PDA

View Full Version : Pacers Breakfast: Q & A with coach Jim O'Brien



Roaming Gnome
09-14-2010, 04:44 PM
As you may know by now, Hicks and I were invited to a Q & A session with Jim O'Brien. When I first arrived and seen the folks in the crowd, I made the assumption that this would be a lot to do about nothing... I basic meet & greet with a lot of information that a lot of us that are here on PD consider "common knowledge".

BOY, WAS I WRONG!!!

Jim starts the Q & A talking about Roy Hibbert and his "asthma" of all things... I figured at this moment was a good time to turn on the 'ol voice recorder for you all.

Unfortunately, since I originally had no plans to record this... I missed about the first 3 or 4 minutes of the Q & A. The audio starts in with coach continuing on discussing Roy Hibbert after he told us about his asthma.

Also, the question that comes across pretty loud about half way thru the whole thing is of course me... And when I got the answer from Jim that I wanted to hear... I nearly wanted to run up and hug him!

Anyway, without further ado... Hicks, roll that beautiful bean footage!

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Y3noCDKPBV8?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Y3noCDKPBV8?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/RYR-FY1oBs0?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/RYR-FY1oBs0?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/mHiJfq0jTq8?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/mHiJfq0jTq8?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

Hicks
09-14-2010, 04:46 PM
Edited them in. :)

pianoman
09-14-2010, 05:01 PM
JOB criticizing another teams defense makes me LOL

Speed
09-14-2010, 06:14 PM
Just heard the first one, wow Posey lost 30lbs since last year?

vnzla81
09-14-2010, 06:18 PM
Good job guys, sorry but I can't get my head to hear JOB's voice for that long(I feel dirty :blush:) Thanks for whatever info he is telling you ;)

Sookie
09-14-2010, 07:38 PM
Good job guys, sorry but I can't get my head to hear JOB's voice for that long(I feel dirty :blush:) Thanks for whatever info he is telling you ;)

Every time I listen to him I think "he's not so bad..seems like a good man" then I watch him coach. And think "wait..yes he is." Maybe that's Larry's problem, he listens to him too much. :laugh:

Honestly, I thought what he said was interesting.

He makes it abundantly clear about how he feels with younger guys vs. vets. With younger guys it's cautious pessimism with older guys it's cautious optimism (Collison vs Posey is the blantant example.)

Small ball...I want to be fair to O'brien here. I've seen small ball work. Any system will work if you have the right amount of talent. That said, I still believe that last season was the worst coaching performance I have ever seen. I hadn't watched an O'brien coached team before this, so I don't know if that's typical. (And I hope for George's sake, it isn't typical) But last season was pathetic, for a multitude of reasons that we've all been through a gazillion times.

Still, if we find out, our best lineup is small ball (whether that's Collison Price Rush Granger Hibbert or Collison Rush Paul Granger Hibbert..ect..) then we should be using it.

The Roy and McRoberts comments were interesting too. I get the sense he's going to want Roy to be a passer next season. That would seem to fit with McRoberts skills too. I wonder if he's planning on using McBob as Roy's backup.

The psychological test thing, I thought was interesting too. Obviously he was alluding to Lance (although, someone should have caught the anger/women issues...) and possibly Rush , but I didn't know they did that.

Thanks for recording though. :P

MaHa3000
09-14-2010, 10:26 PM
Great question, Knome. Way to represent! I'm glad Jim gave the answer most of us were looking for.

I think Roy will have his work cut out for him this year but I also think that he as put in the work to have success. Looks like JOB thinks so as well. Thats real encouraging.

xBulletproof
09-14-2010, 10:29 PM
Jim's always SAID the right things, or what we would perceive as the right things.

Then he just does something else entirely. Don't know why he would change this year.

MaHa3000
09-14-2010, 10:38 PM
Jim's always SAID the right things, or what we would perceive as the right things.

Then he just does something else entirely. Don't know why he would change this year.

Agreed.

But saying things like "starting all 82 games" and "center piece" are bold statements.

PaceBalls
09-14-2010, 11:00 PM
"Roy will be a part of every lineup." -Jim

God I really hope so. I am giving Jim a clean slate to start the year. I hope he can do it right.

I don't even care if we lose as long we play the right way with the right players, but a losing streak with big minutes going to Dunleavy and Posey at the power forward while McBob/Tyler/Magnum/ sits on the bench will probably make me freak out. I don't want to see more than 10 mpg from Dun or Posey this year. There is too much young talent on the team to give these guys huge mins.

Speed
09-15-2010, 08:14 AM
Whatever you think about Jim, it's hard to fault his work ethic. I mean the guy works year round and stays after it. I have to give him credit for this because I don't think every coach does this.

Trophy
09-15-2010, 08:19 AM
Jim is sounding like a changed man.

Maybe without Troy here, he won't be so 3 point crazy. After all, he did complain last season that Danny was taking too many.

Putnam
09-15-2010, 08:46 AM
Chris Calabro says, "I don't have to ask all the questions," and then goes right ahead and continues to dominate the mic.


But anyway, I'm most pleased to hear the emphasis on speed. Despite the criticism on this forum about the Pacers early shooting, the Pacers really didn't use speed to their advantage much at all last year. Yes, they scooted the ball up across the line, but the number of Pacers shots that were made before all 10 players were into the forecourt was small. If we get more real fast breaks and 3 on 2 scoring attempts, it will bode well.

Unclebuck
09-15-2010, 09:06 AM
That explains why Roy seems to get out of breath rather easily.

Brad8888
09-15-2010, 09:45 AM
Chris Calabro says, "I don't have to ask all the questions," and then goes right ahead and continues to dominate the mic.


But anyway, I'm most pleased to hear the emphasis on speed. Despite the criticism on this forum about the Pacers early shooting, the Pacers really didn't use speed to their advantage much at all last year. Yes, they scooted the ball up across the line, but the number of Pacers shots that were made before all 10 players were into the forecourt was small. If we get more real fast breaks and 3 on 2 scoring attempts, it will bode well.

The Pacers must have defense being a higher priority to end up with more real fast breaks and 3 on 2 scoring attempts, and it will be surprising at the very least to see that happen with an increased emphasis on speed offensively. The players have only so much energy available to play with during the course of a game or season, and part of that energy "budget" is allocated to defense and part to offense.

Admittedly, the addition of Collison and Posey with the loss of Murphy should increase the total energy available for any particular purpose, and hopefully the other "additions" of a healthier Granger as well as Foster for limited minutes along with possibly increasing minutes from Hansbrough (not holding my breath on that one) will also increase the available energy, too. However, defensively, there will probably be one or two reductions in available energy, most notably Brandon Rush will likely see his role reduced even beyond the first 5 games, with his minutes going to Dunleavy (I really don't see the young guys getting these minutes unless somehow Stephenson ends up making the team which is still far fetched despite his presence at Conseco IMO). Roy is only a small factor in this in my opinion because his primary defensive function is to erase the mistakes of the rest of the defense and then to hold his own against other more physical centers in the low post, and by the time the ball gets down to his area the opportunities to get out on breaks are limited anyway.

So, it remains to be seen whether defense will have its increased budgetary energy requirements met for the good of the team, or whether the struggling offense will once again eat up whatever additional available energy there is in its effort to play at an even faster pace as it has in the past.

While past performance is no guarantee of future results, it is the only somewhat reliable basis for making projections. Therefore, I believe that we will see faster play offensively with Roy having a higher ability to erase mistakes but a higher need to erase those mistakes defensively due to the opponents using our speed and likely our higher propensity for making both offensive and defensive mistakes against us, which probably will end up a wash for the Pacers, and the ultimate deciding factors ending up being

1. How well will we shoot even more 3's?

2. How much more involved will Roy and Hansbrough (eventually) be in the offense?

3. Will our scoring efficiency with FT's included increase from what it has been?

Once they become adults, leopards rarely change their spots. My guess is that O'Brien will still have silver sideburns unless he starts buying larger bottles of Just for Men (only his hairdresser knows for sure).

vnzla81
09-15-2010, 09:51 AM
That explains why Roy seems to get out of breath rather easily.

:twss: :D

Putnam
09-15-2010, 10:33 AM
The players have only so much energy available to play with during the course of a game or season,

Yes, and an offensive scheme (like last year's) that requires all five players to hurry down to the offensive end on every possession uses more of that energy on offense than fast breaks would. O'Brien implied this when he said something about Roy needing to find a way to get a blow while he's on the floor.

By running more 3-on-2 or 2-on-1 fast breaks, the Pacers would let the two Pacers big men conserve their energy on a quarter to a third of possessions. Those big guys would stay near the defensive end and reap the advantages of that. And any time an opponent dared to go small to prevent the Pacers fast breaks, Hibbert will abuse them. If one of the big guys happens to be McRobert, then he can break the mold by being one of the fast breakers, since he's unusually quick for his size, leaving Granger to trail.

The point guard and swing men would be in on all these breaks, as well as all the majority of possession which require all five players, as well again as every defensive possession. They'll get tired faster and need to rotate often to keep fresh.

As O'Brien said, the Pacers haven't been fast enough in the past to really exploit speed. But it is a good thing that they are determined again this year to try it.

as far as the "leopard changing his spots" comment, it is in the Bible and in Kipling, so I'll not argue. But we've never been able to agree about who the real O'Brien is.



.

Roaming Gnome
09-15-2010, 10:49 AM
Chris Calabro says, "I don't have to ask all the questions," and then goes right ahead and continues to dominate the mic.




To be fair... most in that crowd looked like they would have rather had cyanide sprinkled on their eggs than to think about raising their hand to pick up that mic. Hell, I had my question thought out for over a day and still flubbed up the delivery.

Brad8888
09-15-2010, 11:11 AM
Yes, and an offensive scheme (like last year's) that requires all five players to hurry down to the offensive end on every possession uses more of that energy on offense than fast breaks would. O'Brien implied this when he said something about Roy needing to find a way to get a blow while he's on the floor.

By running more 3-on-2 or 2-on-1 fast breaks, the Pacers would let the two Pacers big men conserve their energy on a quarter to a third of possessions. Those big guys would stay near the defensive end and reap the advantages of that. And any time an opponent dared to go small to prevent the Pacers fast breaks, Hibbert will abuse them. If one of the big guys happens to be McRobert, then he can break the mold by being one of the fast breakers, since he's unusually quick for his size, leaving Granger to trail.

The point guard and swing men would be in on all these breaks, as well as all the majority of possession which require all five players, as well again as every defensive possession. They'll get tired faster and need to rotate often to keep fresh.

As O'Brien said, the Pacers haven't been fast enough in the past to really exploit speed. But it is a good thing that they are determined again this year to try it.

as far as the "leopard changing his spots" comment, it is in the Bible and in Kipling, so I'll not argue. But we've never been able to agree about who the real O'Brien is.



.

So, how do we get the ball in positions to run the additional fast breaks and 3 on 2's?

Also, when would Hibbert abuse opponents who go small to stop our breaks (I doubt they would need to)? Would it be defensively since he would end up on that end of the floor a larger percentage of the time than he has in the past? If defensively, then what do the Pacers give up by having an offensively skilled player who is likely to be a very efficient scorer in the post (if he were utilized with a more significant role in the offense) involved in likely a lower percentage of plays during his time on the floor?

So, who do you actually believe O'Brien is as a coach? What do you believe are his main objectives strategically, and what does he do to achieve those objectives? Do you believe that O'Brien is a defensive-minded coach or an offensive-minded coach? Defensively, how does he actually want the team to play in your opinion? Offensively, what does he expect the team to do to achieve his objectives?

Putnam
09-15-2010, 11:30 AM
So, how do we get the ball in positions to run the additional fast breaks and 3 on 2's?

Long outlet pass after a defensive rebound. I know there are subtleties to this that I don't understand, but the key is simply to push vertically rather than going cross-court, and running to the basket rather than pulling up to wait for ten men to reach the forecourt.



Also, when would Hibbert abuse opponents who go small to stop our breaks (I doubt they would need to)? Would it be defensively since he would end up on that end of the floor a larger percentage of the time than he has in the past?

I'm thinking more on offense when the opponent puts in a 6'9" guy to match down to the Pacers guards and wings.




So, who do you actually believe O'Brien is as a coach? What do you believe are his main objectives strategically, and what does he do to achieve those objectives?

I don't know. I'm not trying to prove one particular thing. He may be as bad as you say, but he also may really be the guy who's team made the playoffs 3 years out of 5 become he came to rebuild Indy.

As Gnome points out above, he's talking about building around Hibbert and talking about relying more on speed. That's what I want to hear.

Brad8888
09-15-2010, 11:43 AM
Long outlet pass after a defensive rebound. I know there are subtleties to this that I don't understand, but the key is simply to push vertically rather than going cross-court, and running to the basket rather than pulling up to wait for ten men to reach the forecourt.




I'm thinking more on offense when the opponent puts in a 6'9" guy to match down to the Pacers guards and wings.





I don't know. I'm not trying to prove one particular thing. He may be as bad as you say, but he also may really be the guy who's team made the playoffs 3 years out of 5 become he came to rebuild Indy.

As Gnome points out above, he's talking about building around Hibbert and talking about relying more on speed. That's what I want to hear.

I appreciate your responses to my questions, and I am sorry if I keep coming across in a heavy-handed manner.

As always, the end result will be the important thing regarding his statements, and I hope that I am proven wrong because I care about the franchise as a fan and want nothing more than to see the Pacers succeed and rise to prominence once more.

Whether it is a valid excuse or not, I guess I just about feel exhausted with respect to the franchise and am having a difficult time seeing the positives because I have focused on the negatives for so long, which unfortunately I am guilty of in life overall as well at this time.

Go Pacers!

90'sNBARocked
09-15-2010, 12:15 PM
To be fair... most in that crowd looked like they would have rather had cyanide sprinkled on their eggs than to think about raising their hand to pick up that mic. Hell, I had my question thought out for over a day and still flubbed up the delivery.

I mean no disrespect at all, but your voice was cracking me up

Good question though

Hicks
09-15-2010, 12:16 PM
Chris Denari, not Chris Calabro, by the way.

Roaming Gnome
09-15-2010, 12:22 PM
Chris Denari, not Chris Calabro, by the way.

I think he was making a back handed jab at Denari because Calabro is real good at dominating a mic!

Justin Tyme
09-15-2010, 12:27 PM
That explains why Roy seems to get out of breath rather easily.



Great point!

Pacers need more than a journeyman b\u center than ever now, knowing Roy's minutes are going to be limited. Jason Thompson PF/C would be a great pick up!!

Hicks
09-15-2010, 12:30 PM
Great point!

Pacers need more than a journeyman b\u center than ever now, knowing Roy's minutes are going to be limited. Jason Thompson PF/C would be a great pick up!!

Huh? Who said anything about Roy's minutes being limited? Quite the contrary; they're hoping he averages 35 minutes next season. That's a huge increase.

Putnam
09-15-2010, 12:33 PM
Chris Denari, not Chris Calabro, by the way.

:blush: That shows how pathetic I am about the media.

O'Bird
09-15-2010, 02:26 PM
Long outlet pass after a defensive rebound. I know there are subtleties to this that I don't understand, but the key is simply to push vertically rather than going cross-court, and running to the basket rather than pulling up to wait for ten men to reach the forecourt.

What Jim normally wants after a defensive rebound is an outlet pass in the backcourt followed by a quick attack pass into the forecourt. The long baseball or chest pass by the rebounder is a notoriously dicey proposition that drives coaches crazy (but Kevin Love may be an exception). The idea is to get the best combination of aggressive attack, getting the defense on its heels, and taking care of the ball.

By the way, the term of art these days is "north-south" vs. "east-west".

Breakaways and 3-on-2's are great but you can't build your offense on fast breaks night to night, and even less so in the playoffs. If and when there's a breakthrough in the Pacers' offense, you'll see it in the early offense, after the defense has gotten back but before it's organized, and in general before ten seconds have elapsed. That's stuff you can run off of any defensive rebound, and even off of made shots. (Tommy Heinsohn reminds us that the old Celtics ran on made free throws, and though that was a different era, it points to the distinct situation that is neither: 1) fast break; nor 2) half-court offense against an organized defense.)



I don't know. I'm not trying to prove one particular thing. He may be as bad as you say, but he also may really be the guy who's team made the playoffs 3 years out of 5 become he came to rebuild Indy.

And coached top defensive teams.

I'm going to quibble a little bit on the history here.

In Boston, Jim took over for the last 48 games of the '00-'01 season, so he didn't have them for the whole season.

From 2001 to 2003, they made the playoffs both years.

He quit after 46 games of the 2003-04 season. The team did make the playoffs, though.

In Philadelphia, they made the playoffs after being in the lottery the year before; after he left they were back in the lottery for two more years.

So if you count whole seasons, he was 3 for 3. If you count whole or part seasons, he was 4 for 5, not 3 for 5.


As Gnome points out above, he's talking about building around Hibbert and talking about relying more on speed. That's what I want to hear.

That's what I want to hear, too. I'm not sure that it's fair to say that he's talking about "building around Hibbert", though. What I hear him saying is that they're going to run a lot of offense through him because he can score in the low-post, pop the midrange, and pass. He already got a lot of the available touches and created a lot of shots last year, turning it over in the process an ungodly amount, but also showing his gifts as a passer and at least the potential of becoming an efficient scorer.

As important, Roy emerged as the quarterback of the Pacers' defense, and was the key player in their big advance in team defense last season. Given his age and Coach planning on 34-36 minutes' burn, what's predictable is that his (and their) developmental arc on defense will continue the upward trend.

.

Speed
09-15-2010, 02:28 PM
I wonder where Roy ranked in assists for Centers last year. If he's used right, I think he could be top 5 or 10, easy, imho.

count55
09-15-2010, 02:34 PM
I wonder where Roy ranked in assists for Centers last year. If he's used right, I think he could be top 5 or 10, easy, imho.

Hoopdata says 7th most in total and 12th in per game.

Unclebuck
09-15-2010, 03:31 PM
What Jim normally wants after a defensive rebound is an outlet pass in the backcourt followed by a quick attack pass into the forecourt. The long baseball or chest pass by the rebounder is a notoriously dicey proposition that drives coaches crazy .

That is an excellent point. Plus it seems to me that the pacers got their share of turnovers when the rebounder tried to make the long outlet pass. Opponents were looking for it.

Diener was excellent in getting the outlet pass and looking up the floor and kicking it ahead. Ford was unable or unwilling to do this. Watson got better at it.

O'Bird
09-15-2010, 04:16 PM
I wonder where Roy ranked in assists for Centers last year.

Per possession, among rotation centers who played at least 40 games, he was 15th, in hailing distance of Horford and Duncan. Those two gentlemen might profitably be in his sights because of their lower turnover rates as well.

Of course, there's a tradeoff; you want him taking some shots himself, and he especially needs to get to the line more often, and shoot better when he gets there.

Note something very interesting, given Coach's goal of getting more point-blank shots: Roy was tied for fourth in the league, per minute, in assists leading to a basket at the rim.



If he's used right, I think he could be top 5 or 10, easy, imho.

If you mean per game, he's there already (tied for 10th), again comparing rotation centers who played at least 40 games. If you mean per minute, he's even better (8th). Does that mean that he was being used right last year?

.

O'Bird
09-15-2010, 04:58 PM
Hoopdata says 7th most in total and 12th in per game.

That's what I was looking at, too; but it gave me tied for 10th, per game, not 12th - and it makes no difference if you sort, as I did, for rotation centers who played 40-plus games, since all the guys above him did that even if you sort for all centers regardless of minutes and games played.

????

.

count55
09-15-2010, 05:02 PM
That's what I was looking at, too; but it gave me tied for 10th, per game, not 12th - and it makes no difference if you sort, as I did, for rotation centers who played 40-plus games, since all the guys above him did that even if you sort for all centers regardless of minutes and games played.

????

.

I counted 11, but typed 12th (typo). Ultimately, he's tied for 10th, but is the 11th listed name.

KennerLeaguer
09-15-2010, 07:33 PM
Good job, Gnome. I must say even I wasn't aware of the whole asthma issue. Was it just diagnosed? Interesting enough it was discovered recently that JaVale McGee has asthma as well. Strange.

I'm shocked by O'Brien's comments. Don't know how Roy will play but he must be looking pretty good if O'Brien is saying all of this. I'm am most pleased with two things:

1)The plan to put the ball in Roy's hands more. That will be positive for the team.

2)That O'Brien is finally going to try to stop allowing the other teams' lineups to dictate how he uses Roy. Even BEFORE Roy lost all that body fat and supposedly improved his quickness, I never understood why JOB would play chicken with Roy if he was playing a 6'8 PF masquerading as center. Sure thet PF could kill Roy on the perimeter with his quickness. But Roy could just as easily punish that quy in the paint and score over him repeatedly...just as long as he got the ball. If I had been JOB during such matchups every time down the court I'm feeding Roy and making sure he takes a shot. If Roy finds quick success and puts up points in the majority of the first ten possessions, the opposing coach would have to make a decision about possibly going to a bigger lineup. Its called imposing your will or dictating terms/style of play. Turn a negative into a positive by using your strengths to expose the other guy's weaknesses.

Justin Tyme
09-15-2010, 09:14 PM
Huh? Who said anything about Roy's minutes being limited? Quite the contrary; they're hoping he averages 35 minutes next season. That's a huge increase.


Roy's health issue will limit the minutes he will be able to play or play and be productive.

BornReady
09-15-2010, 09:16 PM
Roy's health issue will limit the minutes he will be able to play or play and be productive.

Nono I believe you are mistaken. He had previously been using his medication incorrectly, causing him to be short of breath because of his asthma. They realized this and his shortness of breath should no longer be an issue.

beast23
09-15-2010, 11:13 PM
Just heard the first one, wow Posey lost 30lbs since last year?Wow. I guess we have a player that is seriously seeking playing time.

Having lost that much weight, I would say he has his sights set on playing a lot of SG. He can defend opposing SGs and is an excellent perimeter shooter. Most PD members don't seem to like the thought, but I would say we have a good chance of seeing quite a bit of Posey this year.

Sookie
09-15-2010, 11:36 PM
Wow. I guess we have a player that is seriously seeking playing time.

Having lost that much weight, I would say he has his sights set on playing a lot of SG. He can defend opposing SGs and is an excellent perimeter shooter. Most PD members don't seem to like the thought, but I would say we have a good chance of seeing quite a bit of Posey this year.

JOB suggested we'd see him at the 4.

El Pacero
09-15-2010, 11:39 PM
Biggie props to Gnome and Hicks for recording this. It seriously made my day.

beast23
09-16-2010, 12:04 AM
JOB suggested we'd see him at the 4.When we got him, he was reported to be able to play SG, SF and PF.

If he has lost 30 pounds, it would appear that he would be even better at playing against stretch 4s, but would probably not be quite as good defending against PFs that prefer to play inside.

On the other hand, losing 30 pounds should make him an even better defender of SGs. I don't think it will take JOB very long at all to use him as a defender at SG that is also capable of hitting the 3.

At any rate, Posey has always been known as a pretty decent perimeter defender. Seems like his weight loss will only enhance that skill. His versatility at 3 positions might even make DJones defensive skills at SG less attractive.

Hicks
09-16-2010, 12:05 AM
Roy's health issue will limit the minutes he will be able to play or play and be productive.

No, that's incorrect. Roy's had asthma this whole time. Up until recently, he had been taking his medication (somehow) incorrectly/inappropriately, which has now finally been caught and rectified. He has no new health issues heading into this year, and in fact should be healthier than he's ever been.

PaceBalls
09-16-2010, 01:15 AM
When we got him, he was reported to be able to play SG, SF and PF.

If he has lost 30 pounds, it would appear that he would be even better at playing against stretch 4s, but would probably not be quite as good defending against PFs that prefer to play inside.

On the other hand, losing 30 pounds should make him an even better defender of SGs. I don't think it will take JOB very long at all to use him as a defender at SG that is also capable of hitting the 3.

At any rate, Posey has always been known as a pretty decent perimeter defender. Seems like his weight loss will only enhance that skill. His versatility at 3 positions might even make DJones defensive skills at SG less attractive.

James Posey Born: Jan 13, 1977

He will turn 34 this season. At that age, "pretty decent perimeter defender" is not in the conversation. At that age his only role seems to be able to hit 3pters as a "stretch 4", which is scaring me with Jim giving him such praise... as a potential PF. Will he be as bad as Murphy on D? Probably not, but he will be pretty damn bad, espeically if he is getting alot of minutes as our supposed friggin PF.

So what do we have here, a guy too old and slow to defend any SG and a guy too small to defend any PF. Which hopefully will just give him 5-10 mpg as a sub for Granger at SF.

God, this is already pissin me off and they haven't even played a game yet.

Don't let me down Jim. please!~

beast23
09-16-2010, 02:47 AM
James Posey Born: Jan 13, 1977

He will turn 34 this season. At that age, "pretty decent perimeter defender" is not in the conversation. At that age his only role seems to be able to hit 3pters as a "stretch 4", which is scaring me with Jim giving him such praise... as a potential PF. Will he be as bad as Murphy on D? Probably not, but he will be pretty damn bad, espeically if he is getting alot of minutes as our supposed friggin PF.

So what do we have here, a guy too old and slow to defend any SG and a guy too small to defend any PF. Which hopefully will just give him 5-10 mpg as a sub for Granger at SF.

God, this is already pissin me off and they haven't even played a game yet.

Don't let me down Jim. please!~If you don't like a player or don't want to see him play ahead of the youngsters, just say so. But age alone does not change a players known skill set. The skill set "is what it is". And Posey is known for his defensive abilities as much as he is for his perimeter shooting abilities.

I would agree with you in worrying about Posey defending PFs, especially considering the weight loss. It would seem he might be overpowered trying to defend interior PFs... but I'm sure JOB probably wants to use him to defend stretch-4s while also forcing them to stay honest when Posey is on offense.

I tend to believe Posey to be a pretty good acquisition. He has 2 years left on his contract, is a good team player, and would seem to be a nice versatile player to have as our roster transitions between what it is now and what it will become by the end of his contract. Because he is a versatile player with some decent skills, he could also be used as a sweetener for a trade.

The Pacers have stockpiled some decent assets. But to get the most out of them, and perhaps use them for trades, they have to be played to continue to exhibit their value. Posey, and even Dunleavy, are two such players.

Justin Tyme
09-16-2010, 09:41 AM
Nono I believe you are mistaken. He had previously been using his medication incorrectly, causing him to be short of breath because of his asthma. They realized this and his shortness of breath should no longer be an issue.


I'm glad to hear this. Still, maybe incorrectly, I feel Hibbert will never play the minutes most would like. Hibbert averaged 25 minutes per game last year, and most would like him to average 35 minutes per game like his peers Brook Lopez(36 min) and Marc Gasol(35 min). I just don't see Hibbert being able to play 35 minutes a game and produce at his best (hope I'm wrong). 30 minutes to me would seem to be more reasonable. Hibbert playing 30 minutes leaves a 1/3 of the minutes at center, 18, to be filled by a b/u. I'd much prefer T-Birds X-factor to be filling the bulk of those minutes instead of a vet journeyman. Jason Thompson who can play PF/C could be that X-factor player and a core member for the future. That's why I mentioned him. JMOAA

Justin Tyme
09-16-2010, 09:53 AM
The Pacers have stockpiled some decent assets. But to get the most out of them, and perhaps use them for trades, they have to be played to continue to exhibit their value. Posey, and even Dunleavy, are two such players.


Lets just hope those 2 assets can be turned into something good for the future. Neither, as I see it, is a core player for the future.

McKeyFan
09-16-2010, 10:21 AM
James Posey Born: Jan 13, 1977

He will turn 34 this season. At that age, "pretty decent perimeter defender" is not in the conversation. At that age his only role seems to be able to hit 3pters as a "stretch 4", which is scaring me with Jim giving him such praise... as a potential PF. Will he be as bad as Murphy on D? Probably not, but he will be pretty damn bad, espeically if he is getting alot of minutes as our supposed friggin PF.

So what do we have here, a guy too old and slow to defend any SG and a guy too small to defend any PF. Which hopefully will just give him 5-10 mpg as a sub for Granger at SF.

God, this is already pissin me off and they haven't even played a game yet.

Don't let me down Jim. please!~

I'd encourage you to try and keep things in perspective.

Posey is a defensive minded player. And I think someone who understands angles, timing, positioning, when to and when not to poke at the ball, a sense of other defenders on the floor, etc.—that person at age 50 is going to be more effective than Murphy in his 20s.

No matter how you slice it, things are looking up for next year.

Speed
09-17-2010, 03:51 PM
bump, mainly so I can find it easily for a relisten. :D

O'Bird
09-17-2010, 05:15 PM
Posey is a defensive minded player. And I think someone who understands angles, timing, positioning, when to and when not to poke at the ball, a sense of other defenders on the floor, etc.

He had a tough year, post-surgery. But there are a couple of things he was doing defensively last season that were still up among the league leaders, and not just if you call him a small forward:

1) Among rotation forwards, both 4 and 3, he was fifth in charges taken. This is a skill he's excelled in for years (there is skill involved, as well as the willingness to take a hit in the breadbasket).

2) He was 22nd among rotation forwards (again both 4 and 3) in defensive rebounding (and again a career pattern). He was third among rotation small forwards.

People are concerned about him guarding 4's, but he's been doing that for years; and indeed the bright shining moment in his career is probably the third and fourth quarters of game 4 of the 2008 Finals, when they shut down the Lakers on D and rode his jumper to come back from 18 down to take the lead and go on to win. He played exclusively 4 in that stretch.

As coach noted, what he'll bring to the table this year is difficult to know. But given his history and the nature of his surgery it's more likely that 4 is the best position for him. I think that his biggest value is very likely in practice and the locker room rather than on the floor.


No matter how you slice it, things are looking up for next year.

Yes they are. This Thing Is Working®.

___________

KennerLeaguer
09-17-2010, 09:50 PM
Forgot to mention last time that JOB needs to slow down with all of his patting himself on the back over the issue of his preferred style of play supposedly being the same that Coach K used for Team USA.

First of all last time I checked no team in NBA history won a championship playing with virtually an all-wing lineup. In fact no NBA team that I am aware of have had any success at all by putting out a lineup that includes no true big man (whether it be a center or PF) on consequence.

Next the NBA post season is all about what goes on in the paint. In the NBA, particularly the post season, if you have a team that is getting outrebounded basically every game that team isn't going to win and advance.

Third of all there were hardly any bigs of consequence in the recently wrapped World Games (most didn't participate) and Team USA hardly played any of the few that were around.

Last of all, and perhaps most importantly, no NBA team is ever going to have that big of an advantage on all the other teams in league in terms of speed and firepower on the perimeter. More specifically the current Pacers certainly don't possess such an advantage. Its a tad easier for K to go with an exclusive perimeter lineup when he had by the far the most talented collection of perimeter players and by far the deepest. None of the other international squads could equal that talent.

OakMoses
09-18-2010, 01:18 AM
Forgot to mention last time that JOB needs to slow down with all of his patting himself on the back over the issue of his preferred style of play supposedly being the same that Coach K used for Team USA.

First of all last time I checked no team in NBA history won a championship playing with virtually an all-wing lineup. In fact no NBA team that I am aware of have had any success at all by putting out a lineup that includes no true big man (whether it be a center or PF) on consequence.

Next the NBA post season is all about what goes on in the paint. In the NBA, particularly the post season, if you have a team that is getting outrebounded basically every game that team isn't going to win and advance.

Third of all there were hardly any bigs of consequence in the recently wrapped World Games (most didn't participate) and Team USA hardly played any of the few that were around.


At what point in O'Brien's career has he coached a big man who was "of consequence"?

I would guess that Hibbert is the first offensively talented post player that Jim has had the chance to coach in their prime (JO and CWebb were offensively talented at one point, but not when JOB coached them), and it sounds like Jim plans on using him a whole bunch next year.

On a side note, have you seen Roy throw many outlet passes Kenner? I know he hasn't done it a lot for the Pacers. I'd love for him to discover that skill. Walton and Russell (among others) were fantastic outlet passers who could start fast breaks on their own with just one good pass. If Roy could do that 2-3 times a game it would be fantastic.

Troy, by the way, was one of the worst outlet passers I've ever seen. I've never seen a team get the 1st pass after a defensive rebound stolen or deflected as much as the Pacers did the last couple of years.

Naptown_Seth
09-18-2010, 06:47 AM
I wonder where Roy ranked in assists for Centers last year. If he's used right, I think he could be top 5 or 10, easy, imho.
He and Josh were IMO smarter passers than most/all of the guards last year which is why it was so frustrating that this wasn't utilized more. Jerry Sloan would have had a field day with 2 bigs with good court vision.

In fact my problem is how much JOB has turned away from the assets available to him, which included at least 1 season where everyone knew they weren't a playoff team and were more than willing to accept full-on youth development.


Imagine the perception now had the focus of the team been on Roy instead of Rasho and just a little more Josh instead of Troy and more AJ instead of Watson. Squandered chances to improve the horses you were most likely to have now for a empty shot at doing something with rental vets acquired mainly to match trade costs or fill a roster spot.

Naptown_Seth
09-18-2010, 06:49 AM
Troy, by the way, was one of the worst outlet passers I've ever seen. I've never seen a team get the 1st pass after a defensive rebound stolen or deflected as much as the Pacers did the last couple of years.
At times it was so bad it looked intentional. Seriously, I often wondered about it.

count55
09-18-2010, 07:35 AM
Troy, by the way, was one of the worst outlet passers I've ever seen. I've never seen a team get the 1st pass after a defensive rebound stolen or deflected as much as the Pacers did the last couple of years.

Do you not remember LaSalle Thompson?

KennerLeaguer
09-18-2010, 08:28 AM
At what point in O'Brien's career has he coached a big man who was "of consequence"?

In Philly he had CWebb and a young Dalembert which is as close as he got I suppose. JO was still good too. But my point is that he seems to be suggesting that his preferred style of play was justified because of the lineups iof the international teams and the lineups Coach K used during the Worlds. In reality you have to have guys in the post to go far in the NBA. Even if those guys are limited mostly to putbacks to get their points, you still need them. JOB doesn't seem to have too much use for any big guys who don't stretch the floor though.



I would guess that Hibbert is the first offensively talented post player that Jim has had the chance to coach in their prime (JO and CWebb were offensively talented at one point, but not when JOB coached them), and it sounds like Jim plans on using him a whole bunch next year.

Yes, it took Roy being basically one of the hardest-working guys in the NBA and busting his butt for the Indiana coaches over the course of three summers for JOB to change his attitude on this front. I would argue though that even before Roy got to his current stage he was still worthy of getting more looks in the offense than JOB was designing for him. Even as recently as last season there appeared to be numerous games where Pacers fans and Mike Wells were scratching their heads over why Roy didn't have more shot attempts.


On a side note, have you seen Roy throw many outlet passes Kenner? I know he hasn't done it a lot for the Pacers. I'd love for him to discover that skill. Walton and Russell (among others) were fantastic outlet passers who could start fast breaks on their own with just one good pass. If Roy could do that 2-3 times a game it would be fantastic.

Have rarely seen Roy throw an outlet pass so I'm suspecting he's no Kevin Love on that front. Of course he's probably capable of being decent at it but he'll have to get the rebound first. :D

McKeyFan
09-18-2010, 09:30 AM
I
Yes, it took Roy being basically one of the hardest-working guys in the NBA and busting his butt for the Indiana coaches over the course of three summers for JOB to change his attitude on this front.

Well said.

And it's only JOB talk at this point.

Chuck Chillout
09-18-2010, 09:39 AM
Do you not remember LaSalle Thompson?

But Tank had just the one role for which he was responsible: kickin' ***. There was no time left available or need to develop other discernible basketball skills.

Chuck Chillout
09-18-2010, 09:42 AM
I think most on this board are familiar enough with Surly Jim's body of work with the Pacers to question whether he can be taken as a credible source of information.

count55
09-18-2010, 09:47 AM
But Tank had just the one role for which he was responsible: kickin' ***. There was no time left available or need to develop other discernible basketball skills.

Actually, I liked Tank a lot, and he had more skills than he was generally given credit. People always forget that while Reggie was making John Starks cry in that 25-point 4th quarter, Tank had come in and made Patrick Ewing cry - stealing like 14 post passes in a row.

However, he was one of the worst outlet passers in the history of man. Every time we'd see him get a rebound and wind up, my brother, brother-in-law, and I would look like this:

http://static2.bigstockphoto.com/thumbs/0/8/1/large2/1807046.jpg

O'Bird
09-19-2010, 06:18 AM
I think most on this board are familiar enough with Surly Jim's body of work with the Pacers to question whether he can be taken as a credible source of information.

I protest. You are ignorant, but that would not even be worth remarking; nor would your snide and self-important attitude - if it weren't for your cowardly smear of the man's character. Not content with that, you justify abasing your own character by claiming the support of others. I'm sure that they will enjoy your clever remarks and congratulate themselves on having seen, like you, what Larry Bird apparently cannot: that his coach is not only incompetent but a self-serving liar. You must think Bird a pathetic dumbass indeed.

You actually have the nerve to claim the moral high ground! It is time to protest this hypocrisy.

I've had it with the viciousness around here. It's one thing to disagree about basketball, but quite another to spread ugly gossip and insult a fine man behind his back. I am calling you out.

Where is your decency, sir?

Chuck Chillout
09-19-2010, 07:35 AM
I protest. You are ignorant, but that would not even be worth remarking; nor would your snide and self-important attitude - if it weren't for your cowardly smear of the man's character. Not content with that, you justify abasing your own character by claiming the support of others. I'm sure that they will enjoy your clever remarks and congratulate themselves on having seen, like you, what Larry Bird apparently cannot: that his coach is not only incompetent but a self-serving liar. You must think Bird a pathetic dumbass indeed.

You actually have the nerve to claim the moral high ground! It is time to protest this hypocrisy.

I've had it with the viciousness around here. It's one thing to disagree about basketball, but quite another to spread ugly gossip and insult a fine man behind his back. I am calling you out.

Where is your decency, sir?
Nah, I don't think Bird is a "pathetic dumbass indeed." And I actually know from a non-basketball related source that Jim O'Brien is a decent guy.

For some reason, you've taken offense by generalizing a comment about O'Brien's history of public comments as coach of the Pacers, which I have found inconsistent with his follow-through, and by confusing it with a comment about the man's character.

If you are still confused, please take the time, go back, and re-read my original post, specifically the part that says, "body of work with the Pacers," and see if that doesn't help you to remember that this is a forum for fans of a basketball team.

Perspective can be a good thing. Just a thought.

O'Bird
09-19-2010, 07:42 AM
He and Josh were IMO smarter passers than most/all of the guards last year which is why it was so frustrating that this wasn't utilized more. Jerry Sloan would have had a field day with 2 bigs with good court vision.

About Josh, I have the opposite opinion: given all the holes in his game, it's amazing that he got as many minutes as he did. In any case, it wasn't his passing that limited his court time.

About Roy: his usage rate was 12th among rotation centers in the NBA last year. He got a LOT of touches and used an unusually high percentage of those getting himself an assist. So I think that you are simply wrong about what actually happened with him last year. He made huge strides and the staff set him up to do it and take advantage of his hard work.


In fact my problem is how much JOB has turned away from the assets available to him, which included at least 1 season where everyone knew they weren't a playoff team and were more than willing to accept full-on youth development.

Larry Bird has said repeatedly that he expects to make the playoffs "every year", so he, at least, did not know that "they weren't a playoff team". I think it's a valid debate about how much rookies should play - we should have that debate if I stick around here - but it's hard to fault the coach for making his boss's goals his own.


Imagine the perception now had the focus of the team been on Roy instead of Rasho and just a little more Josh instead of Troy and more AJ instead of Watson. Squandered chances to improve the horses you were most likely to have now for a empty shot at doing something with rental vets acquired mainly to match trade costs or fill a roster spot.

Huh? Roy in his rookie year rebounded like a small forward (he would have been 33rd in rebound rates among SFs, so that's putting it kindly); shot free throws at grade D level, had an assist rate in the bottom third of centers, couldn't maintain position on the block, was a mediocre shooter and scorer, would have fouled out every 28 minutes on the floor - and YET he still got rotation minutes. Centers picked that low in the draft have a very low success rate, so no one would have been surprised if he hadn't made it.

Brad8888
09-19-2010, 02:20 PM
About Josh, I have the opposite opinion: given all the holes in his game, it's amazing that he got as many minutes as he did. In any case, it wasn't his passing that limited his court time.

About Roy: his usage rate was 12th among rotation centers in the NBA last year. He got a LOT of touches and used an unusually high percentage of those getting himself an assist. So I think that you are simply wrong about what actually happened with him last year. He made huge strides and the staff set him up to do it and take advantage of his hard work.



Larry Bird has said repeatedly that he expects to make the playoffs "every year", so he at least did not know that "they weren't a playoff team". I think it's a valid debate about how much rookies should play - we should have that debate if I stick around here - but it's hard to fault the coach for making his boss's goals his own.



Huh? Roy in his rookie year rebounded like a small forward (he would have been 33rd in rebound rates among SFs, so that's putting it kindly); shot free throws at grade D level, had an assist rate in the bottom third of centers, couldn't maintain position on the block, was a mediocre shooter and scorer, would have fouled out every 28 minutes on the floor - and YET he still got rotation minutes. Centers picked that low in the draft have a very low success rate, so no one would have been surprised if he hadn't made it.

O'Bird,

I still want to know more details about why you believe "This Thing is Working" and hope that we haven't scared you off. Your input here is likely more valuable than we realize as a collective body of posters, and I, at least, hope to learn more about your view on basketball from any future posts you may make. Please forgive me in advance for both the lengthy nature, and tone, of this post. From a player personnel standpoint, things are changing, which may make many of my points moot with respect to the upcoming season, and I truly hope that is the case. But, here goes nothing...

This being the offseason, in reality, the posters on this board are overall being less vocal in criticism of the coach and his statements to the media that often have run counter to the on-the-court reality that has followed, and some (myself readily included) have been somewhat more objective over this summer due to not witnessing the play of the team each game and therefore having a less direct emotional attachment to the outcome of games and how that is related to the type of coaching the team appeared to receive (or not) during the course of given games. That explains my "reaching across the aisle" as you noted in a previous thread. Because you didn't come here much, if at all, during the regular season (likely due to far more important things taking up your time), you were spared the vitriol directed at both the team and particularly Jim O'Brien (with lots of Troy and TJ ridicule thrown in for good measure). This may be extremely difficult for you to swallow, but, if I were to guess (which is all this is able to be due to the non-scientific nature of internet polling), amongst the significant volume posters on this board, about a third would have recommended a coaching change immediately regardless of fiscal realities facing the franchise, another third would have recommended a coaching change but resigned themselves to the reality of the situation (myself included in this third for the most part), and the final third ranging from tolerance to a few (most notably Uncle Buck) coming out in moderate to at times fervent support of O'Brien to provide balance against the one-sided nature of threads regarding O'Brien that permeated this board (and others) for weeks and months on end.

Many threads rose to such a level that some posters simply stopped posting for the most part because there was no point in continuing the expression of the extreme frustration felt by those fans who were, and are, opposed to the type of strategies being employed as well as the lack of performance of the franchise as a result, or the opposite being those posters who are completely exhausted from defending the coach against the relentless pounding of many posters and choosing not to express themselves any longer. Neither is actually better than the other, but, in slang terms, "it is what it is" (whatever that actually means).

Now, for the remainder of your post.

So, a serious question, followed by rhetorical questions, about Josh. What was it that actually limited his court time? Was it his passing and court vision? Was it his energy and hustle? Was it his on the ball defense that disrupted the flow of the opposition in many instances that he was on the floor in meaningful minutes? Obviously, in my opinion, it was the fact he couldn't hit mid and long range jumpers because of the theory that he has to do that to "space the court", the rest of his developing game be d***ed. That much has been made clear by O'Brien in the media. Are there other off court issues with him that haven't been revealed? A yes or no will suffice, if you are privy to that information.

Now, about Roy. From the beginning, those fans who recognize heart and potential in players have loved him, though some, myself included, have been critical of his lack of fundamentals with respect to the NBA game and the lack until this summer of big man coaching to develop his potential, which is finally being addressed by the franchise through the efforts of Bill Walton.

As effective as he has been in the past, the rate at which Roy has developed given his situation of being alone in the post both offensively and defensively behind a porous perimeter defense (that you vehemently believe is a myth) has been a testament to his own work ethic and desire, nothing more, nothing less. I will never forget the times his rookie season that he sat on the bench with a towel over his head with tears in his eyes after having been benched for extended periods following performances that were very good just for making a couple of mistakes. Had he been allowed to play the game more and not been forced to "learn the game by watching from the bench", both his and the Pacers' fortunes would have been far better served both in the short and long terms because Roy would have gained the equivalent of about another half season overall, which is huge at this formative stage of his development. Having no one to challenge him in practice who was a good deal better than he was even early on (Foster, presumably his mentor, only being so in terms of speed and positioning while being limited due to his health), or to observe during games from the bench did not do as much for his development as playing in actual games and making mistakes would have during the same period of time in my opinion.

If he has only improved half as much as the glowing media reports are leading fans to believe so far this off season due to both working with Walton as well as having developed quickness and stamina through a combination of the relatively unconventional training he has received as well as proper management of both his asthma and better self administration of his asthma medication, it bodes extremely well for both Roy and the franchise. Go Roy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

With respect to Larry Bird, his main over-arching job is to create expectations in the fanbase that will sell tickets and enable the franchise to increase the amount it is able to charge for those tickets, as well as making the team a better on the floor product for increased television ratings and increase franchise revenues (thereby paring its overall losses) as a result. He does that through player acquisitions and departures, statements to the media regarding both player and team performance (including the coach whom he has publicly supported) wherein he manages fan expectations, and providing guidance for player development expectations in an effort to balance current performance vs. the future of the franchise. However, he also has made statements, IIRC, that playing time is up to the coach.

If he, as President of Basketball Operations, did not realize what the product on the floor was capable of, including the coaching staff, he should have been fired, which I don't personally believe. He has repeatedly said that he has expected to make the playoffs, and with proper roster utilization and change in strategic focus, the goal of making the playoffs would likely have been achieved in my opinion, especially during the first two seasons of O'Brien's tenure here.

I also believe that Bird (or others more directly responsible for the financial aspects of the franchise) realized that public perception of the fiscally struggling franchise would be damaged further in the eyes of the taxpaying citizens of the Indianapolis metropolitan area who currently are helping to support this private enterprise if the team were to both pay the coach (who has not met the level of expectations of either player development or actual on the floor performance) as well as any replacement interim coach coming from outside the franchise. Like Bird, I feel that both of the first two seasons the team underperformed, especially defensively (in complete contrast to your beliefs, obviously), and should have made the playoffs, while this past year the injury to Danny would have cost the team several games had he simply had his playing time reduced concommitant with the severity of his injury, let alone the more significant hit his playing time made to team performance, in my opinion, because of his being ineffective and damaging to team performance stemming from his reduced ability to defend (probably contributing to his reduced role with Team USA also due to a lack of lateral quickness even at this point) or effectively drive to the basket during a large portion of the season, reducing him to being an ineffective perimeter shooter whose shots often were the equivalent of turnovers due to the lack of offensive rebounding available at any given time due to the philosophy of "spacing the court" on offense by having the team's best rebounder (statistically) on the perimeter a good portion of the time. This made playoff expectations iffy given that circumstance, all other things being equal (and obviously all other things are never equal, let alone this past year), especially with little discernible change in strategy in the face of the available talent pool of the available players given their injuries or ("doghouse" status) at various points during the season.

In my opinion, Bird may have also recognized that Lester Conner, who he would have been forced to hire due to those same fiscal concerns, does not share the same vision of the game that Bird apparently has. Therefore, Bird has little option but to stand pat and do his best to muddle through until the franchise is in better overall condition fiscally, and has both a roster of available players who have future potential as well as the financial flexibility required after the dust settles with the new CBA to acquire the players the next coach believes to be beneficial to a system that can be competitive in today's NBA, which actually has very little to do with playing a style that was played by Team USA at the world championships. At the professional level in the NBA, unless you have at least one defensively superior presence in the low post (including, but not limited to, rebounding), coupled with an elite presence or two at the wing positions who can both drive and finish as well as hit the occasional 3 when needed, you cannot win the championship. We shall see if Bosh can live up to the hype in Miami on the interior, and I have my doubts, but they may be able to overcome that if they can figure up how to divide touches of the single ball that is still currently being used in the NBA amongst the "Decider" trio.

Yes, a team can make the playoffs with the fast paced perimeter based strategy the Pacers currently employ, and many teams do, most notably Phoenix (which actually is not a realistic comparison due to the fact that they utilize more of a passing oriented game overall due in no small part to the best pg of the modern era from a court vision standpoint, Steve Nash) who simply have lacked interior defense during their prominence, and last year Orlando, who didn't utilize enough drives to the basket and relied on the 3 pointer too much and therefore didn't get by the Celtics (Stan Van Gundy has always been a good coach in my opinion, but he failed his team in the playoffs last spring in my opinion, and I would think he learned from the experience).

To repeat, I hope you continue to post here despite rarely agreeing with the philosophies of basketball that you are a proponent of or your interpretation of the meaning of statistics regarding team and player performance at times. Even in disagreement, it is possible to learn from one another, and I, for one welcome the opportunity. Please, come back when the opportunity presents itself for you from a time standpoint.

Unclebuck
09-20-2010, 09:02 AM
So, a serious question, followed by rhetorical questions, about Josh. What was it that actually limited his court time? Was it his passing and court vision? Was it his energy and hustle? Was it his on the ball defense that disrupted the flow of the opposition in many instances that he was on the floor in meaningful minutes? Obviously, in my opinion, it was the fact he couldn't hit mid and long range jumpers because of the theory that he has to do that to "space the court", the rest of his developing game be d***ed. That much has been made clear by O'Brien in the media. Are there other off court issues with him that haven't been revealed? A yes or no will suffice, if you are privy to that information.



I do not intend to get into a long discussion back and forth about Josh, but the biggest reason why he was limited in playing time was he often times had no idea what he was supposed to be doing in the team defense. Often times not in the right position. Sure he made the spectacular play, but then he followed that up with 4 or 5 straight plays were he wasn't where he should have been. He did get better later in the season and Jim said Josh's improvement in knowing where to be defensively during practice led to his increased playing time. (he also had similar problems on offense - but not as glaring)

McKeyFan
09-20-2010, 09:05 AM
Was it Dunleavy who said some guys on the team didn't know where to be on the court?

Speed
09-20-2010, 10:08 AM
Was it Dunleavy who said some guys on the team didn't know where to be on the court?

Ya, I remember him eluding to this.

Brad8888
09-20-2010, 10:19 AM
I do not intend to get into a long discussion back and forth about Josh, but the biggest reason why he was limited in playing time was he often times had no idea what he was supposed to be doing in the team defense. Often times not in the right position. Sure he made the spectacular play, but then he followed that up with 4 or 5 straight plays were he wasn't where he should have been. He did get better later in the season and Jim said Josh's improvement in knowing where to be defensively during practice led to his increased playing time. (he also had similar problems on offense - but not as glaring)

I appreciate your response, as well as your frustration about Josh, another sore subject.

I am sorry that posting questions (rhetorical or otherwise) about a player who could be at least be a significant NBA backup with the right coach, if not early season starter even this year for the Pacers (who am I kidding, Granger will be at the 4 unless Josh hits 40% from the arc in practice with Dahntay in his grill) somehow has offended you. I realize that you have never cared much for Josh as a player, IIRC you don't feel he should be in the NBA but I could be mis-remembering, but there are those of us here who do like him and feel he is already a valuable contributor (as you know, I am not completely alone in this sentiment even among longer term posters).

Unless and until Hansbrough gets back into NBA condition and learns to make far better shooting and passing decisions than he showed last year (which may never happen if Hansbrough never receives official clearance to play despite his participating in contact basketball per Peck's source without being cleared by the franchise to do so, with my guess being that the reason the franchise won't acknowledge it is that they want to leave the whole medical retirement and insurance coverage options on the table for as long as possible because they fully realize how unlikely it probably is for him to actually be able to return given the duration of his condition), Josh is at least in line to get consistent backup minutes for some position (whatever you want to call it in the O'Brien system, a "wing 4" (?) because at least Josh can get to the rim and finish unlike Murphy who was just a "stretch 4") between the high post paint and the halfcourt line (unless O'Brien chooses to use Posey due to Josh not getting up a volume of threes with a mindset like Reggie Miller or Larry Bird and shooting those 3's with a high accuracy and that Posey is a trusted veteran who played for O'Brien previously).

Short answer, Josh could play 15 minutes per game if O'B doesn't use Posey or bench Josh for not hitting 3's when Granger is played at the 3. He is worth talking about whether you want to or not, IMO, which is what I attempted to do.

Who am I actually kidding with this entire post. As I continue to think about it, the position of the 4 is going to be a combination of Granger and Posey unless Hansbrough gets to play because that is who O'Brien is as a coach. McRoberts is an actual high energy power forward with NBA skills at that position, therefore he will not get playing time because a traditional 4 has no place in the current system on either end of the court. He is not Walker, Posey, Murphy, or anything like any of them.

This is veering dangerously in the direction of another touchy subject, discussing our coach, so I guess I will just stop right now.

Unclebuck
09-20-2010, 10:51 AM
I am sorry that posting questions (rhetorical or otherwise) about a player who could be at least be a significant NBA backup with the right coach, if not early season starter even this year for the Pacers (who am I kidding, Granger will be at the 4 unless Josh hits 40% from the arc in practice with Dahntay in his grill) somehow has offended you.

Brad, I was not offended in the least. I certainly hope I don't come across as someone who gets offended easily

Brad8888
09-20-2010, 10:55 AM
Brad, I was not offended in the least. I certainly hope I don't come across as someone who gets offended easily

May just be my attitude this morning, thanks for the heads up.

OakMoses
09-20-2010, 11:29 AM
I'll chip in.

Full disclosure upfront: I like Jim O'Brien.

I completely agree that Josh McRoberts is good enough to be a 15 mpg player for many NBA teams. I wanted him to play more last season, and I thought, for the most part, he played fairly well when he did play.

What I saw when I watched Josh, however, was that he is not good off the ball offensively. I'd even go so far as to say he's worse than Foster. If he does not have the ball or is not fighting for an offensive rebound, he doesn't really do much at all. He can't consistently make an open jumper. He doesn't cut or screen particularly well. There are similar issues on defense. He's a good on ball defender, especially against perimeter 4's. He's a good weak side shotblocker. Other than those two things, he seemed frequently out of position.

By the way, I don't think there's any problem with criticizing the coach. I think what O'Bird is responding to is the name-calling and baseless credibility attacks that are often made.