. Long is short.

MyFavMartin
01-27-2010, 10:27 PM
Maybe so.

I'm getting tired of fighting it. I feel like I'm in a dream or a deja vu.

Just give me morphine.

Found out that Bayer discovered heroin today by acetylating morphine and even touted it as a drug to help kick your morphine habit.

MyFavMartin
01-27-2010, 10:29 PM
Oh, and we shot 25% for 3PTers, of which we hoisted 28.

Yeah, smallball! :dance:

Infinite MAN_force
01-27-2010, 10:32 PM
Roy tied for best plus minus on team at -3. Murphy with a team worst -26. Its not always an accurate gauge for one game, but with Murphy dead last for the season, the pattern continues.

And how much you wanna bet we see murphy start the next game at center and hear JOB reiterate that the small lineup with Troy at center is our best lineup, when according to the ACTUAL stats, The small lineup with ROY at center is our best lineup.

At least Roy played as many minutes as Troy tonight, but JOB needs to pull his had out of his *** and bring Troy Murphy off the bench, for no more than 20 minutes per game, for the rest of the season. As many on this forum have advocated... FOR MONTHS. but that won't happen, a trade will be our only saving grace.

JOB's solution? If Roy proves he should be starting, he will just start them together... which has consistently proven to be one of our WORST lineups.

JOB will never bring Troy Murphy off the bench, no matter what it seems. I don't care about Troy's feelings, grow a pair, do whats best for the team, stop overusing Troy. Otherwise, for GODS SAKE PLEASE LET HIM BE TRADED.

The only saving grace is the continued improvement of our draft position. Thank you Jim. If you deliver us Wall or Turner, I may take back everything bad I ever said about you.

Unclebuck
01-27-2010, 10:32 PM
Roy's offense ws very good tonight, but his defense was not good at all, so lets not let him of the hook.

I want to see a quote from JOB saying that our best lineup is our small lineup with Troy as the big guy. I don't think he has ever said that

the jaddler
01-27-2010, 10:33 PM
What I've notice is that a typical NBA game has runs back and forth. So whoever starts and if the pacers fall behind as they typically do by 10-15 points, then it only makes sense that the Pacers will make a run and that often times happens when the bench comes in. The opponents let up. Teams makes runs back and forth. Our opponents put their bench into the game and unlike our opponents, our bench is as good as our starters and have been all season long.

My point is that there are many more factors going on then just whether Roy or Troy are in the game.

Tonights game it was just a matter of being outclassed at every position. The talent, experience, and know how advantage by the lakers at every position was striking. Lakers toyed with us for awhile and then turned it on for a few minutes and the game ws over - simple as that. lakers knew where our bad defense is its weakest and that is inside and they destroyed us

well said.....

Infinite MAN_force
01-27-2010, 10:34 PM
I don't think JOB think the same thing, according to Lee on the radio Jim said that Roy did not play a good game tonight.:confused:

The man is certifiable.. and his beloved plus minus stat bears this out.

Ownagedood
01-27-2010, 10:35 PM
Oh, and we shot 25% for 3PTers, of which we hoisted 28.

Yeah, smallball! :dance:

Half of which was WIDE OPEN. You CANT miss the easy shots and win in this league.

McKeyFan
01-27-2010, 10:38 PM
Roy's offense ws very good tonight, but his defense was not good at all, so lets not let him of the hook

Well, I can acknowledge that Bynum had his way with Roy (and also with Troy).

But I wouldn't say he played bad defense. It was pretty good. Bynum was just unstoppable.

Whatever the case, Roy played in such a way that his plus/minus was -3, the highest on the team, and Troy's was -26.

I see lots of reasons why Roy continually has a much higher plus/minus: his presence down low creates open shots on the perimeter, his height causes shots to be altered, and passes to him down low from penetrators turn into easy shots. I imagine his attitude is a factor as well.

Infinite MAN_force
01-27-2010, 10:39 PM
Roy's offense ws very good tonight, but his defense was not good at all, so lets not let him of the hook.

I want to see a quote from JOB saying that our best lineup is our small lineup with Troy as the big guy. I don't think he has ever said that



There is a whole thread dedicated to that subject.

http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthread.php?t=50356

I am not saying Roy did not struggle with Bynum defensively, but Troy was even worse, why does this always go ignored in favor of piling on and blaming our promising young players? When we lose JOB blames the young guys, and lets the vets off the hook.. and he seems to have a similar viewpoint when it comes to playing time.

The plus minus also bears out the entire team was playing better with Roy on the floor.

McKeyFan
01-27-2010, 10:40 PM
I want to see a quote from JOB saying that our best lineup is our small lineup with Troy as the big guy. I don't think he has ever said that

He said the small line up was our best. And he started the small line up tonight with Troy. Doesn't that sort of communicate it?

BlueNGold
01-27-2010, 10:41 PM
Outclassed obviously, but my take-away came in the post-game show.

While JOb is touting small-ball as the best way to win, he is getting closer to the truth....maybe by accident.

He believes small ball helps his offense. Well, it helps this particular team win but not offensively. While it could not be done down the stretch effectively against the much bigger Lakers, it worked against the 76ers.

Now, why is that?

Small ball helps our defense considerably when Granger is at the 4. Not a perfect place for him, but when he spends time there...D Jones and Rush can cover the swing positions greatly improving our defense. The proof is that we kept the 76ers under 100 points...only the 3rd time this month. The same thing happened during the infamous, stupendous, tremendous 5 game winning streak earlier this year. The defense is simply better when you have Granger at the 4 instead of T-Roy covering the front court. It really is that simple....yet JOb continues to think his offense is where he's seeing the improvement.

Love is blind you know.

Unclebuck
01-27-2010, 10:43 PM
I don't think JOB think the same thing, according to Lee on the radio Jim said that Roy did not play a good game tonight.:confused:

O'Brien's press conference which they showed the whole thing on TV - it was very short- just said that the alkers scored easily on Troy and Roy, and that Bynam scored well on our big. At no time did Jim say that Roy had a bad game - but he certainly implied that Roy's defense wasn't good as the pacers whole team's defense wasn't good. Jim was not happy about the pacers defense - he seems as his wits end

Unclebuck
01-27-2010, 10:45 PM
He said the small line up was our best. And he started the small line up tonight with Troy. Doesn't that sort of communicate it?

No, because the decision that Jim has made is to go small and that means either Troy or Roy at center - that is what I think he means and I think that is demonstarted by the lineups he employs

owl
01-27-2010, 10:46 PM
Bottom line, this team is not very good. So I would not get overly excited over the coach
or players as both leave a lot to be desired. Pacers have a ways to go to be good and
in the playoffs. Find some joy in what you can with someone on the team. Peace.

BlueNGold
01-27-2010, 10:47 PM
He said the small line up was our best. And he started the small line up tonight with Troy. Doesn't that sort of communicate it?

The puzzle pieces should start coming together for everyone. I really hope JOb starts getting it before the end of the year.

With this team, small ball is the way to go...but not with Troy in the paint. I'm not sold on Hibbert either, but he's a better option for the 5. I would actually experiment with McBob at the 5 and see just how fast they could get down the floor. The fact is, McBob can defend the C position just fine against half the centers in the NBA.

Unclebuck
01-27-2010, 10:48 PM
There is a whole thread dedicated to that subject.

http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthread.php?t=50356

I am not saying Roy did not struggle with Bynum defensively, but Troy was even worse, why does this always go ignored [bin favor of piling on and blaming our promising young players? When we lose JOB blames the young guys, and lets the vets off the hook.. and he seems to have a similar viewpoint when it comes to playing time.

The plus minus also bears out the entire team was playing better with Roy on the floor.

are you joking? Murphy's defense is never being ignored. His one-on-one defense is beyond horrible - everyone knows that though

Hicks
01-27-2010, 10:50 PM
Up is down. Down is up.

Roy is bad. Troy is good.

Fast is slow. Long is short.

Then, frankly, **** his hypocritical ***. To hell with him.

Kemo
01-27-2010, 10:51 PM
Roy's offense ws very good tonight, but his defense was not good at all, so lets not let him of the hook.

I want to see a quote from JOB saying that our best lineup is our small lineup with Troy as the big guy. I don't think he has ever said that



pfffttt... At LEAST, everytime his matchup drove to the lane.. I didn't feel the compulsive urge to jump up outta my seat and yell ... " OLE' !!!!!!"

Hicks
01-27-2010, 10:54 PM
Roy's offense ws very good tonight, but his defense was not good at all, so lets not let him of the hook.

I want to see a quote from JOB saying that our best lineup is our small lineup with Troy as the big guy. I don't think he has ever said that

It's not that we think Roy is some awesome defender. It's that we're ****ing disgusted by Jim saying Roy had a bad night after a game like this while he continues to say nothing bad about Troy Murphy and treats him like he's better than he is night after night. It's BS.

Unclebuck
01-27-2010, 10:54 PM
people are misquoting O'Brien's press conference that they didn't watch and then using that to make points against what Jim didn't say. Really all Jim said tonight is that the defense was bad - he didn't name names though

Correction: he did name names

Unclebuck
01-27-2010, 10:55 PM
It's not that we think Roy is some awesome defender. It's that we're ****ing disgusted by Jim saying Roy had a bad night after a game like this while he continues to say nothing bad about Troy Murphy and treats him like he's better than he is night after night. It's BS.

Jim never said Roy had a bad game though. I watched the entire press conference - it was only maybe 45 seconds

BlueNGold
01-27-2010, 10:56 PM
people are misquoting O'Brien's press conference that they didn't watch and then using that to make points against what Jim didn't say. Really all Jim said tonight is that the defense was bad - he didn't name names though

That's not true. He specifically said that Roy played poor D tonight right after someone questioned Troy's defense at the beginning of the game.

Hicks
01-27-2010, 10:56 PM
O'Brien's press conference which they showed the whole thing on TV - it was very short- just said that the alkers scored easily on Troy and Roy, and that Bynam scored well on our big. At no time did Jim say that Roy had a bad game - but he certainly implied that Roy's defense wasn't good as the pacers whole team's defense wasn't good. Jim was not happy about the pacers defense - he seems as his wits end

He complains about the defense time after time, but not once does he ever bench Troy. Ever.

Hicks
01-27-2010, 10:58 PM
Jim never said Roy had a bad game though. I watched the entire press conference - it was only maybe 45 seconds

Fair enough, but he's said these kinds of things before, and it was BS then, too.

Hicks
01-27-2010, 10:58 PM
That's not true. He specifically said that Roy played poor D tonight right after someone questioned Troy's defense at the beginning of the game.

Oh. Well, then I'm back to "**** him."

Unclebuck
01-27-2010, 11:00 PM
That's not true. He specifically said that Roy played poor D tonight right after someone questioned Troy's defense at the beginning of the game.

He implied everyone played bad defense, but he never said riy had a good game. Someone said that Roy played well offensively and Jim got a disgusted look on his face and said the defense was bad. If you want to infer that Jim implied that Roy's defense was bad - OK sure he said that. But posters are claiming that O'Brien said Roy had a bad game - Jim never said those words nor did he imply that either.

O'Brien: "He got off on Troy (Murphy) then when Roy (Hibbert) came in he got off on Roy." -- O'Brien on Andrew Bynum

BlueNGold
01-27-2010, 11:02 PM
He implied everyone played bad defense, but he never said riy had a good game. Someone said that Roy played well offensively and Jim got a disgusted look on his face and said the defense was bad. If you want to infer that Jim implied that Roy's defense was bad - OK sure he said that. But posters are claiming that O'Brien said Roy had a bad game - Jim never said those words nor did he imply that either

He didn't say Roy had a bad game. He responded to a questioner and ripped Roy's defense. I think the questioner said something to the effect that Troy was getting abused from the get go. I didn't closely watch this game, so I would not be surprised if they were both struggling...but he definitely seemed to go after Roy when Troy was getting hammered.

BlueNGold
01-27-2010, 11:04 PM
He implied everyone played bad defense, but he never said riy had a good game. Someone said that Roy played well offensively and Jim got a disgusted look on his face and said the defense was bad. If you want to infer that Jim implied that Roy's defense was bad - OK sure he said that. But posters are claiming that O'Brien said Roy had a bad game - Jim never said those words nor did he imply that either.

O'Brien: "He got off on Troy (Murphy) then when Roy (Hibbert) came in he got off on Roy." -- O'Brien on Andrew Bynum

The point though is that the questioner was talking about Troy....but JOb had to interject that Roy was struggling as well. I'm not sure that was necessary even if it were true.

Edit: BTW, Roy being a sophomore....it would seem someone would cut him some slack rather than being held to the same standard as an 8 year vet....JMHO.

McKeyFan
01-27-2010, 11:06 PM
He didn't say Roy had a bad game. He responded to a questioner and ripped Roy's defense. I think the questioner said something to the effect that Troy was getting abused from the get go. I didn't closely watch this game, so I would not be surprised if they were both struggling...but he definitely seemed to go after Roy when Troy was getting hammered.

Whoever said JOS is certifiable . . . I'll go with that.

Anthem
01-27-2010, 11:06 PM
What I've notice is that a typical NBA game has runs back and forth. So whoever starts and if the pacers fall behind as they typically do by 10-15 points, then it only makes sense that the Pacers will make a run and that often times happens when the bench comes in. The opponents let up. Teams makes runs back and forth. Our opponents put their bench into the game and unlike our opponents, our bench is as good as our starters and have been all season long.
A fair point.

In the spirit of scientific inquiry, I'd like to see Obie move Roy to the starting spot and bring Murph off the bench, just to see if the trend continues.

You know, for science.

Unclebuck
01-27-2010, 11:07 PM
He didn't say Roy had a bad game. He responded to a questioner and ripped Roy's defense. I think the questioner said something to the effect that Troy was getting abused from the get go. I didn't closely watch this game, so I would not be surprised if they were both struggling...but he definitely seemed to go after Roy when Troy was getting hammered.

see quote above that I added to my post. Jim critized Troy and Roy equally.

The reason why I got agitated is that people who didn't hear or see the coaches press conference are going off third had informarion about what Jim said and the info they have is false. Roy was our best player tonight so if Jim thinks Roy had a bad game overall then he is wrong, but Jim never criticized Roy's defense.

Correction - Jim did criticize roys defense as I mentioned in the first post I made on this topic. Not sure what I was thinking here, he obviously criticized his defense, not sure if I meant he never criticized Roy's offense or overall game

McKeyFan
01-27-2010, 11:07 PM
A fair point.

In the spirit of scientific inquiry, I'd like to see Obie move Roy to the starting spot and bring Murph off the bench, just to see if the trend continues.

You know, for science.
Well, Roy started most of the games this year and had a much higher plus/minus.

Tonight, he didn't start and had a much higher plus/minus.

How's that for science?

Sookie
01-27-2010, 11:11 PM
see quote above that I added to my post. Jim critized Troy and Roy equally.

The reason why I got agitated is that people who didn't hear or see the coaches press conference are going off third had informarion about what Jim said and the info they have is false. Roy was our best player tonight so if Jim thinks Roy had a bad game overall then he is wrong, but Jim never criticized Roy's defense

But the question was about Troy, and had nothing to do with Roy.
Jim brought Roy into it.

And it's bull to begin with, Jim clearly doesn't care about defense. Troy plays because Troy can hit the three. He's the type of center that JOB wants in his offense.

Although honestly, given the circumstances, I might argue that Rush was our best player tonight.

BlueNGold
01-27-2010, 11:15 PM
see quote above that I added to my post. Jim critized Troy and Roy equally.

The reason why I got agitated is that people who didn't hear or see the coaches press conference are going off third had informarion about what Jim said and the info they have is false. Roy was our best player tonight so if Jim thinks Roy had a bad game overall then he is wrong, but Jim never criticized Roy's defense

If he "criticized Troy and Roy equally"...why do you say he "never criticized Roy's defense"? I think what you're saying is that he's saying Bynum went off and no one was going to stop him. So, IOW, he used names but was just saying, as a team, we weren't getting it done. I can agree with that.

My only beef is that he had to bring up Roy when the 8 year vet starting at C should be taking the heat. If Roy is coming off the bench, he shouldn't expect a bench player to do that well against the Laker's starting C anyway.

In any event, JOb should be at the 5. He certainly has experience defending Troy at least.

Unclebuck
01-27-2010, 11:21 PM
But the question was about Troy, and had nothing to do with Roy.
Jim brought Roy into it.

.

The point of the question was why wasn't Roy in the game guarding Bynum - that was the context, so it was perfectly natural for Jim to discuss Roy's defense as well

Roaming Gnome
01-27-2010, 11:32 PM
I'm starting to get numb to J O'Brien's logic for why giving Troy heavy minutes is his best chance to win. I'm just glad that Roy and AJ Price are doing what they can in the minutes that they are getting. I'm just starting to reserve myself to the fact that we are good enough to beat teams like the Nets, Pistons and other teams similar to us in the standings, but are more times then not lose to the play-off teams or teams slightly better then us resulting in our standard drafting position in June.

On a happier note, it was nice being honored at center court 15 minutes before tip-off with my wife, daughter and Duke Dynamite for being Season Ticket Holders of the week in January.

PaceBalls
01-27-2010, 11:34 PM
We can argue over the semantics of what Jim said all night... but we all know what he really thinks about this situation of Troy vs Roy... which is that Troy is much more valuable to spread the defense than Roy is in the low post.... defense be damned.

Now why the hell does he play Mike Dunleavy? Mike is playing half as well as Rush is on offense and he is maybe the worst SF/SG in the league on defense.

Who was the worst coach, Jim or Isaiah? Every game is convincing me IT was the better coach.

Unclebuck
01-27-2010, 11:35 PM
If he "criticized Troy and Roy equally"...why do you say he "never criticized Roy's defense"?

I'm not sure what happened, in my first post about this specific point i said that Jim was critical of Roy's defense. I think what I meant to say and what I stand by is that Jim never said that Roy had a bad game and that alleged comment is what was being used to insinuate that Jim O'brien had completely lost it

jhondog28
01-27-2010, 11:55 PM
The fair weathered hate for Dun gets ridiculous the guy should not even be playing this year but he is.

Also the complaining about the Lakers fans being vocal at your home court and you are arguing about it from a computer is also ridiculous...for those who complain about that why were you not at the game in the cheap seats at least showing up in numbers. Sorry but the hate scale after this loss has gone to the extreme. We played the Lakers what did you expect?

Pacersfan46
01-28-2010, 12:06 AM
I'm done pointing out whether it's JOB's fault, or Murphy or the young guys or the vets. It's over done. The only thing that matters ....

.... we're not good.

I don't care why at this point, I'm just ready for 2011 and to blow this damn thing up.

At the same time, I'm seriously debating getting season tickets next year. I think I finally got a good friend sold on the idea. I just didn't want to go to every game by myself. WooT!

-- Steve --

QuickRelease
01-28-2010, 12:14 AM
Maybe so.

I'm getting tired of fighting it. I feel like I'm in a dream or a deja vu.

Just give me morphine.

:hippie::cloud9::hippie:Mmmmm...Morphine! Makes one feel good!:hippie::cloud9::hippie:

Bball
01-28-2010, 12:20 AM
I watched closely early in the game... then moved on to other things with the game on in the background.

I saw several quick Pacer shots during an early Laker run and these all led to Laker baskets going the other way. We fueled their run with our great offense. We did close that gap though.

At one point I saw either 4 or 5 Laker jerseys in or around the paint and NO Pacers and yet whoever the first Pacer to reach the 3 point line with the basketball was, he heaved up a shot... missed... and the Lakers were off the other way. Honestly, I'm not even sure there was another Pacer in the camera frame...

It's no wonder we lose. You lose by not valuing possessions and bad defense. Rushing shots leads to bad defense. It's gift-wrapping points for the other team. Our defense doesn't even look that bad when we have time to setup.

We don't have the players to run another team out of the gym nor do we even use the bench enough not to wear down the players we do have. This only makes it worse.

Jim O'Brien is a horrible, horrible coach.

There's no shame in losing to the Lakers. There is a shame when you can't or refuse to utilize the team you do have to at least maximize their potential.

Did I mention Jim O'Brien is a horrible, horrible coach?

CableKC
01-28-2010, 12:23 AM
Oh. Well, then I'm back to "**** him."
:lol: Poor Hicks. You're on an emotional roller coaster when it comes to JO'B tonight.

CableKC
01-28-2010, 12:33 AM
He implied everyone played bad defense, but he never said riy had a good game. Someone said that Roy played well offensively and Jim got a disgusted look on his face and said the defense was bad. If you want to infer that Jim implied that Roy's defense was bad - OK sure he said that. But posters are claiming that O'Brien said Roy had a bad game - Jim never said those words nor did he imply that either.

O'Brien: "He got off on Troy (Murphy) then when Roy (Hibbert) came in he got off on Roy." -- O'Brien on Andrew Bynum

To be fair....because some of us didn't see the Post Game Conference....I think that many of us were simply reacting to your initial post and the highlighted part:


O'Brien's press conference which they showed the whole thing on TV - it was very short- just said that the alkers scored easily on Troy and Roy, and that Bynam scored well on our big. At no time did Jim say that Roy had a bad game - but he certainly implied that Roy's defense wasn't good as the pacers whole team's defense wasn't good. Jim was not happy about the pacers defense - he seems as his wits end

You then go on to say this:


Jim never said Roy had a bad game though. I watched the entire press conference - it was only maybe 45 seconds
Honestly, I was confused by whether he actually said something or not based off of your posts. All you ended up doing was make Hicks go from "Eff JO'B" to "You're Cool JO'B" back to "Eff JO'B" again in the span of 10 minutes.

Cactus Jax
01-28-2010, 01:06 AM
Even Phil Jackson thought it was a horrible move by the Pacers. "I don't know if Jim was baiting us by starting Murphy at center," Lakers coach Phil Jackson said. "It was impossible for them to cover Pau and Andrew.

http://www.nba.com/games/20100127/LALIND/gameinfo.html

CableKC
01-28-2010, 01:17 AM
Even Phil Jackson thought it was a horrible move by the Pacers. "I don't know if Jim was baiting us by starting Murphy at center," Lakers coach Phil Jackson said. "It was impossible for them to cover Pau and Andrew.

http://www.nba.com/games/20100127/LALIND/gameinfo.html
Queue JO'Bs standard response: "Oh Yeah Phil.......Murphy can stretch the offense....can Bynum or Pau do that?"

Brad8888
01-28-2010, 01:25 AM
Outclassed obviously, but my take-away came in the post-game show.

While JOb is touting small-ball as the best way to win, he is getting closer to the truth....maybe by accident.

He believes small ball helps his offense. Well, it helps this particular team win but not offensively. While it could not be done down the stretch effectively against the much bigger Lakers, it worked against the 76ers.

Now, why is that?

Small ball helps our defense considerably when Granger is at the 4. Not a perfect place for him, but when he spends time there...D Jones and Rush can cover the swing positions greatly improving our defense. The proof is that we kept the 76ers under 100 points...only the 3rd time this month. The same thing happened during the infamous, stupendous, tremendous 5 game winning streak earlier this year. The defense is simply better when you have Granger at the 4 instead of T-Roy covering the front court. It really is that simple....yet JOb continues to think his offense is where he's seeing the improvement.

Love is blind you know.

The best reasoning for Danny at the 4 is the fact that Rush and Jones are better perimeter defenders at this point than Danny has ever been, and playing Danny at the 4 minimizes the impact of his defensive difficulties on the perimeter. He definitely has problems defending at the 4 against quality players too, though.

The Lakers are the Lakers are the Lakers are the Lakers.

Overmatched teams throughout history have attempted to beat better teams by drawing fouls and getting to the line while getting the opponents stronger players in a little foul trouble, thereby evening things up.

However, O'B is O'B is O'B is O'B. He is probably thinking "Wow. If we had shot 50% from 3 for the game, we would have had 21 more points and would have nearly won this game. I think I am on to something here. I know Murphy can shoot 50% from there if he just keeps shooting, and I've seen Granger and Michael do so, too. And, Brandon has been shooting well from the arc recently as well, so I just need to figure out how to get them all more touches and shots at the arc. I know, speed up the game even further and reduce our over-reliance on movement and throwing the ball into the post. After tonight, I think we can put that whole strategy of to rest once and for all. The quicker we shoot, the more possessions we will have, therefore the more uncontested shots we should have early in the clock."

Kuq_e_Zi91
01-28-2010, 01:27 AM
What a sad excuse for a team, coach, and organization. All I can say about this season is, "Is it over yet?"

You could go on and on about what's wrong with this team 'till you get carpel tunnel, but really what's the point? It's a throwaway season and I think some of these players realize it as well.

Oh well... on to the next game.

DisapointedPacerFan
01-28-2010, 01:36 AM
"I don't know whether Jim was baiting us or not, but he started Murphy on him [Bynum]," Jackson said. "Drew is a plus-7-footer with probably 30 pounds, 40 pounds on him at least. It's almost an impossible feat for them to cover Drew."

-Phil Jackson on the small-ball lineup we countered with (ESPN.com).

Seriously Jim? One of the most obvious situations where you NEED to put a big guy on Bynum...he had 10 of their first 18 points. Ridiculous...so pathetic. Get this guy out of town.

AesopRockOn
01-28-2010, 02:22 AM
No McBob in the title? ;)

Naptown_Seth
01-28-2010, 02:34 AM
Roy's offense ws very good tonight, but his defense was not good at all, so lets not let him of the hook.

I want to see a quote from JOB saying that our best lineup is our small lineup with Troy as the big guy. I don't think he has ever said that
OFFENSE
Roy >>> Troy, especially because he was able to attack their bigs

DEFENSE

Roy>Troy, though both weren't very good at stopping Bynum

Thus the +/-.

Rush shot poorly and has a +/- to reflect it.


Buck, you're killing me at this point. It's all just a game of runs and the runs come when one team lets up??? That's the great nuanced theory you've got?

Maybe, just maybe, both teams impact when a run comes and when you put in a better player your team makes a run without requiring the other team to let up. I mean doesn't it work in reverse? If Kobe goes out and the Pacers make a run it's because Kobe is out, but if Troy goes out and the Pacers make a run it has nothing to do with the Pacers.

Let me flip your theory, the ONLY REASON the Lakers made runs when Kobe or Bynum were in was because that's when the Pacers got tired and started to let up.

Hmmm, sounds kinda dumb that way, doesn't it.


Who is on the court for your team does impact your chances of making a run, and Roy wasn't just facing their backups. He saw plenty of Bynum and Gasol.


I feel like the UB post game is on autopilot at this point: 1) not JOB's fault 2) not Troy's fault 3) the young players aren't that hot.


In any event, JOb should be at the 5. He certainly has experience defending Troy at least.
:brilliant:



The best reasoning for Danny at the 4 is the fact that Rush and Jones are better perimeter defenders at this point than Danny has ever been, and playing Danny at the 4 minimizes the impact of his defensive difficulties on the perimeter. He definitely has problems defending at the 4 against quality players too, though.

100% agree Brad. Danny can actually be a little frustrating on defense, but as the PF it somewhat showcases his better help defense/shot blocking while Rush and Jones do a better job of getting up on a guy and making all his moves tougher, plus they both have a sense for driving a player into help defenders also. That also benefits Roy who can block a shot if you put the guy in a weak position where he can't draw Roy out to him for the foul.

Neither Price or Watson are really kicking butt at defense, though I'm more frustrated with Watson because I think his defense has dropped off some in the last 2-3 weeks.

Still either of those 2 with those 4 seems to give you the best overall defensive look, and you still have the Danny and Roy offensive options out there.


Even Phil Jackson thought it was a horrible move by the Pacers. "I don't know if Jim was baiting us by starting Murphy at center," Lakers coach Phil Jackson said. "It was impossible for them to cover Pau and Andrew.
It's officially embarrassing when the most successful NBA coach ever (by rings at least) is making fun of your coach's decisions.



The fair weathered hate for Dun gets ridiculous the guy should not even be playing this year but he is.
I think you just gave yourself the answer. We all agree, he should not be playing but he is.

Does this mean you are also a fair weather hater of Dun?



A fair point.

In the spirit of scientific inquiry, I'd like to see Obie move Roy to the starting spot and bring Murph off the bench, just to see if the trend continues.

You know, for science.
Exactly. Hey, I'll even wear a lab coat and goggles. Someone bring a Bunsen burner and a petri dish. We're going to get to the bottom of this.

Naptown_Seth
01-28-2010, 02:41 AM
I'm starting to get numb to J O'Brien's logic for why giving Troy heavy minutes is his best chance to win. I'm just glad that Roy and AJ Price are doing what they can in the minutes that they are getting. I'm just starting to reserve myself to the fact that we are good enough to beat teams like the Nets, Pistons and other teams similar to us in the standings, but are more times then not lose to the play-off teams or teams slightly better then us resulting in our standard drafting position in June.

On a happier note, it was nice being honored at center court 15 minutes before tip-off with my wife, daughter and Duke Dynamite for being Season Ticket Holders of the week in January.
Oh dear, I'm sorry to hear that. Thousands of people saw you associated with the team. You'll never shake off the stigma of that. Expect hisses and catcalls for the next 6 months.*





*IOW, congrats man. Very cool. Too bad I have the Cavs game and not the Lakers, coulda got a nice photo of that.

CableKC
01-28-2010, 03:45 AM
The best reasoning for Danny at the 4 is the fact that Rush and Jones are better perimeter defenders at this point than Danny has ever been, and playing Danny at the 4 minimizes the impact of his defensive difficulties on the perimeter. He definitely has problems defending at the 4 against quality players too, though.


100% agree Brad. Danny can actually be a little frustrating on defense, but as the PF it somewhat showcases his better help defense/shot blocking while Rush and Jones do a better job of getting up on a guy and making all his moves tougher, plus they both have a sense for driving a player into help defenders also. That also benefits Roy who can block a shot if you put the guy in a weak position where he can't draw Roy out to him for the foul.
I ( like many of you ) would prefer that Granger stick to being a SF and not play any PF minutes. But the sad truth is that ( like it or not ) Granger is the best defender that we have that can handle defending MOST of the modern day "athletic" PFs that can score inside and outside of the paint. This doesn't mean that he's our best PF defender....it just means that he's able to defend more athletic PFs that don't heavily rely on their Low-Post scoring skills to score. On top of that...it doesn't mean that Murphy is a totally inept defender......Murphy is good at defending, Non-Athletic, Slow but not overly strong scoring Big Men. The problem is that those type of Big Men are the only types of Big Men that he's somewhat effect at defending.

The problem is that neither Granger nor Murphy are effective at guarding the type of PF that Gasol is....one of those traditional "bang inside Low-Post scorers that muscles their way into the paint to score" tyep of PFs. That's why PFs like Gasol, Brand and Zach Randolph have their way with us....we don't have a Forward in the regular rotation that can properly defend those type of Big Men.

Note that I said that "regular" rotation, I think that Solo and ( especially ) McRoberts would do an acceptable job defending those type of Players....but that ( of course ) means they'd have to get minutes.

In the end, IMHO Granger should be used on as a defending PF in "situational" basis depending on matchups. Why JO'B would even consider having Granger and Murphy defend a Frontcourt of Gasol and Bynum for extended periods of time is questionable IMHO.

D-BONE
01-28-2010, 07:12 AM
Our inside D and boardwork was pathetic regardless of who was in last night. None of our bench other 4/5 options that didn't get off the bench would have made any difference. Bynum and Gasol are elite, traditional-size, scoring bigs. We have absolutely nobody to match, with the possible exception of Foster who's not available. (By the way, will he ever be available again after the extension we gave him?)

I respect and sympathize Dunleavy on the difficult return from serious injury. My request to the coach is if the guy consistently is shooting air balls and bricks, get him out of the game. He was doing very little of any value to us on the floor. That said, I hope with time he will move closer to his pre-injury level of play.

We actually had various chances to cut it to five or six in the fourth quarter, but we never capitalized. We missed various of our many 3 pt attempts during that span. Bottom line-total mismatch game. Our chances of winning were probably ten percent or less. Nobody should be surprised.

Unclebuck
01-28-2010, 08:08 AM
To be fair....because some of us didn't see the Post Game Conference....I think that many of us were simply reacting to your initial post and the highlighted part:



You then go on to say this:


Honestly, I was confused by whether he actually said something or not based off of your posts. All you ended up doing was make Hicks go from "Eff JO'B" to "You're Cool JO'B" back to "Eff JO'B" again in the span of 10 minutes.

All I was trying to do is cause Hicks to turn bi-polar - it almost worked too.

I will say though that Roy and Troy started the third quarter together and that was where the game was lost

McKeyFan
01-28-2010, 08:27 AM
Considering the plus/minus, you have to figure that it was Troy, not Roy, that screwed up the third quarter.

Kuq_e_Zi91
01-28-2010, 08:36 AM
O'Brien asked for defensive players and he got them, but is our defense any better? He still stresses offense. The whole mentality is wrong. It's basically hit your jumpers or lose. We have no inside game and we can't guard anybody. He didn't even think about the defensive end last night because if he did he wouldn't play Murphy on Bynum. You cannot expect to win if your only hope is out-shooting the opponent. There is no plan B. There is no defense to fall back on. This, more than anything, is what makes me completely disgusted with this team.

Sure there will be nights when everything goes in and we catch some teams by surprise, but more often it'll be like last night. Teams can put it in cruise control all game until whenever they feel like putting their foot on the gas. Even though we were within 10 for most of the game, did anyone feel like we had a chance at making a comeback? Kobe didn't even look to shoot for the first half.

Unclebuck
01-28-2010, 08:46 AM
Considering the plus/minus, you have to figure that it was Troy, not Roy, that screwed up the third quarter.

how does the plus/minus tell you that - how could it possibly tell you that

Unclebuck
01-28-2010, 08:50 AM
O'Brien asked for defensive players and he got them, but is our defense any better? He still stresses offense. The whole mentality is wrong. It's basically hit your jumpers or lose. We have no inside game and we can't guard anybody. He didn't even think about the defensive end last night because if he did he wouldn't play Murphy on Bynum. You cannot expect to win if your only hope is out-shooting the opponent. There is no plan B. There is no defense to fall back on. This, more than anything, is what makes me completely disgusted with this team.

Sure there will be nights when everything goes in and we catch some teams by surprise, but more often it'll be like last night. Teams can put it in cruise control all game until whenever they feel like putting their foot on the gas. Even though we were within 10 for most of the game, did anyone feel like we had a chance at making a comeback? Kobe didn't even look to shoot for the first half.

The problem is and it is something many of us were worried about over the summer. Our best offensive players are our worst defensive players and vice versa. (Granger is the only exception - he's our only real two way player) So as a coach what do you do. I think Jim has decided to try and put the best offensive team out there and hope the team defense is good enough to be OK. This team isn't easy to coach

Unclebuck
01-28-2010, 09:26 AM
Is it just me, or does it seem like, game after game, Roy comes in and we go on a run? Roy goes out and we lose steam.

Once in a while its the opposite, but it seems to go the way I said most of the time, game after game.

Against the Lakers, Roy had the best plus/minus. Murphy the worst.

I went back through the past 10 games plus/minus for Troy and Roy. (even after last night's -26 for Troy and -3 for Roy - the overall combined (this is not on a per game average) Troy is -15 and Roy is -11. Not much difference betwen the two.

Strangly Troy only has three games were he was in the minus category - but obviously to get to the -15 overall the three bad games were really bad. Roy was more "consistant" as he had 5 plus and 5 minus games. I picked the past 10 games at random, but I did look at the previous 5 games just to make sure there wasn't a huge swing one way or the other, and Troy was out the first 3 of those games and then he was -12 and Roy was -6.

Don't really have a point just bringing the numbers

BillS
01-28-2010, 09:50 AM
*Props to Roy Hibbert, the only pacers to show up tonight.*

Absolutely not fair to Brandon, who worked his *** off defending Kobe.

BillS
01-28-2010, 09:56 AM
I saw several quick Pacer shots during an early Laker run and these all led to Laker baskets going the other way. We fueled their run with our great offense. We did close that gap though.

At one point I saw either 4 or 5 Laker jerseys in or around the paint and NO Pacers and yet whoever the first Pacer to reach the 3 point line with the basketball was, he heaved up a shot... missed... and the Lakers were off the other way. Honestly, I'm not even sure there was another Pacer in the camera frame...

It's no wonder we lose. You lose by not valuing possessions and bad defense. Rushing shots leads to bad defense. It's gift-wrapping points for the other team. Our defense doesn't even look that bad when we have time to setup.

Good Lord, has it come to this, that I agree with Bball?

:suicide:

Eindar
01-28-2010, 10:38 AM
So, if slowing down the pace of the game and controlling possessions are the way to win in this league, why did we call for Rick Carlisle's head again?

Sookie
01-28-2010, 11:27 AM
All I was trying to do is cause Hicks to turn bi-polar - it almost worked too.

I will say though that Roy and Troy started the third quarter together and that was where the game was lost

Exactly, because they can't play together. Because the second JOB put them on the floor together, Pau and Bynum didn't have anyone guarding them and Kobe could get at will.

I was glad JOB decided to go "with the smaller" lineup. Because it's much better defensively. And it limits the time Roy and Troy are together.

Hicks
01-28-2010, 11:35 AM
So, if slowing down the pace of the game and controlling possessions are the way to win in this league, why did we call for Rick Carlisle's head again?

Iso JO ball where the rest stand and watch.

DaveP63
01-28-2010, 11:47 AM
When we hit open 2's and 3's we can play with anyone in the league. Tonight, we did not. We got beaten by a much better team. Nothing to see here folks, move along...

Roaming Gnome
01-28-2010, 01:00 PM
When we hit open 2's and 3's we can play with <s>anyone in the league</s> the other lottery teams in the league. Tonight, we did not. We got beaten by a much better team. Nothing to see here folks, move along...

Fixed!

Trophy
01-28-2010, 01:03 PM
When Odom was in, it would've smart to put Troy on him at PF and have Roy on the center. Pretty much what everyone wanted except JOB.

Bball
01-28-2010, 01:10 PM
So, if slowing down the pace of the game and controlling possessions are the way to win in this league, why did we call for Rick Carlisle's head again?

Because we focused on JO while he clanked the ball off the side of the rim and shot somewhere in the 40 percent range while everyone pretended he was hitting over 50%. He was a poor passer and decision maker with the ball and he killed any offensive flow we might otherwise have.

I don't know why Carlisle continued to focus on JO. We know JO had no problem voicing his displeasure if he wasn't the center of attention (oops... I shouldn't have said 'center').

Did we throw the baby out with the bath water? Probably...

We should've been replacing players... not the coach. But one thing was clear, we couldn't continue doing what we were doing either.

Part of me wonders if that mistake (replacing the coach when we really needed to replace a few players) is holding TPTB back from doing the right thing these days and not replacing the horrible, horrible coach that is Jim O'Brien.

McKeyFan
01-28-2010, 01:20 PM
I will say though that Roy and Troy started the third quarter together and that was where the game was lost

Just rewatched the third quarter.

Started down by three.

Murphy got burned by Gasol, then got burned again after missing a three and Gasol got an and 1.

Pacers now down ten. JOB sits Murphy after giving him two chances.

Pacers, with Roy still in, get within six.

Bynum spins around Roy for the and 1. Pacers down nine.

JOB subs Murph for Roy after giving Roy one chance.

Lakers go up 16 until Roy comes back with one minute left.

Roy hits a shot and Pacers are down 14 at the end of the third quarter.


So who lost the game for us in the third quarter?

Anthem
01-28-2010, 01:33 PM
Because we focused on JO while he clanked the ball off the side of the rim and shot somewhere in the 40 percent range while everyone pretended he was hitting over 50%.
Come on, Bball, that's not true. Nobody-but-nobody pretended he was shooting a great percentage. It was a VERY frequent topic of conversation. Even the folks who defended JO (like me) didn't deny his atrocious shooting percentage that season. We suggested reasons for it, but nobody denied that it was there.

Bball
01-28-2010, 01:38 PM
Come on, Bball, that's not true. Nobody-but-nobody pretended he was shooting a great percentage. It was a VERY frequent topic of conversation. Even the folks who defended JO (like me) didn't deny his atrocious shooting percentage that season. We suggested reasons for it, but nobody denied that it was there.

The 'everyone' was meant to be coaches, TPTB, and JO himself... not fans....

And it was meant as his poor shooting was overlooked and nothing different tried so they must've been pretending he was shooting over 50% because otherwise I don't see much justification for continuing to focus the offense around his bad decision making, poorly timed passes (when he did pass), and 40 something % from the field.

BillS
01-28-2010, 02:27 PM
Just rewatched the third quarter.

Started down by three.

Murphy got burned by Gasol, then got burned again after missing a three and Gasol got an and 1.

Pacers now down ten. JOB sits Murphy after giving him two chances.

Pacers, with Roy still in, get within six.

Bynum spins around Roy for the and 1. Pacers down nine.

JOB subs Murph for Roy after giving Roy one chance.

Lakers go up 16 until Roy comes back with one minute left.

Roy hits a shot and Pacers are down 14 at the end of the third quarter.


So who lost the game for us in the third quarter?

Could it be the missed shots from the Pacer offense? The Lakers only scored 2 more points in the 3rd than they did in the 1st, when we were only down by 2. Doesn't indicate a horrible 11 point defensive breakdown to me.

DaveP63
01-28-2010, 07:26 PM
Fixed!

Love it!:buddies: