PDA

View Full Version : Starters?



Speed
09-07-2010, 10:59 AM
May be too early, but we are officially 3 weeks away from the first training camp practice, my friends.

So who are the starters?

I think we can comfortable state this.

DC at the Point
Roy at the Center
Granger at 3 or 4.

What's that leave us?

I, personally, have no idea, but I'm interested to hear what others prefer.

count55
09-07-2010, 11:16 AM
May be too early, but we are officially 3 weeks away from the first training camp practice, my friends.

So who are the starters?

I think we can comfortable state this.

DC at the Point
Roy at the Center
Granger at 3 or 4.

What's that leave us?

I, personally, have no idea, but I'm interested to hear what others prefer.

Hibbert, Granger, Collison.

I'd like to see either Hansbrough or McRoberts show enough in Training Camp to at least get the "short minute" starts - similar to what Hibbert got as a rookie.

Rush will be the starting 2, once he returns. I'm not sure what happens with the backup wings. A lot depends on how well McRoberts or Hansbrough can play in order to solidify the 4. If they struggle or aren't healthy enough, then you'll see Danny get more minutes at the 4, which will open more time for George/DJones/Dunleavy/Posey. It's impossible to tell at this point who will get minutes among those guys.

I am also hopeful that Price is ready to go at least short minutes from the start of the season, and he would be the backup 1. I do not expect Stephenson to be a part of this team.

Unclebuck
09-07-2010, 11:23 AM
I tend to agree with count. Ideally I don't want Granger to start at the 4 (although I fully expect and accept the fact that he is liable to play more minutes at the 4 than anyone else we currently have on our roster)

Rush - who knows at this point. I suppose if he plays well in training camp he'll be in the starting lineup in game #6.

Speed
09-07-2010, 11:31 AM
Here's what I've been thinking about.

What about Foster starting next to Roy at PF?

I think there are a bunch of question marks with Jeff's health, coaches M.O. for the PF position, who then backs Roy up at Center?

As far as an on-court fit, my mind keeps going back to this possibility. Match up flexibility (Jeff takes the better frontcourt player defensively, veteran prescence, energy, offensive rebounding.

If you start Jeff, his back will be warmed up, too. If you could get 8 minutes each half I think it would maybe set the tone and give some consistency to that starting group.

bphil
09-07-2010, 11:36 AM
My best guess...

PG - Collison (lock)
SG - Dunleavy (I think he'll return to form and stick past game 5)
SF - Granger (lock)
PF - McRoberts (hopefully Hans can play at some point this season)
C - Hibbert (lock)

Call me crazy, but I don't think BRush will start at any point this season. In fact, I'm hoping against all hope that PG will come in and shine big time and take the backup minutes at SG from him as well...

count55
09-07-2010, 11:39 AM
Here's what I've been thinking about.

What about Foster starting next to Roy at PF?

I think there are a bunch of question marks with Jeff's health, coaches M.O. for the PF position, who then backs Roy up at Center?

As far as an on-court fit, my mind keeps going back to this possibility. Match up flexibility (Jeff takes the better frontcourt player defensively, veteran prescence, energy, offensive rebounding.

If you start Jeff, his back will be warmed up, too. If you could get 8 minutes each half I think it would maybe set the tone and give some consistency to that starting group.

I have never liked this idea in the least, and it wastes the only backup center we have. I don't expect O'Brien to seriously consider it, and I don't think pairing them helps the team in any significant way.

At this stage of his career, Jeff is basically just a center.

ChicagoJ
09-07-2010, 11:45 AM
Just like last season, there is no "3" and there is no "4". If you really want to use the old 1-2-3-4-5 numbering system, Troy was an oversized wing (2/3) in a three-wing lineup, not a "4".

Anyway, I think this year, after game #5, the lineup will be:

Collison - Rush - Dunleavy - Granger - Hibbert.

Except on the rare occasions we anticipate a matchup problem at one of the forward spots, and then it will be Collison - Rush - Granger - Tyler - Hibbert.

ksuttonjr76
09-07-2010, 12:07 PM
Indiana is going to have to do one more trade to get rid of some of our wing players. Plus, there's no real information on Hansbrough and Foster. Until we hear something different, my guess will be Dunleavy at the 2 and McRoberts at the 4 to start the season.

BobbyMac
09-07-2010, 12:31 PM
I expect the starting lineup, on opening day, to be Collison, Dunleavy, Granger, Hansbrough and Hibbert. After his suspension Rush may get a nod depending on Mike's production. Tyler will have a chance to keep his job, McBob is a possibility if Tyler falters. Twill be interesting to see if George can progress to the point of getting serious minutes.

MLB007
09-07-2010, 12:42 PM
I have never liked this idea in the least, and it wastes the only backup center we have. I don't expect O'Brien to seriously consider it, and I don't think pairing them helps the team in any significant way.

At this stage of his career, Jeff is basically just a center.

Agreed about it using our backup center. But otherwise I think 180 degrees opposite. I think it would be a very nice combination and it would help the teams rebounding in a very significant way.
Jeff would ave double figure rebounding without a doubt. And our interior defense would be much stronger.
Unfortunately we don't have another center to spell Roy, so that will be a limited time lineup for sure.

jcouts
09-07-2010, 01:03 PM
What I would like to see as our starting 5 on day 1...

PG - Collision
SG - Dahntay
SF - Danny
PF - McRoberts
C - Roy

From the defensive standpoint:
I like the idea of Dahntay and Collison pressuring the opposing team's backcourt from a defensive standpoint. Danny hasn't shown much dedication to defense throughout the FIBA world championships, so I doubt he's going to blow our minds by showing up to training camp with defense on his mind. I like the idea of having McRoberts over Tyler from the benefit of weak side rotation or help side shot blocking, as well as the ability to guard the athletic 4's that have torched the Pacers early in the game during the Murphy era. If Dahntay and Collison can stay with their man and McRoberts can do even a slightly better job than Murphy did at keeping his man in front of him, I think it will help quite a bit in keeping Roy out of early foul trouble.

From an offensive standpoint:
McRoberts and Roy work better together in my mind than Tyler and Roy, simply due to diversity with Roy taking low post options and McRoberts taking high post options on offense. Tyler's passing ability or court vision is nowhere near that of McBob, so I like having that diversity thrown into the mix. Dahntay gives you someone who can slash, attack the basket and provide mid-range scoring to prevent the sort of "all in or all out" problem the pacers have had at times over the past couple of years. The diversity in the options, I believe, will give Collison the flexibility that he needs in order to orchestrate the offense effectively...again, rather than just having the one or two options that our past PGs have had, those being either throw it in the post, or look for someone out at the arc. Danny can do what Danny seems to feel comfortable doing: fill in the empty spaces, catch and shoot. I would like for him to add "catch and create" to that, but I'm a realist. I really expected him to benefit from the FIBA experience, but from what I've seen on the court, I've seen little improvement in his game over the summer...unlike what I've seen out of Rudy Gay and Iggy which has been very pleasing.


What I think Jim will likely have as our starting 5 on day 1...
PG - Collison
SG - Dunleavy
SF - Posey
PF - Danny
C - Roy

Speed
09-07-2010, 01:10 PM
Interesting and not to side track things. New Orleans offense had alot of pick and pop with David West built in. Thats really not McBob or Tyler's game. A guy who's game it could be? Magnum Rolle. I'm not suggesting he's a starter or even a rotation guy at this point; he still has to make the team. However, after reading some of these thoughts, I'd love to see Collison and him play together at some point. It seems like a match, maybe.

Speed
09-07-2010, 01:12 PM
I'm surprised how many people see McBob as a possible starter, I didn't expect that. That's a big jump from where he's coming from.

luis3ep
09-07-2010, 01:22 PM
I'm surprised how many people see McBob as a possible starter, I didn't expect that. That's a big jump from where he's coming from.

McRoberts is quality. Dumb O'Brien was just stubborn and never gave him a chance until late last year. I've always been high on McRoberts, he can straight out ball. He's fine tuning his game, and would not be surprised if he's a double double guy not this season, but the next.

Speed
09-07-2010, 01:27 PM
McRoberts is quality. Dumb O'Brien was just stubborn and never gave him a chance until late last year. I've always been high on McRoberts, he can straight out ball. He's fine tuning his game, and would not be surprised if he's a double double guy not this season, but the next.


I'll give you a single double in minutes, but at least that would be a good starting point. :)

jcouts
09-07-2010, 01:33 PM
I'm surprised how many people see McBob as a possible starter, I didn't expect that. That's a big jump from where he's coming from.

Assuming the other four starters that I show below, just for the purposes of discussion, who would you put at the 4 spot...and, of course, why?

PG - Collision
SG - Dahntay
SF - Danny
PF - ?
C - Roy

count55
09-07-2010, 01:37 PM
Interesting and not to side track things. New Orleans offense had alot of pick and pop with David West built in. Thats really not McBob or Tyler's game. A guy who's game it could be? Magnum Rolle. I'm not suggesting he's a starter or even a rotation guy at this point; he still has to make the team. However, after reading some of these thoughts, I'd love to see Collison and him play together at some point. It seems like a match, maybe.

From Kevin Arnovitz back when we asked people about Hibbert:


Hibbert has very soft hands and is able to catch the ball in traffic then finish. This makes him a valuable pick-and-roll guy, which, in most systems around the league, is 50 percent of a centerís grade.

McBob should be a decent PnR guy, as well.

This could be a false memory, but I'd swear that it was mentioned in last year's pre-season that Tyler Hansbrough had never run a PnR in his life before coming to the Pacers. Sounds outlandish, but I'm sure that was what I'd heard last year around this time. That being said, being the roll guy ain't rocket science, and he should be able to pick that up.


I'm surprised how many people see McBob as a possible starter, I didn't expect that. That's a big jump from where he's coming from.

Keep in mind that there's a difference between being a "starting quality player" and being a guy who starts. McRoberts is not a starting quality player, but on this roster, it doesn't seem unreasonable to use the 15-20 minutes he can give you - or at least a 6-minute chunk of it - at the start of the game. The same could be said for Hansbrough.

Let me put it this way: I can see either one of them getting starts on a regular basis - I can't see either one of them playing 30 minutes, or even 24 minutes, on a regular basis.

Speed
09-07-2010, 01:45 PM
Assuming the other four starters that I show below, just for the purposes of discussion, who would you put at the 4 spot...and, of course, why?

PG - Collision
SG - Dahntay
SF - Danny
PF - ?
C - Roy

All things being equal, I'd put Tyler there. Roy and Tyler played very nicely together in the summer league two years ago, but not just that. I think Hansbrough physical rugged style compliments Roy perfectly.

I like McRoberts athleticism and I think he's much improved defensively, maybe even underated. I also think he's a much better passer than Tyler.

That said his style isn't and really doesn't need to be that bull in the china shop that is a Hansbrough.

So if Roy is a finesse center, I want the most physical option next to him. That's Tyler to me.

I like McRoberts to still get minutes, but as a break running, excellent passing, energy guy off the bench.

And really if Jeff doesn't have much in the tank, McRoberts might get as many minutes as Tyler for what I'd do.

So for me, it's about the complimentary pieces. Things Roy doesn't do, Tyler does, things Tyler doesn't do, Roy does. And that goes on both ends of the court, imo.

McRoberts brings you a bit of both guys, so I'd bring him off the bench.

bphil
09-07-2010, 01:46 PM
I'm surprised how many people see McBob as a possible starter, I didn't expect that. That's a big jump from where he's coming from.

Agreed, but I'm not sure who else the Pacers have that can fill the PF spot right now. Hans probably won't play at the beginning of the season if at all, Foster is probably our backup center, SJones likely won't be in the rotation, and I doubt Rolle can come in and land a starting job. So really, what is the other option at PF besides Josh? Or Danny if the Pacers start small? We have no legit PF right now, so McBobs is listed by default.

I must admit that like you, I am super excited about Magnum. Give him a year or two though...

ksuttonjr76
09-07-2010, 01:51 PM
I'm surprised how many people see McBob as a possible starter, I didn't expect that. That's a big jump from where he's coming from.

For me, McRoberts is just the default starting PF until we know the situation with Hansbrough. Given the choice, Hansbrough would be my starting PF everytime.

Speed
09-07-2010, 01:53 PM
From Kevin Arnovitz back when we asked people about Hibbert:



McBob should be a decent PnR guy, as well.

This could be a false memory, but I'd swear that it was mentioned in last year's pre-season that Tyler Hansbrough had never run a PnR in his life before coming to the Pacers. Sounds outlandish, but I'm sure that was what I'd heard last year around this time. That being said, being the roll guy ain't rocket science, and he should be able to pick that up.



Keep in mind that there's a difference between being a "starting quality player" and being a guy who starts. McRoberts is not a starting quality player, but on this roster, it doesn't seem unreasonable to use the 15-20 minutes he can give you - or at least a 6-minute chunk of it - at the start of the game. The same could be said for Hansbrough.

Let me put it this way: I can see either one of them getting starts on a regular basis - I can't see either one of them playing 30 minutes, or even 24 minutes, on a regular basis.


On the pick and roll part, I was meaning pick and pop, exclusively. So a guy who in one fluid motion can set up at 17 feet and hit that shot all day, like David West, PJ Brown, Udonis Haslem come to mind. Roy can do that I think, but he's a slow shooter so he really needs to be wide, wide open, if that makes sense.

Reason I say pop, is I agree rolling to the basket is easy enough and really easy enough to guard or at least easier. You're rolling into help. Pick and pop is really hard to guard if you set a good enough pick and have a smart point guard (hopefully finally.)

With the pick and pop, McBob doesn't get his body quiet enough/quick enough to do this effectively. Tyler's really the same almost, they both almost need to shoot set shots to be effective or no more than one dribble to their strong hand. A guy who does look to have good body control setting up for his shot and a really really really nice 17 foot shot is Magnum. Magnum has light feet and gets into his shot very smoothly. His shot is so consistent looking.

As for the McBob/Tyler thing, I hope your wrong more than I can make a good enough argument against. :D

pwee31
09-07-2010, 02:44 PM
Collison, Dunleavy, Granger, Hansbrough, Hibbert
Collison, Rush, Granger, Hansbrough, Hibbert
Collison, Rush, Dunleavy, Granger, Hibbert

I believe those are the 3 options.

I still expect another trade to take place in the next couple of weeks though. I can't see Rolle not being on the roster

pizza guy
09-07-2010, 03:37 PM
I'd like it to be

Collison
Rush
Granger
Hansbrough
Hibbert

But obviously, Rush will miss a few games and Hans' status is uncertain. So, I won't be surprised if we start

Collison
Rush
Dunleavy
Granger
Hibbert

...but I will be disappointed.

--pizza

MLB007
09-07-2010, 03:42 PM
Collison, Dunleavy, Granger, Hansbrough, Hibbert
Collison, Rush, Granger, Hansbrough, Hibbert
Collison, Rush, Dunleavy, Granger, Hibbert

I believe those are the 3 options.

I still expect another trade to take place in the next couple of weeks though. I can't see Rolle not being on the roster

I would like to see another trade too, but if it doesn't happen then Rolle gets Stephensons spot. (assuming the worst)

KennerLeaguer
09-07-2010, 05:00 PM
Tyler's .360 fg percentage still worries me. Maybe the ear infection had something to do with it.

Trophy
09-07-2010, 05:10 PM
PG Collison
SG Dunleavy
SF Granger
PF Hansbrough (or McRoberts)
C Hibbert

I think Mike will be ready to take that starting position. He'll do better starting than coming off the bench I think, like he did a few seasons ago.

Tyler on the other hand, maybe wishful thinking that he'll be ready for the starting PF spot right away, but if he's not full back to his regular self, then it should go to Josh.

Hicks
09-07-2010, 05:18 PM
Who I would like:

Collison, Rush, Granger, Hansbrough, Hibbert

Who I would like for games 1-5:

Collison, I want to say George, but he's probably not ready so I'll say Jones, Granger, Hansbrough, Hibbert

Who I expect: (though I really don't know at the PF spot)

Collison, Rush, Granger, Posey, Hibbert

Expect for first five:

Collison, Dunleavy, Granger, Posey, Hibbert

Trophy
09-07-2010, 05:20 PM
Who I would like:

Collison, Rush, Granger, Hansbrough, Hibbert

Who I would like for games 1-5:

Collison, I want to say George, but he's probably not ready so I'll say Jones, Granger, Hansbrough, Hibbert

Who I expect: (though I really don't know at the PF spot)

Collison, Rush, Granger, Posey, Hibbert

Expect for first five:

Collison, Dunleavy, Granger, Posey, Hibbert

Posey at PF?

Kemo
09-07-2010, 06:07 PM
I have never liked this idea in the least, and it wastes the only backup center we have. I don't expect O'Brien to seriously consider it, and I don't think pairing them helps the team in any significant way.

At this stage of his career, Jeff is basically just a center.


What about Magnum ?

He is 6"10 correct?

I think having him out on the court with a handful of minutes will free up Foster being able to slide to the 4 with Hibbert ....

Same thing with McRoberts..
He has played minutes last season at the 5 , and done quite well actually..
He is 6"10 as well .. So I don't really see much barring Foster playing the 4 position in short stretches or spot minutes...

.
.
.

Kemo
09-07-2010, 06:13 PM
I also like the idea of McRoberts playing Center , with Hansbrough at the PF spot .. In some situations ..

Could you imagine the intensity, and the "b@lls-to-the-wall" play on both ends of the floor with this group out there at the same time??

This would be my "small-ball" lineup , that I'd prefer.. IF JOB were going to go small...
Which we ALL know it's his fetish .. LMAO


McRoberts
Hansbrough
Granger
Price
Collison


Granted I wouldn't like to see a whole lot of AJ playing as a small sg .. but for a quick scoring burst ,with 2 nice ball-handlers/passers on the floor .. It will make it so much easier for Tyler and McBob to get the easy lobs ..


Note : I don't condone small ball.. lmao .. But with JOB , I expect it...

.




I'm not gonna include the rooks , not untill I see them play throughout the season and see what they can contribute to this team..

But they look mighty promising...

..
.


.

Hicks
09-07-2010, 07:18 PM
Posey at PF?

Yep. It's no worse than Danny at the 4 in terms of "can he play there, even if it's for a short stretch."

OakMoses
09-07-2010, 11:36 PM
I would be willing to bet that, assuming health - which I realize is a big assumption, we will come to see Tyler as a very effective mid-range shooter. I don't know if the pick and pop game will be there right away, but it's something he'll improve on dramatically over the next couple years to the point where he's just as good as West.

SYDNEY MILLER AUSTRALIA31
09-08-2010, 04:14 AM
i would go for

pg-collision
sg-dunleavy
sf-granger
pf-foster
c-hibbert

y i chose to go with foster i believe defensively we need him and it sort of evens things out in the starting line up, by having atleast 2 players interested in playing defense in foster and collision and maybe granger if they rub off on him and then you have four players who can score and with foster picking up the rebounds/setting screens instead of looking to score. thats what the pacers have known him to do and we know we can rely on foster to do his job, let tyler watch from the bench so he knows what standard foster is setting so he can emulate it him self

Sookie
09-08-2010, 12:16 PM
I also like the idea of McRoberts playing Center , with Hansbrough at the PF spot .. In some situations ..

Could you imagine the intensity, and the "b@lls-to-the-wall" play on both ends of the floor with this group out there at the same time??

This would be my "small-ball" lineup , that I'd prefer.. IF JOB were going to go small...
Which we ALL know it's his fetish .. LMAO


McRoberts
Hansbrough
Granger
Price
Collison


Granted I wouldn't like to see a whole lot of AJ playing as a small sg .. but for a quick scoring burst ,with 2 nice ball-handlers/passers on the floor .. It will make it so much easier for Tyler and McBob to get the easy lobs ..


Note : I don't condone small ball.. lmao .. But with JOB , I expect it...

.




I'm not gonna include the rooks , not untill I see them play throughout the season and see what they can contribute to this team..

But they look mighty promising...

..
.


.

The thing is, Jimmy likes Small ball so he can play Rush at the 3 and Granger at the 4. I think we will see

Collison
Price
Rush
Granger
Hibbert

With this...

Personally, I like Rush at the three and Granger at the 4..SOMETIMES.

Collison and Price..*sigh* I suppose it's better than TJ and Earl. Honestly, too bad one of them wasn't bigger because I do think they can compliment each other. The issue with the smaller lineup is obvioulsy defensively. Both, at least try defensively, and I suppose AJ or Darren guarding the 2 is probably going to be better than Dun guarding the 2..but still...we're just going to get killed on PnRs because both of them typically get bounced out of the way when someone sets a pick on them.

MLB007
09-08-2010, 02:37 PM
The thing is, Jimmy likes Small ball so he can play Rush at the 3 and Granger at the 4. I think we will see

Collison
Price
Rush
Granger
Hibbert

With this...

Personally, I like Rush at the three and Granger at the 4..SOMETIMES.

Collison and Price..*sigh* I suppose it's better than TJ and Earl. Honestly, too bad one of them wasn't bigger because I do think they can compliment each other. The issue with the smaller lineup is obvioulsy defensively. Both, at least try defensively, and I suppose AJ or Darren guarding the 2 is probably going to be better than Dun guarding the 2..but still...we're just going to get killed on PnRs because both of them typically get bounced out of the way when someone sets a pick on them.

That team gets killed on the glass.

Sookie
09-08-2010, 03:12 PM
That team gets killed on the glass.

Any small ball team would get killed on the glass. (Which was what I was talking about)

And honestly, with Roy not being a fantastic rebounder, and us not really having a PF..we're going to get killed on the glass regardless.

Speed
09-08-2010, 03:21 PM
Any small ball team would get killed on the glass. (Which was what I was talking about)

And honestly, with Roy not being a fantastic rebounder, and us not really having a PF..we're going to get killed on the glass regardless.

I hoping that Roy will get 2 more boards a game on average this year. 5.7 to 7.7 is what I'm thinking/hoping.

Partly because he'll get more minutes, partly because of improved mobility, partly because of improved understanding, and partly because the designated defensive rebounder is gone.

I don't ever see him as a dominant rebounder, he's not an explosive leaper or quick twitch kinda player. I do see him hovering around 8 in his prime. Thats good enough, I think.

Roy half joked about 'most improved' this year, I think he'll for sure get some votes when it's all said and done.

Keep in mind, I am one of the guys with the Roy avatar. <--

Sookie
09-08-2010, 03:30 PM
I hoping that Roy will get 2 more boards a game on average this year. 5.7 to 7.7 is what I'm thinking/hoping.

Partly because he'll get more minutes, partly because of improved mobility, partly because of improved understanding, and partly because the designated defensive rebounder is gone.

I don't ever see him as a dominant rebounder, he's not an explosive leaper or quick twitch kinda player. I do see him hovering around 8 in his prime. Thats good enough, I think.

Roy half joked about 'most improved' this year, I think he'll for sure get some votes when it's all said and done.

Keep in mind, I am one of the guys with the Roy avatar. <--

Oh I didn't mean anything against Roy. I love the guy. And I think he'll get more rebounds this season too. It's just rebounding isn't one of the qualities he excells in. And because we don't really have a power forward (or one that's going to be getting a ton of rebounds) Any lineup we throw out there is going to get killed. We just have to either create enough turnovers (which I suppose, is an incentive for the small ball lineup), or shoot a high enough FG percentage to make up for the rebounding difference.

Eleazar
09-08-2010, 04:35 PM
I also like the idea of McRoberts playing Center , with Hansbrough at the PF spot .. In some situations ..

Could you imagine the intensity, and the "b@lls-to-the-wall" play on both ends of the floor with this group out there at the same time??

This would be my "small-ball" lineup , that I'd prefer.. IF JOB were going to go small...
Which we ALL know it's his fetish .. LMAO


McRoberts
Hansbrough
Granger
Price
Collison


Granted I wouldn't like to see a whole lot of AJ playing as a small sg .. but for a quick scoring burst ,with 2 nice ball-handlers/passers on the floor .. It will make it so much easier for Tyler and McBob to get the easy lobs ..


Note : I don't condone small ball.. lmao .. But with JOB , I expect it...

.




I'm not gonna include the rooks , not untill I see them play throughout the season and see what they can contribute to this team..

But they look mighty promising...

..
.


.

Actually I think that line-up would be really effective for short periods of time.

OakMoses
09-08-2010, 07:35 PM
I hoping that Roy will get 2 more boards a game on average this year. 5.7 to 7.7 is what I'm thinking/hoping.

Partly because he'll get more minutes, partly because of improved mobility, partly because of improved understanding, and partly because the designated defensive rebounder is gone.

I don't ever see him as a dominant rebounder, he's not an explosive leaper or quick twitch kinda player. I do see him hovering around 8 in his prime. Thats good enough, I think.

Roy half joked about 'most improved' this year, I think he'll for sure get some votes when it's all said and done.

Keep in mind, I am one of the guys with the Roy avatar. <--

Let's all keep in mind that Roy averaged over 8 rebounds per game when Troy was out. I don't think that's an unrealistic number for him at all.

Regardless, rebounding still is a weakness of this team, but it was last year, so it's not like much has changed.

However, if we get 15 minutes a game of Foster at C and a steady diet of Hans/McRoberts at PF, we could be an average rebounding team next season.

OakMoses
09-08-2010, 07:37 PM
I also like the idea of McRoberts playing Center , with Hansbrough at the PF spot .. In some situations ..

McRoberts
Hansbrough
Granger
Price
Collison

.

Skill set wise, the lineup works much better with McRoberts at PF and Tyler at C.

McKeyFan
09-08-2010, 08:51 PM
i would go for

pg-collision
sg-dunleavy
sf-granger
pf-foster
c-hibbert

y i chose to go with foster i believe defensively we need him and it sort of evens things out in the starting line up, by having atleast 2 players interested in playing defense in foster and collision and maybe granger if they rub off on him and then you have four players who can score and with foster picking up the rebounds/setting screens instead of looking to score. thats what the pacers have known him to do and we know we can rely on foster to do his job, let tyler watch from the bench so he knows what standard foster is setting so he can emulate it him self
Sydney, may I introduce you to the period: .

Kemo
09-08-2010, 09:02 PM
Actually I think that line-up would be really effective for short periods of time.



That's what I was thinking too .. as you said .. in "short periods of time.."

I was thinking , that JOB is gonna go small at times, that's a given.. I just think that ... THAT particular lineup would be excellent for a short burst of unadultrated energy off the bench.. and having both AJ and DC , being able to handle the ball and both able to make plays .. it would fascillitate McRoberts and Tyler greatly in the PnR , and on fastbreaks for the slam ..

BBQ
09-09-2010, 08:33 AM
My preference for a starting 5 would be:

Collison
Dunleavy
Granger
McRoberts (As long as he doesn't try to be Troy Murphy)
Hibbert

O'Bird
09-09-2010, 11:46 PM
This could be a false memory, but I'd swear that it was mentioned in last year's pre-season that Tyler Hansbrough had never run a PnR in his life before coming to the Pacers. Sounds outlandish, but I'm sure that was what I'd heard last year around this time.

I know, right? It's not what they do at Carolina, so it's at least fair to say that he lacked experience in it - and that's especially outlandish, in your word, because Tyler was made to play NBA pick and roll basketball. They should have him working on the jumper from elbows extended, I think, but the good old roll should be his bread and butter because he makes good things happen in the paint.

Last year was a write-off for him in a lot of areas, but it seems pretty clear that he can draw fouls and make good decisions with the ball at the NBA level.


Let me put it this way: I can see either one of them getting starts on a regular basis - I can't see either one of them playing 30 minutes, or even 24 minutes, on a regular basis.

I don't agree, at least when it comes to Tyler; I think 24 minutes is very possible this season. He played over 17 per last year, most of it restricted because of the anterior compartment syndrome or stress reaction or whatever it was; O'Brien really really wanted him on the floor, and would've played him more if he could've - and the biggest change in personnel so far this year is the departure of Murphy, who plays Tyler's position.

McRoberts should be a good candidate for pick and rolls, too, as far as that is concerned - very smart with the ball, great feel, good passer, and at the same time athletic (unusual combination); the only problem to this point is that he doesn't have a lot of ways to get the ball to go into the basket. That could change; remember Bird saying in April that if he were Josh he'd be in the gym shooting jumpers every day.
:

D-BONE
09-10-2010, 06:10 AM
If/when everyone is available:

Collison, Rush, Granger, Hansbrough, Hibbert

Only exception I'd like to see is switch out Hans for George, but I don't forsee George as ready to start anytime soon. Dunleavy, if truly healthy, could make a nice contribution off the bench, IMO. If he just kind of muddles around at last year's level of play, though, we might not see him that much with D. Jones, Posey, George all cued up in the wing player mold.

MLB007
09-10-2010, 11:38 AM
Any small ball team would get killed on the glass. (Which was what I was talking about)

And honestly, with Roy not being a fantastic rebounder, and us not really having a PF..we're going to get killed on the glass regardless.

So magnify it as much as possible???
Think not likely.

MLB007
09-10-2010, 11:40 AM
Oh I didn't mean anything against Roy. I love the guy. And I think he'll get more rebounds this season too. It's just rebounding isn't one of the qualities he excells in. And because we don't really have a power forward (or one that's going to be getting a ton of rebounds) Any lineup we throw out there is going to get killed. We just have to either create enough turnovers (which I suppose, is an incentive for the small ball lineup), or shoot a high enough FG percentage to make up for the rebounding difference.

Where are you pulling this assumption that our 4 is invisible?
Tyler will likely be a very good NBA player and Jeff already is.
Jeff WILL get a ton of rebounds if he's healthy and he plays the minutes.
Not going to happen with us shrinking each position (1 playing 2, 2 playing 3, 3 playing 4)

count55
09-10-2010, 12:29 PM
I know, right? It's not what they do at Carolina, so it's at least fair to say that he lacked experience in it - and that's especially outlandish, in your word, because Tyler was made to play NBA pick and roll basketball. They should have him working on the jumper from elbows extended, I think, but the good old roll should be his bread and butter because he makes good things happen in the paint.

Last year was a write-off for him in a lot of areas, but it seems pretty clear that he can draw fouls and make good decisions with the ball at the NBA level.



I don't agree, at least when it comes to Tyler; I think 24 minutes is very possible this season. He played over 17 per last year, most of it restricted because of the anterior compartment syndrome or stress reaction or whatever it was; O'Brien really really wanted him on the floor, and would've played him more if he could've - and the biggest change in personnel so far this year is the departure of Murphy, who plays Tyler's position.

McRoberts should be a good candidate for pick and rolls, too, as far as that is concerned - very smart with the ball, great feel, good passer, and at the same time athletic (unusual combination); the only problem to this point is that he doesn't have a lot of ways to get the ball to go into the basket. That could change; remember Bird saying in April that if he were Josh he'd be in the gym shooting jumpers every day.
:

I am speaking only of this year.

My concern with Tyler first and foremost is health preventing him from playing any minutes at all. However, assuming full health, I still think that he has a lot to prove before you can expect long minutes for him. If he had stayed healthy all last year, but not become consistent with his midrange jumper and not learned how to get his shot off in the post better, those flaws would have (and should have) limited the amount of time he'd be on the floor. Those issues remain, until he proves otherwise.

90'sNBARocked
09-10-2010, 01:03 PM
Yep. It's no worse than Danny at the 4 in terms of "can he play there, even if it's for a short stretch."

Anyone else have a feeling that Possey will become the "new Murphy" ?

In the sense that he will love this veteran and play him more minutes than we might like?

odeez
09-10-2010, 01:37 PM
Collison
Dunleavy
Danny
Tyler (not sure he will be ready) (Foster or Mcbob here)
Hibbert

O'Bird
09-10-2010, 07:42 PM
Any small ball team would get killed on the glass. (Which was what I was talking about)

And honestly, with Roy not being a fantastic rebounder, and us not really having a PF..we're going to get killed on the glass regardless.

You might be surprised - but it's not necessary to speculate. The two small-ball units that got the most minutes last year were both plus rebounding:

Watson-Rush-D.Jones-Granger-Hibbert got 50.5% of available rebounds
Ford-Rush-D.Jones-Granger-Hibbert got 51.5% of available rebounds

Not exactly rebounding dominance, but most people, like you and me, would expect a small-ball unit to get routinely killed - and instead these small lineups held their own and then some.

Rebounding isn't just size - in fact a lot of it is speed, getting to the right spot on time; after that you've got to work for the ball, and a lot of that is just will and desire.

Then, too, a lot of teams play a lot of small ball, so the size differential is not so big when you play it yourself. You could even argue that Orlando plays mostly small ball, and they were fourth in rebounding rate last season (first in defensive).
:

Brad8888
09-10-2010, 10:00 PM
You might be surprised - but it's not necessary to speculate. The two small-ball units that got the most minutes last year were both plus rebounding:

Watson-Rush-D.Jones-Granger-Hibbert got 50.5% of available rebounds
Ford-Rush-D.Jones-Granger-Hibbert got 51.5% of available rebounds

Not exactly rebounding dominance, but most people, like you and me, would expect a small-ball unit to get routinely killed - and instead these small lineups held their own and then some.

Rebounding isn't just size - in fact a lot of it is speed, getting to the right spot on time; after that you've got to work for the ball, and a lot of that is just will and desire.

Then, too, a lot of teams play a lot of small ball, so the size differential is not so big when you play it yourself. You could even argue that Orlando plays mostly small ball, and they were fourth in rebounding rate last season (first in defensive).
:

Were those our only two units that were over 50% of available rebounds?

As far as Dwightlando being amongst the league leaders in rebounding, that gets a resounding NO KIDDING from me considering Dwight's elite status as a rebounder. Small ball?????

PACERPLAYOFFS
09-10-2010, 11:05 PM
COLLISON
DUNLEAVY
GEORGE
GRANGER
HIBBERT

O'Bird
09-11-2010, 02:24 AM
Were those our only two units that were over 50% of available rebounds?

Watson-Rush-D.Jones-Murphy-Hibbert 50.0%
Ford-D.Jones-Granger-Murphy-Foster 51.0%
Ford-Rush-Dunleavy-Murphy-Hibbert 55.0%

These units did not play a lot of minutes, though; I wouldn't bet the farm on their rebounding numbers. Ford is a good rebounder for a point guard, by the way.


As far as Dwightlando being amongst the league leaders in rebounding, that gets a resounding NO KIDDING from me considering Dwight's elite status as a rebounder. Small ball?????

I think that most people would consider Rashard small; he's listed at 215, which is a typical weight for a shooting guard. And yet he played more minutes than Bass and Anderson, his backups, combined.

Small-ball lineups most often use a big center, preferably a mobile guy who can block shots; that's what Orlando runs the vast majority of the time, and that was also the biggest use of small-ball minutes with Indiana last year, using Hibbert as the lone big.

Of course, you see all sorts of lineups in a season, but the usual small-ball strategy is to take a guy who's a triple-threat small forward, put him up against a slower 4, and watch the popcorn pop. Lewis isn't that, but he's such a good shooter and has developed a game that he can run off the arc to get into open midrange areas or to the rim - so that it's a difficult matchup if the opponent wants to play a big 4. Boston solved that one, though - and made it look easy, too, confounding all the prognosticators in the process...
:

pacer4ever
09-11-2010, 08:08 PM
COLLISON
DUNLEAVY
GEORGE
GRANGER
HIBBERT

like it - dunleavy move PG 2 the 2 and tyler to the 4

BlueNGold
09-12-2010, 10:18 AM
I think that most people would consider Rashard small; he's listed at 215, which is a typical weight for a shooting guard. And yet he played more minutes than Bass and Anderson, his backups, combined.

Small-ball lineups most often use a big center, preferably a mobile guy who can block shots; that's what Orlando runs the vast majority of the time, and that was also the biggest use of small-ball minutes with Indiana last year, using Hibbert as the lone big.


Dwight is not your typical center. The point is, unlike nearly every other team...if not all of them, they are fine using a poor defensive player at the 4. Other teams will have a difficult time progressing through the playoffs with a weak front court. All you need to do is look at Boston and LA...both have talented bigs at both the 4 and 5 spot unlike most of the league.

O'Bird
09-12-2010, 12:29 PM
Dwight is not your typical center.

I agree.


The point is, unlike nearly every other team...if not all of them, they are fine using a poor defensive player at the 4.

I didn't say that Rashard is a poor defensive player, and I don't agree that he is. And I wasn't talking about his individual defense at all, but about team rebounding, half of which is offense, not defense.

The issue that I was discussing is, does playing a small lineup mean that you get "killed" on the boards? The answer for Orlando is "no." Just as surprising is that the Pacers' most-often used small lineups were (slightly) better at rebounding than their opponents.

The question I didn't address is the next obvious one: well, why shouldn't you make, for example, Collison/Rush/DJones/Granger/Hibbert your starters (the Pacers' most effective small lineup last season, with Collison instead of Watson - in fact it was the most effective lineup, period, that got significant minutes)? I'm not advocating that, but I think that there are good arguments in favor. Using that group as a kind of fifth-gear lineup when an opponent's starting 4 has been on the floor for a while, for instance, looks like it has potential.

We saw a while ago in the "Hungry Hungry Hibbert" thread that almost all the playoff teams used a stretch big with sixth-man or more minutes; but most of them used that player off the bench - Orlando is an exception, of course, but the rule tells you something about the strategy that it shares (and sometimes overlaps) with small-ball strategy: you try to wear your opponent down by running to keep up with you.


Other teams will have a difficult time progressing through the playoffs with a weak front court.

In what sense do you mean that Orlando's front court is "weak"?


All you need to do is look at Boston and LA...both have talented bigs at both the 4 and 5 spot unlike most of the league.

Not sure what your point is here; it seems to boil down to "talent wins", which I agree with.

If you mean that Rashard Lewis is not talented, however, I would disagree. Overpaid, maybe.
: