PDA

View Full Version : It Kills Me To See McRoberts On Bench?



presto123
01-12-2011, 02:10 AM
When I started watching the Pacers again this year for the first time in a long time the first thing I noticed was Josh's energy and athleticism. I just assumed that he wasn't that great. Even though he played at Carmel and I'm from Noblesville I never really followed his game. Now I think he's very close to being a very good player. He's improved his outside shot and he's always been athletic if he could work on his D and the little things he's almost there. That being said you can't tell me he deserves ZERO minutes. Is he in O'Briens doghouse or something. Jeff Foster has been on the floor a lot lately and he has zero athleticism. He gets a few boards here and there but it's painful to watch him offensively. I noticed that the teams ball movement is instantly better when Josh is in the game. It was funny that tonight's poll question on the broadcast was which of Josh's dunks were the best. All the while showing him sitting on the bench. I'm not a McRoberts fanboi by any stretch but this has got me puzzled?

CableKC
01-12-2011, 02:18 AM
I can understand Foster getting some minutes....but I don't see why we can't run a Hibbert/Foster/Hansbrough/McBob Frontcourt rotation.

presto123
01-12-2011, 02:28 AM
I can understand Foster getting some minutes....but I don't see why we can't run a Hibbert/Foster/Hansbrough/McBob Frontcourt rotation.

California Pacer fan? Are you originally from around here?

special ed
01-12-2011, 02:30 AM
I can understand Foster getting some minutes....but I don't see why we can't run a Hibbert/Foster/Hansbrough/McBob Frontcourt rotation.Not certain anyone understands any rotation. The only thing one can guess is that guys are being shopped.

CableKC
01-12-2011, 02:34 AM
California Pacer fan? Are you originally from around here?
Nope....just an out of State Pacer fan since "8 points in 9 seconds". ;)

Pacerfan
01-12-2011, 02:34 AM
McBob looked so uncomfortable on the bench in ATL. I really felt bad for him.

presto123
01-12-2011, 02:37 AM
Nope....just an out of State Pacer fan since "8 points in 9 seconds". ;)


I will always remember that!!! I just about had a heart attack and the whole neighborhood probably heard me scream:)

CableKC
01-12-2011, 02:39 AM
Not certain anyone understands any rotation. The only thing one can guess is that guys are being shopped.
Foster being shopped?

Possibly....but not likely. Every GM knows what Foster can and can't do.

It's likely that the reason Foster is playing ( and McBob isn't ) is because of the same reason that he was heavily used 2 seasons ago....because Foster is JO'Bs Frontcourt security blanket.

Psyren
01-12-2011, 03:02 AM
My guess is just because JOB loves his veterans.

Also, Josh has very little offensive ability. Jeff does as well, but when you give Josh easy open shots in the paint he just doesn't score the ball very well. At least we know Jeff can hit his layups.

I'm a big Josh fan, but also, Jeff just has a way with rebounding. Which the Pacers are beyond awful at. Josh just seems out of control when trying to rebound half the time.

spazzxb
01-12-2011, 04:22 AM
Don't bash foster over Mcroberts. The issue is small ball and Danny taking Mcroberts minutes (via George). Josh was inactive the other night so I definitely get someone thinking WTF, but foster isn't the issue. Foster took Solo's minutes and I am happy for that. Argue about Posey getting Josh's minutes the other night, I even scratch my head at that one but foster deserves some respect.

Lance George
01-12-2011, 06:22 AM
I'd take Josh over Posey, but right now both Psycho T and Feisty Foster are outplaying McBobby.

Pacerized
01-12-2011, 08:55 AM
I'd take Josh over Posey, but right now both Psycho T and Feisty Foster are outplaying McBobby.

I agree with this. I'd like to see Josh play over Posey, but as long as we aren't playing small ball I'm happy with Hibbert, Tyler, and Foster. Last nights overall rotation wasn't bad.

MTM
01-12-2011, 09:15 AM
I attended the OKC overtime game at Conseco the night after Thanksgiving, and that night the 53 minutes of PF were divided exclusively between McRoberts (24) and Posey (29). I had attended with my son, who had hoped to get a glimpse of Tyler (he's been a fan of Tyler from his UNC days because we live nearby and caught a lot of his games on tv). Tyler and Foster got DNP-CD. Solomon Jones played 16 minutes.

The problem I have with trying to be a fan is the fact that guys will rubber-band between 29 minutes and DNP-CD for no particular reason. Players need continuity, but so do fans. We are trying to invest ourselves in a team, and when the personnel are shifting around so dramatically without regard to injury, then it is tough to stay on board.

MyFavMartin
01-12-2011, 09:20 AM
We won.

Foster was terrific last night. He's a tremendous offensive rebounder and very good defender.

Maybe this will spur McBob to be more nasty on the defensive end of the court?

flox
01-12-2011, 09:22 AM
It kills me to see McRoberts playing.

johndozark
01-12-2011, 09:54 AM
I want to see a reliable Hibbert/Foster (approximately equal now, but with Hibbert getting up to 36 minutes as soon as he works through his current funk) center rotation and a reliable Hansbrough/McRoberts (in whichever order works best, but approximately equal minutes) PF rotation with S. Jones as a backup for either position as needed.

joeyd
01-12-2011, 10:13 AM
Geez, can we please agree to stop bashing Foster, or any player for that matter, if the criticism is not warranted? How in the world can you say he has zero athleticism? He was 4-5 shooting and nearly had a double-double last night, has a very good block per and steals per game line this season, and his offensive boards are accounting for roughly 5 extra points per game. Painful to watch him offensively? Gets a few rebounds here and there? Have you checked his FG% this season and compared it to the other bigs? Have you figured what he'd get in rebounds if he played more minutes? Admittedly he had an exceptional night of shooting as far as % goes, but simply put, the guy is doing what he is supposed to do, and he has been doing better than the other people that your intimate should have his minutes. I like McBob. I think there is room for him in the rotation. But your comments, at least about Jeff, are not supported by facts.

Also, your thread title? Is that a question or a statement?

Pacerblue
01-12-2011, 10:21 AM
It is puzzling how he went from starter to not even playing.

smj887
01-12-2011, 10:24 AM
I think Foster is playing at least as well as McRoberts, and don't mind seeing him out there. I don't really like McRoberts getting DNP-CD'ed because I love how any second he can give us a highlight dunk, but I'd rather see the team go with whatever gives them the best chance to win, whether it's Foster or McBob.

But for the sake of being a crazed conspiracy theorist, Foster is playing because the Pacers want to show GM's around the league that he's healthy so that they can ship him out of town in the next few weeks. It's also a move to keep McRoberts' value low, GM's around the league won't want to give a good contract to a guy who got benched and DNP'ed for half the season, giving the Pacers the ability to retain him at a much lower price.

luis3ep
01-12-2011, 10:27 AM
im actually really happy to not see posey playing much lately.. miss his 3 pointers though, but god i'm glad he's not playing defence right now.

xIndyFan
01-12-2011, 10:34 AM
josh does a lot of thing ok. nice passer, runs the floor, moves the ball, nice handle for a big, sees the floor pretty well, rebounds in space, will block a shot, decent finisher, good hands, great nasty attitude on the court, plays with lots of emotion. lots of things. but he is not a good rebounder in traffic, not a good defender in the post and not a low post scorer. in other words he doesn't do well most of the things a PF has to do. some of that can be fixed with practice and some with more time in the weight room. josh still can be a good player, but he is not there yet. jeff is a better player and so is tyler. so they play and he sits. when he gets to be a better player in the post, my guess is we will see more of him since his intangibles are good.

presto123
01-12-2011, 12:56 PM
josh does a lot of thing ok. nice passer, runs the floor, moves the ball, nice handle for a big, sees the floor pretty well, rebounds in space, will block a shot, decent finisher, good hands, great nasty attitude on the court, plays with lots of emotion. lots of things. but he is not a good rebounder in traffic, not a good defender in the post and not a low post scorer. in other words he doesn't do well most of the things a PF has to do. some of that can be fixed with practice and some with more time in the weight room. josh still can be a good player, but he is not there yet. jeff is a better player and so is tyler. so they play and he sits. when he gets to be a better player in the post, my guess is we will see more of him since his intangibles are good.


Good post. That was my point. If he keeps his head on straight I think Josh has the potential with a little work to be better than all our big guys in the long run. You can coach defense and the little things but you can't coach athleticism. Still not a big fan of Foster but to each his own. I realize our need for rebounding. But you can't compare Foster's FG%. All his points are layups or dunks. He can't put the ball on the floor at all or shoot from the perimeter. Yeah we need that nasty guy inside and maybe this will inspire Josh to step up to the plate with rebounding and defense. Especially since Tyler has come on strong as well.

Eleazar
01-12-2011, 02:30 PM
I'm going with the AJ Price theory for McRoberts not playing. JOB can't stand the idea of playing two young players at the same position for the majority of the game.

Sookie
01-12-2011, 02:50 PM
I'm going with the AJ Price theory for McRoberts not playing. JOB can't stand the idea of playing two young players at the same position for the majority of the game.

This is essentially it. We can't have two young guys holding up a position. One of them must be a vet.

Not that Foster hasn't played well, he has, but we can have a four post rotation and alternate Posey and Solo on the inactive list.

joeyd
01-12-2011, 02:51 PM
Good post. That was my point. If he keeps his head on straight I think Josh has the potential with a little work to be better than all our big guys in the long run. You can coach defense and the little things but you can't coach athleticism. Still not a big fan of Foster but to each his own. I realize our need for rebounding. But you can't compare Foster's FG%. All his points are layups or dunks. He can't put the ball on the floor at all or shoot from the perimeter. Yeah we need that nasty guy inside and maybe this will inspire Josh to step up to the plate with rebounding and defense. Especially since Tyler has come on strong as well.

Not to purposely be argumentative, but you CAN compare Foster's FG%. Actually, not all of Jeff's points are layups and dunks this season. Actually, I don't remember too many dunks---I remember more jumpers. But let's say that they predominantly were all layups and dunks. You can make the comparison between FG%, at least with Josh, because pretty much all I remember from Josh were predominantly layups and dunks. To me, it doesn't matter how a person contributes in regard to scoring, as long as they do what they need to do and satisfy expectations.

BlueNGold
01-12-2011, 04:08 PM
I'm fine with McRoberts on the bench, as long as he's sitting there with Posey and Solo.

Trophy
01-12-2011, 04:20 PM
We needed a change at PF and we're finally giving our best option at the position a chance to show what he can bring.

Tyler's more effective and does what a PF should. He's aggressive, he's a decent post defender.

Josh is a decent PF, but not the answer to start.

beast23
01-12-2011, 04:51 PM
...But for the sake of being a crazed conspiracy theorist, Foster is playing because the Pacers want to show GM's around the league that he's healthy so that they can ship him out of town in the next few weeks. It's also a move to keep McRoberts' value low, GM's around the league won't want to give a good contract to a guy who got benched and DNP'ed for half the season, giving the Pacers the ability to retain him at a much lower price.BS 1 - Foster isn't going anywhere. Not that all PD member would agree with it, but he wants to retire a Pacer, considering the respect Bird has for Foster, Foster will be retained at least through season's end.

BS 2 - JOB doesn't give two craps about McRoberts perceived value around the league. All he wants to do is win games. Now, we may disagree with the players and how he uses the players to accomplish that goal, but all JOB cares about is winning games. His ability to receive an extension depends on it. He only states whether or not he would want to retain a player, he has absolutely nothing to do with how much said player might receive. Not his problem; not his job.

presto123
01-12-2011, 05:06 PM
Not to purposely be argumentative, but you CAN compare Foster's FG%. Actually, not all of Jeff's points are layups and dunks this season. Actually, I don't remember too many dunks---I remember more jumpers. But let's say that they predominantly were all layups and dunks. You can make the comparison between FG%, at least with Josh, because pretty much all I remember from Josh were predominantly layups and dunks. To me, it doesn't matter how a person contributes in regard to scoring, as long as they do what they need to do and satisfy expectations.


Excuse me? Josh has made a lot of 3 pointers this year. He's actually a pretty decent 3 point shooter. I don't want to argue either but that's one of the first things I noticed this year was his improved shot. Hibbert on the other hand needs a lot of work. Not saying he can't do it. Look at the shooter that Smits became. But Hibbert throws up way too many shots that have NO CHANCE of going in. Wasted possessions. I like Roy's work ethic so I'm sure down the road he will get there.

joeyd
01-12-2011, 05:29 PM
Excuse me? Josh has made a lot of 3 pointers this year. He's actually a pretty decent 3 point shooter. I don't want to argue either but that's one of the first things I noticed this year was his improved shot. Hibbert on the other hand needs a lot of work. Not saying he can't do it. Look at the shooter that Smits became. But Hibbert throws up way too many shots that have NO CHANCE of going in. Wasted possessions. I like Roy's work ethic so I'm sure down the road he will get there.

Hey, I didn't say that 100% of Josh's shots were layups. I've seen him shoot 3's. But come on! Josh is the fifth best 3 point shooter on the team in terms of 3pt% at 35%. He has 17 three's this year in 30 games played. A lot of 3 pointers through a third of the season, as you maintain? Probably would not say that. He would rank 87th in the league in the 3 pt% category. Decent? Maybe. Pretty decent? Highly debatable! Great? No! Josh's overall shooting percentage is decent. Several folks have mentioned what he brings to the team and I generally concur. There are enough minutes so that the guy should play some. Certainly in place of Posey, b/c his 3 pt percentage is higher. But that's all that I am willing to concede right now.

speakout4
01-12-2011, 06:44 PM
Excuse me? Josh has made a lot of 3 pointers this year. He's actually a pretty decent 3 point shooter. I don't want to argue either but that's one of the first things I noticed this year was his improved shot. Hibbert on the other hand needs a lot of work. Not saying he can't do it. Look at the shooter that Smits became. But Hibbert throws up way too many shots that have NO CHANCE of going in. Wasted possessions. I like Roy's work ethic so I'm sure down the road he will get there.
No one would call Josh a good 3 point shooter and no smart coach would put him out there. This is getting preposterous talking about PFs as 3 point shooters.

QuickRelease
01-12-2011, 08:34 PM
No one would call Josh a good 3 point shooter and no smart coach would put him out there. This is getting preposterous talking about PFs as 3 point shooters.:laugh:

presto123
01-12-2011, 09:23 PM
No one would call Josh a good 3 point shooter and no smart coach would put him out there. This is getting preposterous talking about PFs as 3 point shooters.


I guess O'Brien must be real smart then. You and he think alike:dance:

speakout4
01-12-2011, 09:50 PM
I guess O'Brien must be real smart then. You and he think alike:dance:Why don't you just make Josh a 2? That also makes sense.

Mackey_Rose
01-13-2011, 07:17 AM
Here is what bothers me the most about Josh getting benched: There was no reason for it.

If you look at the 5 games before his minutes started getting consistently reduced, statistically he was actually playing one of his best stretches of the season. In those 5 games:

He averaged 25.6 minutes per game. 11 points per game. 5.6 rebounds per game. 4.4 assists per game. 1.6 blocks per game. He shot 18-35, good for 51.4% from the field. 10-18 from the behind the three-point line, 55.5% from 3 and 75% from the free throw line.

Per 36 minutes, which is the standard for the a starting NBA player, he averaged 15.5 points per game, 7.9 rebounds per game, 6.2 assists per game, and 2.25 blocks per game.

The only number that you could really complain about was his rebounding. I would complain about more than half of his shot attempts being threes, but that is what JOB wants him to do. How do you bench a guy for doing what you ask?

He blocked shots, and recorded assists at a very high level. He was also very efficient shooting the ball offensively.

If you look at his per 36 numbers, it becomes more apparent that his numbers decreasing, are the effect of his minutes decreasing, rather than the cause. Would most people be happy with 15, 8, 6, and 2 from the starting power forward? Probably, but apparently JOB wasn't. It didn't make sense why his minutes were reduced, especially at the time, because Hansbrough wasn't getting any burn either.

Now he is racking up the DNP-CD's, and there doesn't seem to be any reason for that either. I probably shouldn't worry about it, because it isn't like Josh is the only player this has ever happened to with JOB, and as long as he keeps getting coaching jobs, he won't be the last player it happens to. He does things for no reason, and as I said last night, there is no point in trying to find the logic in the illogical.

Maybe the Pacers have decided that they don't want him back after this season. Perhaps the front office told JOB, "well he had his chance, we've seen what we need to see, let's move on." That seems unlikely, since the front office have had several more pressing issues that they could have stepped in and done something about before, and never have. But if the Pacers did have any interest in signing him this offseason, this certainly is not going to help their cause. I wouldn't blame him, at all, for leaving for greener pastures.

johndozark
01-13-2011, 08:04 AM
Hansbrough and McRoberts are our two best options at PF. Whichever one starts, each ought to be getting at least twenty minutes per game, and the one who is having the best game ought to get twenty-eight. They bring different skill sets and different weaknesses, but both are improving and need fairly steady playing time. Posey ought to be playing zero minutes most games, and what minutes he gets should be as the fifth to seventh wing, never as power forward.

presto123
01-13-2011, 10:23 AM
Here is what bothers me the most about Josh getting benched: There was no reason for it.

If you look at the 5 games before his minutes started getting consistently reduced, statistically he was actually playing one of his best stretches of the season. In those 5 games:

He averaged 25.6 minutes per game. 11 points per game. 5.6 rebounds per game. 4.4 assists per game. 1.6 blocks per game. He shot 18-35, good for 51.4% from the field. 10-18 from the behind the three-point line, 55.5% from 3 and 75% from the free throw line.

Per 36 minutes, which is the standard for the a starting NBA player, he averaged 15.5 points per game, 7.9 rebounds per game, 6.2 assists per game, and 2.25 blocks per game.

The only number that you could really complain about was his rebounding. I would complain about more than half of his shot attempts being threes, but that is what JOB wants him to do. How do you bench a guy for doing what you ask?

He blocked shots, and recorded assists at a very high level. He was also very efficient shooting the ball offensively.

If you look at his per 36 numbers, it becomes more apparent that his numbers decreasing, are the effect of his minutes decreasing, rather than the cause. Would most people be happy with 15, 8, 6, and 2 from the starting power forward? Probably, but apparently JOB wasn't. It didn't make sense why his minutes were reduced, especially at the time, because Hansbrough wasn't getting any burn either.

Now he is racking up the DNP-CD's, and there doesn't seem to be any reason for that either. I probably shouldn't worry about it, because it isn't like Josh is the only player this has ever happened to with JOB, and as long as he keeps getting coaching jobs, he won't be the last player it happens to. He does things for no reason, and as I said last night, there is no point in trying to find the logic in the illogical.

Maybe the Pacers have decided that they don't want him back after this season. Perhaps the front office told JOB, "well he had his chance, we've seen what we need to see, let's move on." That seems unlikely, since the front office have had several more pressing issues that they could have stepped in and done something about before, and never have. But if the Pacers did have any interest in signing him this offseason, this certainly is not going to help their cause. I wouldn't blame him, at all, for leaving for greener pastures.


Great post. Josh's future potential to be a good player is sidetracked at the moment:mad:

Mackey_Rose
01-13-2011, 01:20 PM
Just to reiterate this point, in the 5 games before his minutes started being reduced, Josh averaged per 36 minutes:

15.5 points per game
7.9 rebounds per game
6.2 assists per game
2.25 blocks per game

Anyone have an explanation for why he was benched? If anything those numbers would indicate that he should have been playing more. Coincidentally (maybe) in the 15 games since his minute reduction, the Pacers have gone 5-10.

Eleazar
01-13-2011, 01:51 PM
Just to reiterate this point, in the 5 games before his numbers started being reduced, Josh averaged per 36 minutes:

15.5 points per game
7.9 rebounds per game
6.2 assists per game
2.25 blocks per game

Anyone have an explanation for why he was benched? If anything those numbers would indicate that he should have been playing more. Coincidentally (maybe) in the 15 games since his minute reduction, the Pacers have gone 5-10.

That was also when Hibbert started to struggle.

Mackey_Rose
01-18-2011, 05:58 AM
Time to give this thread a :bump:

Josh has now played 4 minutes in the last 6 games, including 5 DNP-CD's. This is the same guy who started 29 games already this season. I would love to hear a valid basketball reason why this is the case, but I really don't think there is one. It makes zero sense how someone can go from starting nearly every game, to consistent DNP-CD's, virtually overnight. So you don't want to start him? Fine, bring him off the bench. There is no reason why you can't play both Hansbrough and McRoberts. It is a serious issue I have with JOB. The obvious fact that is not capable of finding a role for them both, on this team, is a very telling problem. It isn't hard. Power forward is a a position of weakness. They are the two best power forwards. Duh. It is so simple. Yet he can't do it. The fact that he has been able to climb the ranks of the coaching world and attain a head coaching position in the NBA, yet can't figure out a way to play both of his two best power forwards is ridiculous.

It just doesn't make any sense. Especially considering yesterday's game against the Clippers.

Does anyone out there seriously think that giving Josh a chance against Griffin wouldn't have been worth a shot? Anybody? Please explain this one to me Unclebuck or flox, I really don't get it. "He would have fouled him." He could have fouled him 6 times in 6 possessions for all I care. It isn't like what we were doing was working. How do you not try something else?

Maybe hack-a-Griffin would have been the best way to go. I mean seriously, he is only a 60% free throw shooter. He shot 80% from the field yesterday, so I'd be willing to take my chances with him at the line, rather than just bending us over and laughing as he goes about his business. Josh gives us a lot more athleticism, length, and lateral quickness than we had at the position yesterday, but at the very least, he gives us 6 more fouls we could have used.

I think he is probably the best option we have to defend a guy like Griffin. Some of you might disagree, but he definitely isn't the sixth or seventh best option.

In the first Clippers game, McRoberts and Hansbrough got a combined 44 minutes and combined for 10 points and 13 rebounds. Griffin had 12 points and 8 rebounds. Essentially they stalemated him.

Yesterday, they (Hansbrough) got 16 minutes to contribute 2 points and 3 rebounds, while Griffin went wild for 47 points and 13 rebrounds. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that Griffin won the power forward match-up yesterday. It isn't Hansbrough's fault. He should have played more. He wasn't very effective against Griffin, but he wasn't any less effective than Posey, Foster, Granger, or Hibbert.

Would McRoberts have been less effective against him? It would almost be impossible to be any less effective! He had 47 points on 24 shots! Yet we did nothing differently to try to stop him. JOB just went into his "The Thinker" pose and watched it happen.

Maybe after Griffin eclipsed the 40 point mark, JOB would have thought, "you know what, this isn't working. Maybe we should try something different. Maybe we should double team him. Maybe I should put my most athletic big guy in against him."

Nope. He just left Posey man-on-man against the beast that is Blake Griffin, and let him take a vicious pounding. This is a broken record at this point, but I'm not knocking James Posey. It wasn't his fault. It was just another crystal clear example of the horrible in-game coaching of Jim O'Brien. He is simply not capable of putting his team in the best position to win basketball games. He is unable to make in-game adjustments, and he is unable to best utilize his roster.

So I ask you Unclebuck or flox, please for the sake of my sanity, explain this one to me. I can't see any reason how that was the best move, but I'm sure you both did. Please, help me see the light.

Mackey_Rose
01-18-2011, 06:19 AM
Now that I got that rant out of the way, I thought I would try to explain the mysterious disappearance of Josh McRoberts myself. If anyone else has any theories or explanations, please post them, because it is a very curious development.

Based on the numbers, it can't possibly be on-the-court related. So it must be something else:

Theory 1) The Pacers front office decided they don't want to re-sign him after this season. They would rather try to spend the money on a top-tier free agent at the power forward position (Randolph and West are really the only two) and keep Hansbrough as the long-term back-up. Bird, Morway, and Simon have told JOB not to bother playing him, as he isn't a part of the future.

Theory 2) He is about to be traded. I'm sure the Pacers are doing everything they can to work out a deal before the trade deadline. They have several valuable trade pieces. However, from what I've heard, the entire NBA is pretty much in a holding pattern, when it comes to making trades, until a Carmelo Anthony deal is finalized. Once Melo is either traded or signs his extension with Denver, then things can start to happen. Perhaps the Pacers have worked out a deal with somebody, and Josh is a part of that deal. It is possible that the team acquiring him does not want him to risk injury by playing in games.

Theory 3) A combination of theory 1 and theory 2. This is what I'm inclined to believe. The Pacers have decided he probably doesn't work into their future plans, and he might get traded soon. They are probably not actively shopping him, but they know that, more than likely, they don't want him after this season anyway. His contract is low enough that he is an easy piece to throw into any possible deal, and he could be valuable sweetener to help move one of the other expiring contracts. If he gets hurt, his value is basically nothing. Once the trade deadline passes, if he is still a part of the team, then they will start playing him again and re-evaluate him for the future.

1984
01-18-2011, 07:52 AM
I'm not a McRoberts fanboi by any stretch but this has got me puzzled?

I'm Ron Burgandy?

http://sebastian.sbecerra.org/2009/10/14/anchorman5.jpg

hoopsforlife
01-18-2011, 07:56 AM
I think JOB is holding him until he decides to make that usual late season run that puts us out of a great draft pick into the 13th position.

Cherokee
01-18-2011, 08:11 AM
FROM Mackey_Rose (http://www.pacersdigest.com/apache2-default/member.php?u=14728):

"Here is what bothers me the most about Josh getting benched: There was no reason for it.

If you look at the 5 games before his minutes started getting consistently reduced, statistically he was actually playing one of his best stretches of the season. In those 5 games:

He averaged 25.6 minutes per game. 11 points per game. 5.6 rebounds per game. 4.4 assists per game. 1.6 blocks per game. He shot 18-35, good for 51.4% from the field. 10-18 from the behind the three-point line, 55.5% from 3 and 75% from the free throw line."

-------

And if you look at Tyler's last 5 games, you get:
Minutes: 16 per game
FG: 17-36 (47.1%)
3PT: 0-0
FT: 8-9 (88.9%)
Reb.: 23 (4.6 per game)
Ast: 5 (1.0 per game)
Stls: 3 (0.6 per game)
TO: 9 (1.8 per game)
Blocks: 2 (0.4 per game)
Blocks Against Him: 2 (0.4 per game)
PPG: 7.0

Therefore, while there isn't much difference, JOB's stated reason of needing more offense as the reason for the move does not hold up. Also, don't forget the fact that Josh moves the ball, while Tyler tends to hold it while trying to decide what to do with it.

Further, why did JOB have Josh shooting from long distance all the time while allowing Tyler to not shoot any 3s.

Don't get me wrong, I like Tyler, too, but it makes no sense to take Josh out of the lineup for no significant gain. Further, Roy plays a lot better with Josh at his side. When Josh's minutes started to diminish (about 8 min. per game), Roy's funk deepened and has not yet recovered.

Also, in the past two games, Tyler has been a swinging door on defense.

DrFife
01-18-2011, 08:14 AM
Theory 2) He is about to be traded. I'm sure the Pacers are doing everything they can to work out a deal before the trade deadline. They have several valuable trade pieces. However, from what I've heard, the entire NBA is pretty much in a holding pattern when it comes to making trades, until a Carmelo Anthony deal is finalized. Once Melo is either traded or signs his extension with Denver, then things can start to happen. Perhaps the Pacers have worked out a deal with somebody, and Josh is a part of that deal. It is possible that the team acquiring him does not want him to risk injury by playing in games.

I love this theory, even though I'd be in favor of re-signing Josh. IMO, we'll need five decent-to-great bigs in order to contend: Player X, (a matured) Hibbert & Hans, a back-up center better than Solo, and McBob would do nicely.

However, if three players must be inactive and usually two of them will be Stephenson and DJones, shelving AJ as well would leave us quite thin in the backcourt, and PGeorge clearly is showing his potential, so a big it must be. JOB may have decided that Solo is a tad better backing up Hibbert, and Posey gives a different look from Hans by shooting the 3 (as well as veteran non-handshaking leadership) ... so unless/until a trade (or injury) shakes up the roster, or unless/until Josh starts shooting better than Posey or scoring better than Hans, he (McBob) goes to the shelf.

Cherokee
01-18-2011, 08:32 AM
so unless/until a trade (or injury) shakes up the roster, or unless/until Josh starts shooting better than Posey or scoring better than Hans, he (McBob) goes to the shelf.

I like that theory as well; however, keep in mind McBob has shot better than Posey all season and his scoring is equal to Tyler's on the season. (Albeit Josh has averaged more minutes per game, though).

Mackey_Rose
01-18-2011, 08:45 AM
Therefore, while there isn't much difference, JOB's stated reason of needing more offense as the reason for the move does not hold up. Also, don't forget the fact that Josh moves the ball, while Tyler tends to hold it while trying to decide what to do with it.

Further, why did JOB have Josh shooting from long distance all the time while allowing Tyler to not shoot any 3s.

Don't get me wrong, I like Tyler, too, but it makes no sense to take Josh out of the lineup for no significant gain. Further, Roy plays a lot better with Josh at his side. When Josh's minutes started to diminish (about 8 min. per game), Roy's funk deepened and has not yet recovered.

Also, in the past two games, Tyler has been a swinging door on defense.

I hate to make this about Josh vs. Tyler, because that is definitely not the issue here. The issue is that both of them aren't being played consistently extensive minutes, as they should be.

But if you compare the numbers, you are right, it doesn't hold up. Taking the last 6 games that Hansbrough has started, because I think it would be unfair to just selectively discount the Spurs game when he had his huge night, it still doesn't.

Per 36 minutes, Hansbrough has posted:

17.3 points per game
9.3 rebounds per game
1.6 assists per game
1.1 blocks per game

I understand everyone got excited about the Spurs game. 23 points and 12 rebounds is very impressive, and I am not discounting that. He played great, but those aren't numbers that he can produce long-term, in my opinion. He hasn't in the five games since then, but he also hasn't come close to getting the 36 minutes he got in that game. Another fine example of how little performance relates to playing time with JOB in charge.

When you compare the 6 game stretch that Hansbrough has started and the 5 game stretch before McRoberts' minutes were reduced, Hansbrough has posted:

2 more points per game
1 more rebound per game
4.5 less assists per game
1 less block per game

I said at the time, I didn't think the addition of Hansbrough into the starting lineup really added much to the offense. I think it just changed it. You can argue that it has helped Collison, but I think that has more to do with him simply having more freedom to play his game

Individually, the addition of Hansbrough over McRoberts has actually hurt the offense. He has scored 1 more basket per game, while accounting for 4.5 less baskets on assists alone. This analysis doesn't even take into account how much more movement and off-the-ball screening that McRoberts contributed to the offense.

Again, I'm sorry to have veered off course, this isn't about McRoberts vs. Hansbrough. This is about the fact that JOB is unable to play both McRoberts and Hansbrough, when they both are needed, and they both contribute different things. Start McRoberts, and let him play his game. Try to get Hibbert back on track, like he was in November. Bring Hansbrough off the bench as a much needed scoring punch with the second unit.

Maybe I'm just wrong, but I think it seems blatantly obvious.

Unclebuck
01-18-2011, 08:50 AM
Mackey - I didn't see the game against the Clippers, so I cannot comment.

I do think going back and looking at the prior game is useless though.

Mackey_Rose
01-18-2011, 09:06 AM
Mackey - I didn't see the game against the Clippers, so I cannot comment.

I do think going back and looking at the prior game is useless though.

Consider yourself lucky. My eyes still hurt.

You can discount that whole section if you think that is a useless venture, and the argument still holds up.

Giving Josh a DNP-CD while Griffin was doing what he was doing is absurd. Just as it was absurd against Josh Smith, and absurd he never got a chance in the 2nd half against Stoudamire.

Mackey_Rose
01-18-2011, 09:24 AM
It kills me to see McRoberts playing.

Apparently, this thread kills flox too much, and is not worth his time defending JOB for the indefensible.

flox
01-18-2011, 09:27 AM
Apparently, this thread kills flox too much, and is not worth his time defending JOB for the indefensible.

What do you want me to say? I don't even know why I have to defend him for not playing a marginal player. Why what even prompted you to even post that?

I don't understand what you want from me.

BRushWithDeath
01-18-2011, 09:39 AM
What do you want me to say? I don't even know why I have to defend him for not playing a marginal player. Why what even prompted you to even post that?

I don't understand what you want from me.

Marginal or not, when a player is his team's best option at a position he should play. When the best option is a 23 year old on a rebuilding team, he should pay a ton.

Unclebuck
01-18-2011, 09:48 AM
OK, as I said I didn't watch the game. But I just watched on NBA.com highlights of every FG Griffin made. He only scored two baskets on Posey and one was a pick and roll (and I think a switch with Foster) the other one was a 17 ft jumper over Posey.

Assuming what NBA.com has is correct I cannot believe all of the complaining over 4 points scored on Posey.

Overall it looked top me the pacers gameplan was to back of Griffin and make him hit the 15 ft jumpers and tonight he did hit them. Of the 15 FG made jeff was guarding him on about 11 or 12

That is one thing that bugs me. So many are yelling bloody murder about Jim having Posey defend Griffin. OK, how about instead of having a knee-jerk reaction to that why not do a little research and see how many times he scored over Posey. (as I mentioned I didn't see the game, so who knows maybe the pacers doubled when Posey was guarding him, but from reading the threads on here, I honestly figured that Griffin scored 20 points on Posey)

Peck
01-18-2011, 11:33 AM
I'm not sure that people in this case are yelling bloody murder about Posey on Griffin.

Nobody was working against him so Posey was no more or no less than what anyone else was doing.

However what I think people are upset about is that many people consider Josh McRoberts the second best paint defender on the team and for whatever reason he has gone from starter to DNP-CD.

Look I've not made any comments about yesterday's game because frankly there just isn't much to say. Griffin was just out of his mind outstanding and honestly Josh probably would have been rolled right along with the rest of the team.

But the issue is not one game, it is a philosophy if you will that some of us have issues with. I understand some of you don't, that's fine.

Also I have kept this to myself as well but at the last home game when Josh did get some min. on the floor he made a mistake and was taken out. Let's just say that Josh did not take this to well and I have a feeling that there is an issue between Josh & Jim right now. Vitaly had to keep patting him on the back trying to keep him calm, Foster stepped between Josh and O'Brien's view & it was obvious he was doing this on purpose & ultimately Dan Burke took Josh to the end of the bench and talked with him. Josh was red faced, cursing loudly.

Josh made mistakes that game, in fact he made quite a few and obviuosly he still has some issues with either maturity or anger.

Now of course the counter to this is that Josh may have every right to feel this way as Jim does have a double standard when it comes to mistakes and who can and who can not make them. But he is still the coach whether any of us like it or not.

At the end of the day having a discussion of the value of the playing time of Josh McRoberts tells you really what type of shape our club is in.

Mackey_Rose
01-18-2011, 11:39 AM
OK, as I said I didn't watch the game. But I just watched on NBA.com highlights of every FG Griffin made. He only scored two baskets on Posey and one was a pick and roll (and I think a switch with Foster) the other one was a 17 ft jumper over Posey.

Assuming what NBA.com has is correct I cannot believe all of the complaining over 4 points scored on Posey.

Overall it looked top me the pacers gameplan was to back of Griffin and make him hit the 15 ft jumpers and tonight he did hit them. Of the 15 FG made jeff was guarding him on about 11 or 12

That is one thing that bugs me. So many are yelling bloody murder about Jim having Posey defend Griffin. OK, how about instead of having a knee-jerk reaction to that why not do a little research and see how many times he scored over Posey. (as I mentioned I didn't see the game, so who knows maybe the pacers doubled when Posey was guarding him, but from reading the threads on here, I honestly figured that Griffin scored 20 points on Posey)

I watched the game. It doesn't matter whether he scored on Foster or Posey. Posey just had the unenviable task of defending him at the end in crunch time. The point is, neither of them are the best option for guarding Griffin, and that at no point did O'Brien show even an inkling of knowledge that Griffin was pretty much single-handedly destroying us. He had some help from EJ but the entire game was pretty much the Blake Show, and the Pacers, especially JOB, were nothing but spectators.

Is it not a problem that he scored 11 or 12 buckets on Foster because he isn't Posey? I'd say that's still a pretty big ****ing problem regardless of who he scored on. How do you, as a coach, sit back and allow that to happen without making an adjustment? It is preposterous that an NBA coach would let that happen.

It is a damn good thing you didn't watch the game, because I have no doubt that even your opinion of JOB's coaching prowess would have been greatly diminished. There was no way to watch the game without thinking the Pacers were being coached by a man way in over his head.

Unclebuck
01-18-2011, 11:56 AM
Jeff and Tyler are a better option defending Griffin than is Josh. Josh might be good helping out, double-teaming - but one-on-one he isn't very good

Mackey_Rose
01-18-2011, 11:58 AM
Jeff and Tyler are a better option defending Griffin than is Josh. Josh might be good helping out, double-teaming - but one-on-one he isn't very good

You aren't even addressing the issue by saying this. Frustrating.

Peck
01-18-2011, 11:59 AM
Jeff and Tyler are a better option defending Griffin than is Josh. Josh might be good helping out, double-teaming - but one-on-one he isn't very good

I know you don't want to go look at previous games but how is it that Josh managed to keep Griffin in check in thier first meeting?

Now having said that I will freely admit that Griffin has grown as a player and I do NOT believe that Josh would have had much if any more success than any one else.

pacer4ever
01-18-2011, 12:24 PM
I know you don't want to go look at previous games but how is it that Josh managed to keep Griffin in check in thier first meeting?

Now having said that I will freely admit that Griffin has grown as a player and I do NOT believe that Josh would have had much if any more success than any one else.

No offense but Blake just played horrible that game so did the whole clipper team. I may be mistaken but i remember that Blake scored all his 12 in the first half.He didnt play very much in the 2nd game was out of reach.

Peck
01-18-2011, 12:35 PM
No offense but Blake just played horrible that game so did the whole clipper team. I may be mistaken but i remember that Blake scored all his 12 in the first half.He didnt play very much in the 2nd game was out of reach.

He did play bad, I grant you that. Also I will restate that he has grown by leaps and bounds as a player since that game and I am not implying at all that I believe Josh would have stopped him or even slowed him down yesterday.

However in that first game Josh did the only thing he could do against Griffin and he is the only player on our team capable of doing it. Jeff can not jump high enough anymore and Roy is not fast enough and never will be.

BTW, when Tyler was on Griffin to begin the game I also think he did as good a job as he could do as well.

Griffin was just F'n unbelievable. One of the best games I've ever seen by a player. Not the best but certainly one of the best.

That is not a slam at O'Brien, Posey or any of my other usual targets, it's just a statement that Blake Griffin was on a mission and we were his victims.

PR07
01-18-2011, 12:38 PM
I feel like the Pacers should have at least tried McRoberts on Griffin. After all, he was the human highlight reel against everyone else, and even if that doesn't change, at least you can say you exhausted all of your options.

presto123
01-18-2011, 12:41 PM
Saw Griffin here and there in college and while he was great I didn't think it would totally transfer to the NBA. Man was I wrong. I always knew he could sky but he's actually quicker than I thought he was. How long will he be with the Clippers?

pacer4ever
01-18-2011, 12:45 PM
Saw Griffin here and there in college and while he was great I didn't think it would totally transfer to the NBA. Man was I wrong. I always knew he could sky but he's actually quicker than I thought he was. How long will he be with the Clippers?

They arent letting him go. 4 yrs plus the max offer he gets as a RFA which the clippers could match. so a long time. Probly life if they keep deandre eric and the other guys he likes so much

Hicks
01-18-2011, 12:52 PM
IMO, the best 3 defenders we could throw at Blake, in no particular order, are Tyler, Jeff, and Josh. To not use all three when all three are available is bad coaching.

presto123
01-18-2011, 12:55 PM
They arent letting him go. 4 yrs plus the max offer he gets as a RFA which the clippers could match. so a long time. Probly life if they keep deandre eric and the other guys he likes so much


I didn't mean he would come here. Just a shame to be stuck on the Clippers for that long. LA's after-thought team:laugh:

pacer4ever
01-18-2011, 12:57 PM
I didn't mean he would come here. Just a shame to be stuck on the Clippers for that long. LA's after-thought team:laugh:

Stuck? they have one of the best young cores in the NBA if sterling doesnt F up they will win a few championships. They have the Twolves pick next year which wil give them even more star talent in next yrs very deep draft.

presto123
01-18-2011, 01:07 PM
Stuck? they have one of the best young cores in the NBA if sterling doesnt F up they will win a few championships. They have the Twolves pick next year which wil give them even more star talent in next yrs very deep draft.


Well if the Tampa Bay Bucs can be a joke for so long and still win a Super Bowl then I suppose it's possible for the Clippers as well. I still can't picture it though. Wouldn't that be weird if they became more popular in LA than the Lakers down the road after Kobe retires?:-o

CableKC
01-18-2011, 01:10 PM
I'm not sure that people in this case are yelling bloody murder about Posey on Griffin.

Nobody was working against him so Posey was no more or no less than what anyone else was doing.

However what I think people are upset about is that many people consider Josh McRoberts the second best paint defender on the team and for whatever reason he has gone from starter to DNP-CD.

Look I've not made any comments about yesterday's game because frankly there just isn't much to say. Griffin was just out of his mind outstanding and honestly Josh probably would have been rolled right along with the rest of the team.

But the issue is not one game, it is a philosophy if you will that some of us have issues with. I understand some of you don't, that's fine.

Also I have kept this to myself as well but at the last home game when Josh did get some min. on the floor he made a mistake and was taken out. Let's just say that Josh did not take this to well and I have a feeling that there is an issue between Josh & Jim right now. Vitaly had to keep patting him on the back trying to keep him calm, Foster stepped between Josh and O'Brien's view & it was obvious he was doing this on purpose & ultimately Dan Burke took Josh to the end of the bench and talked with him. Josh was red faced, cursing loudly.

Josh made mistakes that game, in fact he made quite a few and obviuosly he still has some issues with either maturity or anger.

Now of course the counter to this is that Josh may have every right to feel this way as Jim does have a double standard when it comes to mistakes and who can and who can not make them. But he is still the coach whether any of us like it or not.

At the end of the day having a discussion of the value of the playing time of Josh McRoberts tells you really what type of shape our club is in.
I really think that this is the case....something is going on between McBob and JO'B....which can only explain and justify why McBob is sitting now. The question is whether the "punishment" is legit or not. Given some in-game posts about McBob getting emotional during games and the reported cursing here and there...I wouldn't be surprised if JO'B did bench him due to some issue/disagreement/argument between the two.

Not that it matters...I don't think that McBob is going to re-sign with the Team anyway.

CableKC
01-18-2011, 01:15 PM
Jeff and Tyler are a better option defending Griffin than is Josh. Josh might be good helping out, double-teaming - but one-on-one he isn't very good
I know that we are talking about hypotheticals....but if McBob did play and he did double-team Griffin ( which he appears to be good at )...I would have lived with a double-team of Griffin alongside Foster and force him to pass the ball out to DeAndre Jordan then let Foster/Tyler/Posey/Granger go one-on-one with Griffin ( which wasn't working anyway ).

pacer4ever
01-18-2011, 01:17 PM
I know that we are talking about hypotheticals....but if McBob did play and he did double-team Griffin ( which he appears to be good at )...I would have lived with a double-team of Griffin alongside Foster and force him to pass the ball out to DeAndre Jordan then let Foster/Tyler/Posey/Granger go one-on-one with Griffin ( which wasn't working anyway ).

To be fair Yesterday i dont think anyone but god could of stoped Blake he was playing insane.

CableKC
01-18-2011, 01:27 PM
To be fair Yesterday i dont think anyone but god could of stoped Blake he was playing insane.
I ( and many here ) don't think that Griffin could have been stopped.....at most...we could have slowed him down...or ( at the very least ) make him work for his points.

It's possible that McBob could have done as well as Murphy defending Griffin....but we won't know...cuz DESPITE BEING AN OPTION on the bench and JO'B throwing the Kitchen Sink and everything else EXCEPT for McBob himself at Griffin....the problem that we have is that he chose not to try and we will never know.

If we were out of the game by the 3rd QTR...then I'd have no problem with not using McBob....but we were still in the game with 5-6 minutes left in the 4th QTR where Coaching decisions and the players performance matters. The mere fact that he did not explore ALL the options....tells you something....either it was bad Coaching...or IMHO...that McBob is being punished for one reason or another.

Unclebuck
01-18-2011, 01:32 PM
You aren't even addressing the issue by saying this. Frustrating.

what is the issue - I bet I already addressed it in my other comments.

beast23
01-18-2011, 01:47 PM
IMO, the best 3 defenders we could throw at Blake, in no particular order, are Tyler, Jeff, and Josh. To not use all three when all three are available is bad coaching.I would probably agree with the 3 you have selected.

But, I am of the opinion that it is possible to take vritually any player in the league out of the game offensively. That's not saying that you will not be killed by one or more of the 4 other players on the court, but at least you can stop any one single player from scoring.

So, once it was obvious that Blake was killing us, and that apart from EJ no else really mattered, why is it that our illustrious coach simply didn't call for a double team on Blake every single time the ball even remotely went his direction?

I'd much rather get beaten by forcing the opponent to pass the ball than by giving an opposing player a career game.

Peck
01-18-2011, 01:52 PM
I would probably agree with the 3 you have selected.

But, I am of the opinion that it is possible to take vritually any player in the league out of the game offensively. That's not saying that you will not be killed by one or more of the 4 other players on the court, but at least you can stop any one single player from scoring.

So, once it was obvious that Blake was killing us, and that apart from EJ no else really mattered, why is it that our illustrious coach simply didn't call for a double team on Blake every single time the ball even remotely went his direction?
I'd much rather get beaten by forcing the opponent to pass the ball than by giving an opposing player a career game.

The L.A. commentators were asking the very same thing.

Unclebuck
01-18-2011, 01:54 PM
I agree, I would criticize Jim for not double teaming. Obvously 1 player (no matter who it was) wasn't going to stop Blake yesterday.

Since86
01-18-2011, 01:56 PM
But yet you won't criticize him for not even attempting to try Josh.

Interesting.

Unclebuck
01-18-2011, 02:04 PM
But yet you won't criticize him for not even attempting to try Josh.

Interesting.

I've said many times that I think Josh should backup Roy and play 12-15 minutes per game. And maybe I might have tried Josh on Griffin, but that would have been after Jeff and Tyler had their turn. But as I watched the highlights of every made FG it looked to me more of a team breakdown than an individual defender breakdown. No way Blake scores 40 points on the Celtics and I don't care who is guarding him one-on-one - they could put Ray Allen on him and the Celtics team defense would step up and do the job. That is what I criticize the pacers for not doing

Hicks
01-18-2011, 02:07 PM
What got me and Gnome while we were watching is that Jim didn't even double team Ike Diogu. It's not that Ike was a big threat, but Jim knew from their time together in Indiana that a double team destroys Ike. Why not abuse that?

Let me be clear: I don't complain about this to say that doing it would have resulted in a win, but it bugs me when very doable steps to improve your chances at success (try Josh, double Blake, double Ike) are not followed.

BRushWithDeath
01-18-2011, 02:10 PM
I've said many times that I think Josh should backup Roy and play 12-15 minutes per game. And maybe I might have tried Josh on Griffin, but that would have been after Jeff and Tyler had their turn. But as I watched the highlights of every made FG it looked to me more of a team breakdown than an individual defender breakdown. No way Blake scores 40 points on the Celtics and I don't care who is guarding him one-on-one - they could put Ray Allen on him and the Celtics team defense would step up and do the job. That is what I criticize the pacers for not doing

Yet you have already said Josh is a good help defender. Wouldn't that have helped our team defense?

I don't think it's going out on a very long limb to say that it would, or at the very least could, have.

Unclebuck
01-18-2011, 02:12 PM
Yet you have already said Josh is a good help defender. Wouldn't that have helped our team defense?

I don't think it's going out on a very long limb to say that it would, or at the very least could, have.

I thought I said that - I would have played Josh backing up Roy.

Since86
01-18-2011, 02:32 PM
Okay, you've said that Josh would have been a good option. But where is the criticism for not doing it?

You say he would be a good option, once Tyler and Jeff had their turn. When would it been obvious to Jim, in your opinion, that they weren't cutting it and he needed to try something else?

That's the point. You keep telling us why Josh wasn't/isn't a good option, in your opinion, because he lacks lateral quickness. I disagree but for the sake of the argument I'll conceed it.

EDIT: Maybe in your mind acknowleding the fact that Josh should get 12-15mins, in a general statement, is your criticism. But from my position, when you keep telling us why you don't think Josh would have worked, that's giving Jim an excuse as to why he didn't even attempt to switch things up.

Mackey_Rose
01-18-2011, 02:47 PM
what is the issue - I bet I already addressed it in my other comments.

The lack of making an adjustment. And no, you didn't. You are so focused on defending Jim through Hell or high water, that I'm not even sure you know what you are defending half the time.

pacer4ever
01-18-2011, 02:53 PM
What got me and Gnome while we were watching is that Jim didn't even double team Ike Diogu. It's not that Ike was a big threat, but Jim knew from their time together in Indiana that a double team destroys Ike. Why not abuse that?

Let me be clear: I don't complain about this to say that doing it would have resulted in a win, but it bugs me when very doable steps to improve your chances at success (try Josh, double Blake, double Ike) are not followed.

and leave who open?? Im sry but if we cant guard Ike without doubleing we are in trouble. If you were to double any one it would be Blake. Let the pg double and if Baron kills u shooting so be it he is a pretty bad shooter.

Sookie
01-18-2011, 02:59 PM
and leave who open?? Im sry but if we cant guard Ike without doubleing we are in trouble. If you were to double any one it would be Blake. Let the pg double and if Baron kills u shooting so be it he is a pretty bad shooter.

It's not doubling Ike because we can't handle him. It's doubling Ike because he can't handle being doubled.

AKA, he gets the ball..we double team him..and see if it'll create a turnover.

pacer4ever
01-18-2011, 03:04 PM
It's not doubling Ike because we can't handle him. It's doubling Ike because he can't handle being doubled.

AKA, he gets the ball..we double team him..and see if it'll create a turnover.

I relize that but Vinney would have bench IKe it wouldnt have made a differnce doubling blake could have.

Johnny Strange
01-18-2011, 03:13 PM
I donít believe Josh is a starting NBA power forward. I donít think any of the Pacer's power forwards are NBA starters you can consistently count on. I do think Josh has the ability to have a long NBA career as a backup getting 15-20 minutes per game.

I donít think JOB tells Josh to play so far away from the basket. If you watched him in HS or at Duke that is where he has always wanted to play. There are not many 6'10" guys with his athleticism. I think he negates his own strengths by playing away from the basket. Teams have to guard Tyler and he draws fouls. Teams even have to guard Posey because the view him as an outside threat. They donít have to guard him with a good defender but they do extend out on him. Foster and Solo play inside while Josh primarily plays away from the basket. Other teams donít really have to guard Josh. I think this is what frustrates JOB and why he is not playing.

He should be working on his mid range game. He is an incredible ball handler for a big guy yet he never tries to drive on bigger PFs. He doesnít have a pull up jumper. I think he has the ability to be a tough matchup for bigger PF if he presented the offensive threat to either drive on them or drive and hit a pull up jumper. While he has moments where he picks up early fouls I actually think he played pretty good defense. I donít remember anybody abusing Josh offensively. When his guy scored it was usually because Josh had to come help someone else.

There is no way he shouldnít get any minutes. He must have told JOB to eat $**t.

PR07
01-18-2011, 03:33 PM
Josh, by in-large, has the best combination of speed and athleticism of all our frontcourt. Unlike the rest of our bigs, athletically...he's at least in the same gymnasium as Blake Griffin.

Yes, Blake Griffin probably chews and spits him out, just like he did with everyone else, but why not see? At the very least, it gives JOB an excuse to say that he tried everyone. The fact that he played 0 minutes is alarming.

presto123
01-18-2011, 03:38 PM
Yeah....I think Josh and JOB have something going on. I hope he gave JOB a piece of his mind. Unfortunately Josh needs minutes right now to prove himself and develop. There is still a chance he will end up out of the NBA without this and that would be a shame. Still wouldn't kiss JOB's butt though. LOL!

Since86
01-18-2011, 03:40 PM
Josh never played at the 3pt line at Duke. He played the high post, at the elbow. He averaged 0.5 attempts from 3 per game for his entire career.

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/basketball/players/46499

That's about 15 per season, total. You can close to that many just off of the shot clock winding down and last second full court prayers. Let's stay factual.

And really, you don't think Jim asked him to shoot 3s? So he spent all summer working on 3s because of why exactly? I'm curious.

Hicks
01-18-2011, 03:43 PM
and leave who open?? Im sry but if we cant guard Ike without doubleing we are in trouble. If you were to double any one it would be Blake. Let the pg double and if Baron kills u shooting so be it he is a pretty bad shooter.

Like Sookie said, even if it's just one play, you do it because it will likely disrupt the possession, possibly leading to a turnover. No reason not to.

As for who to leave open? Whomever is furthest way from the ball over on the weak side, giving your help D its best chance to recover if/when the ball is reversed.

pacer4ever
01-18-2011, 03:48 PM
Like Sookie said, even if it's just one play, you do it because it will likely disrupt the possession, possibly leading to a turnover. No reason not to.

As for who to leave open? Whomever is furthest way from the ball over on the weak side, giving your help D its best chance to recover if/when the ball is reversed.
Then like i said Vinney adjust and ethieer benches him or just doesnt give him the ball. He scored a lot on 2nd chance pts and just effort. It wasn't like he was posting us up every time. But he did post us up a few times.

Sookie
01-18-2011, 03:51 PM
Then like i said Vinney adjust and ethieer benches him or just doesnt give him the ball. He scored a lot on 2nd chance pts and just effort. It wasn't like he was posting us up every time. But he did post us up a few times.

Yes, but I think it's always good to make another coach adjust to your plan.

He wants to play Ike. We force him not to. That's a good thing.

Since86
01-18-2011, 03:52 PM
Then like i said Vinney adjust and ethieer benches him or just doesnt give him the ball. He scored a lot on 2nd chance pts and just effort. It wasn't like he was posting us up every time. But he did post us up a few times.

The whole point of defense is to make the offense do something they don't want to do.

If Vinny takes him out and puts in someone else, it either makes him play someone longer minutes wearing them down or it forces him to play someone he wasn't wanting to play at that moment.

I don't know why it would be a bad idea. It forces them to do something that they didn't want to do. That's a good thing. Even if you only do it for one or two possessions.

pacer4ever
01-18-2011, 03:54 PM
Yes, but I think it's always good to make another coach adjust to your plan.

He wants to play Ike. We force him not to. That's a good thing.

Doubling Blake would have been smarter

Bball
01-18-2011, 03:55 PM
Josh never played at the 3pt line at Duke. He played the high post, at the elbow. He averaged 0.5 attempts from 3 per game for his entire career.

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/basketball/players/46499

That's about 15 per season, total. You can close to that many just off of the shot clock winding down and last second full court prayers. Let's stay factual.

And really, you don't think Jim asked him to shoot 3s? So he spent all summer working on 3s because of why exactly? I'm curious.


Even if Capt Contradiction didn't specifically require/request McRoberts spend the summer working on his 3 point shooting it would be a natural progression considering the things Capt Contradiction ultimately proves he wants out of his PF's... I've seen nothing on the court in O'Brien's tenure that tells me he doesn't love him some stretch forward action... What would anyone expect Josh to think he needed to work on to improve his place in the rotation?

O'Brien gets the team his coaching actions ultimately indicates he wants... Whether that is the best basketball team they could be is debatable...

Hicks
01-18-2011, 04:02 PM
Then like i said Vinney adjust and ethieer benches him or just doesnt give him the ball.

Good. You want to force them to do things they'd otherwise not do.

pacer4ever
01-18-2011, 04:06 PM
Good. You want to force them to do things they'd otherwise not do.

I assure u the clipper game plan isnt to get Ike scoring in the post. They are just thin till Kaman gets back.


I get what ur saying im just saying it really wouldnt of maid a differnce. Unless we figured a way to stop Blake we were losing that game.

Hicks
01-18-2011, 04:09 PM
Not all strategies involve huge gains/losses. Little things can add up. You seem to think I'm suggesting it would have made a big difference, and I'm not because I think it's likely to have caused very little change. But you still do it.

Sookie
01-18-2011, 04:45 PM
Not all strategies involve huge gains/losses. Little things can add up. You seem to think I'm suggesting it would have made a big difference, and I'm not because I think it's likely to have caused very little change. But you still do it.

You get two turnovers/fast break layups and then Vinny is forced to adjust.

That's an eight point swing (Instead of them score 4, we get the 4) and we're making the other team adjust to us.

It's little..but it's not.

Gamble1
01-18-2011, 05:24 PM
I think its safe to say that we don't make big in game adjustments. If a guy is killing us JOB simply throws a different defender on him.

I would have like to see more double teams and a lot more fouls on Blake to make him earn his points on the stripe. Letting him get 3 point plays is just stupid. Hack the man early and often. He's only shooting 60 % from the stripe anyway.

On a side note I wonder how many players have career highs against us. We seem to make a lot of players look pretty good.

beast23
01-18-2011, 05:58 PM
... Capt Contradiction ...

Hmm, think you are onto something there.

Love the pseudoname.

spazzxb
01-18-2011, 06:03 PM
What got me and Gnome while we were watching is that Jim didn't even double team Ike Diogu. It's not that Ike was a big threat, but Jim knew from their time together in Indiana that a double team destroys Ike. Why not abuse that?

Let me be clear: I don't complain about this to say that doing it would have resulted in a win, but it bugs me when very doable steps to improve your chances at success (try Josh, double Blake, double Ike) are not followed.

I see you agree with me on the double Ike thing. :)I mentioned it at least twice in the game thread.

Hibbert
01-18-2011, 06:28 PM
It kills me to see McRoberts playing.

Same thing can be said for Dunleavy.

xIndyFan
01-18-2011, 06:36 PM
obviously i am in the minority here, but i just don't see the 'good defender' part of josh's game. in fact, i don't see anything except some rebounds in josh's game that says PF. most of his game is more like an oversized SF without a good jump shot. josh is not a good defender in the post. his technique seems ok, but he is not strong enough to keep anyone out of position. does he have a low post offensive game? can he post anyone? i don't remember it happening. lack of things like that magnify rotational mistakes on defense.

i don't know if josh is in the future plan of the pacers or not. if not, he should be. but he is not yet a ready for prime time player in the paint. except against teams with a weak inside game. jmo, but josh needs to spend some time in the weight room, some time learning how to defend from jeff and some time with anyone who can show him some good low post moves.

right now, josh is more athletic than skilled. or at least bigs skilled. he has lots of non-big skills that will make him a valuable player if and when he is able to play in the paint, but right now i just don't see a PF in josh. :shrug:

PacerGuy
01-18-2011, 07:37 PM
Josh, by in-large, has the best combination of speed and athleticism of all our frontcourt. Unlike the rest of our bigs, athletically...he's at least in the same gymnasium as Blake Griffin.

Yes, Blake Griffin probably chews and spits him out, just like he did with everyone else, but why not see? At the very least, it gives JOB an excuse to say that he tried everyone. The fact that he played 0 minutes is alarming.

110% THIS!

Posey again? Really? Did Amare not show you enough?
Posey didn't shake Blake's hand because he's "old school", it was because he didn't get a hand on him defensively all game, why would he want to do so after the game?

Johnny Strange
01-18-2011, 10:21 PM
The NBA is all about Wins and Losses. Here is the Pacers record when Tyler, Josh, Posey, Foster, and Solo get 15+ minutes.

Solo 6-4 win 60%
Tyler 7-6 win 53%
Josh 13-14 win 48%
Posey 8-15 win 35%
Foster 3-8 win 38%

Just based on that I would say that Solo should back up Roy and Tyler and Josh should get most of the PF minutes

Eleazar
01-19-2011, 12:10 AM
The NBA is all about Wins and Losses. Here is the Pacers record when Tyler, Josh, Posey, Foster, and Solo get 15+ minutes.

Solo 6-4 win 60%
Tyler 7-6 win 53%
Josh 13-14 win 48%
Posey 8-15 win 35%
Foster 3-8 win 38%

Just based on that I would say that Solo should back up Roy and Tyler and Josh should get most of the PF minutes

There is one thing you have to ask is why did Solo get so many minutes in those games. It is probably because those are the only game he was actually playing well, and when he is playing well there isn't as much of a drop off from Hibbert to him as there is when he is playing like ****. If Solo got 15+ minutes in every game I can guarantee his record would be the worst because he just doesn't play that well that often.

spazzxb
01-19-2011, 04:04 AM
There is one thing you have to ask is why did Solo get so many minutes in those games. It is probably because those are the only game he was actually playing well, and when he is playing well there isn't as much of a drop off from Hibbert to him as there is when he is playing like ****. If Solo got 15+ minutes in every game I can guarantee his record would be the worst because he just doesn't play that well that often.

Solo played Monday because Hibbert had 5 fouls in 12 minutes. Solo appears to be our third string center behind Hibbert and Foster. I think Josh is the backup 4, but this is only if we don't play smallball.

Unclebuck
01-19-2011, 09:18 AM
The NBA is all about Wins and Losses. Here is the Pacers record when Tyler, Josh, Posey, Foster, and Solo get 15+ minutes.

Solo 6-4 win 60%
Tyler 7-6 win 53%
Josh 13-14 win 48%
Posey 8-15 win 35%
Foster 3-8 win 38%

Just based on that I would say that Solo should back up Roy and Tyler and Josh should get most of the PF minutes

I think your stat is meaningless. I looked it up a week ago or so and in the wins Granger averages 34 minutes per game and in the losses around 40 minutes per game. just for fun I checked I think Dwight Howard and he averaged about 4 minutes per game in the losses then in the wins. So using your logic the pacers should play Granger less and the Magic should play Dwight less.

Posey is going to play more in games the Pacers struggle. Several games this season he hasn't played until the 3rd quarter, but Posey is used often when the pacers are down big.

xIndyFan
01-19-2011, 09:51 AM
The NBA is all about Wins and Losses. Here is the Pacers record when Tyler, Josh, Posey, Foster, and Solo get 15+ minutes.

Solo 6-4 win 60%
Tyler 7-6 win 53%
Josh 13-14 win 48%
Posey 8-15 win 35%
Foster 3-8 win 38%

Just based on that I would say that Solo should back up Roy and Tyler and Josh should get most of the PF minutes

jeff is the pacers best big right now. not sure it is even close, he is like the only real NBA level big on the team. that seems clearly obvious from watching the games. any stat that has him as the worse player. [ok, 2nd worse] is meaningless.

the rotation the pacers are currently using is about a good as this team can do until they get another legit NBA big or two on the team. :shrug:

Unclebuck
01-19-2011, 10:00 AM
Just a funny note: I was listening to the AM 1070 Sunday morning local sports talk show. A guy called in and claimed to be a longtime season ticket holder. he was railing against the Pacers and went on a rant about how the Pacers have the third worst FG% in the NBA. He then suggested what is even worse is that the pacers are so bad that they infect the opponent (and how does he know this) because our oppenents shoot also third worst in the NBA.

He never mentioned that maybe the Pacers pretty good defense is a factor - no he said the pacers were so bad they infected the other teams.

I would hope no one in this forum would think like that

vnzla81
01-19-2011, 10:07 AM
I think your stat is meaningless. I looked it up a week ago or so and in the wins Granger averages 34 minutes per game and in the losses around 40 minutes per game. just for fun I checked I think Dwight Howard and he averaged about 4 minutes per game in the losses then in the wins. So using your logic the pacers should play Granger less and the Magic should play Dwight less.

Posey is going to play more in games the Pacers struggle. Several games this season he hasn't played until the 3rd quarter, but Posey is used often when the pacers are down big.

So you are saying that Posey is the opposite of a victory cigar? Is like trowing the white flag without trowing the white flag?

BillS
01-19-2011, 10:09 AM
He never mentioned that maybe the Pacers pretty good defense is a factor - no he said the pacers were so bad they infected the other teams.

THAT'S IT!!!!

It really isn't playing ability OR coaching, it is some Player Zero on the team with a "bad shooting" virus, a 24-hour bug with a 5 minute incubation period but that bestows no immunity and can be caught over and over again.

We need to find the source and get rid of it.

Who could it be ...

Unclebuck
01-19-2011, 10:13 AM
So you are saying that Posey is the opposite of a victory cigar? Is like trowing the white flag without trowing the white flag?

I think in a lot of games this year Posey has been used as sort of a "last ditch effort" - in certain games he's been thrown out there as nothing else has worked and well lets see if Posey can give us a spark.

vnzla81
01-19-2011, 10:40 AM
I think in a lot of games this year Posey has been used as sort of a "last ditch effort" - in certain games he's been thrown out there as nothing else has worked and well lets see if Posey can give us a spark.

I think it makes sence to bring somebody who's average is 5.6 ppg to bring some spark of the bench......

joeyd
01-19-2011, 10:58 AM
The NBA is all about Wins and Losses. Here is the Pacers record when Tyler, Josh, Posey, Foster, and Solo get 15+ minutes.
Solo 6-4 win 60%
Tyler 7-6 win 53%
Josh 13-14 win 48%
Posey 8-15 win 35%
Foster 3-8 win 38%
Just based on that I would say that Solo should back up Roy and Tyler and Josh should get most of the PF minutes

UB has already made some valid points. For a coach to base playing time only on the above stat would be a bad move. Also, consider that the bulk of Solo's and Josh's minutes came earlier in the season when Hibbert and Granger were hitting a higher percentage of their shots. The bulk of Foster's minutes were logged during slumps by Roy and Danny. You could argue that the change in personnel/rotations in some way caused the slumps, but that is simply not supported by hard evidence, as most will admit that there is no way Roy and Danny should have been missing so many open shots.

Johnny Strange
01-19-2011, 11:16 AM
The thread was trying to figure out why McRoberts is not playing and not dressing. Based on all the data it doesnt make sense. Earlier threads indicate his stats projected out to 36 minutes of playing time are solid. Minutes based on W and L are solid. For those that prefer efficiency rating found on NBA.com here you go:

Josh 10.84
Foster 10.31
Tyler 7.36
Posey 6.39
Solo 5.09

The thread was why Josh is sitting? Not why Granger is stinking it up and Hibbert is a head case. I have no idea. Those two guys went south about the same time JOB started jacking with the rotation and publicly putting down players to the press. As it pertains to Josh, it appears that both statistically and in the W/L department it would benefit the team to play him. The games are certainly more fun to watch with Josh playing. The team is terrible and getting worse!

Mackey_Rose
01-19-2011, 11:51 AM
jeff is the pacers best big right now. not sure it is even close, he is like the only real NBA level big on the team. that seems clearly obvious from watching the games. any stat that has him as the worse player. [ok, 2nd worse] is meaningless.

the rotation the pacers are currently using is about a good as this team can do until they get another legit NBA big or two on the team. :shrug:

I often see things written on here about "The Legend of Josh McRoberts." Allow me to introduce you to, "The Legend of Jeff Foster."

In January, when Foster has been averaging 22.4 minutes per game, Foster has posted the All-Star level numbers of:

4.3 points per game
7.7 rebounds per game
2.0 assists per game
0.4 blocks per game

Per 36 minutes his numbers are:

6.9 points per game
12.4 rebounds per game
3.2 assists per game
0.7 blocks per game

We are 2-5 in that stretch.

In games that Foster plays more than 0 minutes, we are 4-13.

Think about that. When Foster plays we are 4-13. When Foster doesn't play, we are 12-9.

Anthem
01-19-2011, 12:00 PM
Solo played Monday because Hibbert had 5 fouls in 12 minutes. Solo appears to be our third string center behind Hibbert and Foster. I think Josh is the backup 4, but this is only if we don't play smallball.
Nope, Posey's the backup PF. Josh is third-string C and third-string PF.

Mackey_Rose
01-19-2011, 12:16 PM
jeff is the pacers best big right now. not sure it is even close, he is like the only real NBA level big on the team. that seems clearly obvious from watching the games. any stat that has him as the worse player. [ok, 2nd worse] is meaningless.

the rotation the pacers are currently using is about a good as this team can do until they get another legit NBA big or two on the team. :shrug:

Josh McRoberts:

15.5 points per game
7.9 rebounds per game
6.2 assists per game
2.25 blocks per game

Tyler Hansbrough:

17.3 points per game
9.3 rebounds per game
1.6 assists per game
1.1 blocks per game

Jeff Foster:

6.9 points per game
12.4 rebounds per game
3.2 assists per game
0.7 blocks per game

The individual numbers, combined with the win/loss records do not support this theory, one bit.

Mackey_Rose
01-19-2011, 12:19 PM
I think your stat is meaningless. I looked it up a week ago or so and in the wins Granger averages 34 minutes per game and in the losses around 40 minutes per game. just for fun I checked I think Dwight Howard and he averaged about 4 minutes per game in the losses then in the wins. So using your logic the pacers should play Granger less and the Magic should play Dwight less.

Posey is going to play more in games the Pacers struggle. Several games this season he hasn't played until the 3rd quarter, but Posey is used often when the pacers are down big.

Granger should absolutely play less minutes.

Since86
01-19-2011, 12:33 PM
This is all starting to really, and I mean really, bust me over the head.

I don't need all of Mackey's stats to prove to me that playing Josh, and playing the way they started the freaking season, is better than what is happening now. (although they do help when we are "debating" HAHA yeah right....)

It's pretty damn clear that there are a certain number of people who really don't give two ****s about stats, nor do they care about results. At this point in time it's more about saving face.

What a freaking shame.

The day Jim gets fired this board will instantly turn better. Not because Jim won't be discussed anymore, but because posters who I've though so highly of in the past will quit making all these excuses and defenses for a man who clearly doesn't know what in the hell he is doing.

The only way anything will ever be resolved is if Jim changes back, yeah right, and the Pacers start playing well again.

But if that does happen, I'm sure we will have to read about how well Josh "probably" was playing during practice and how Jim must have really liked what he might have been seeing.

Mackey_Rose
01-20-2011, 06:24 AM
Josh looked rusty out there last night. Understandably so. He hasn't played in like a month.

But it was just a further reminder that Josh and Tyler play well together. They have been effective every time they've been given the chance. They just haven't been given the opportunity nearly often enough.

That needs to be a weapon that we utilize on a regular basis.

Mackey_Rose
01-20-2011, 06:26 AM
By the way, when Foster plays we are now 4-14. .222

When Foster doesn't play, we are 12-9. .571

Hicks
01-20-2011, 11:04 AM
By the way, when Foster plays we are now 4-14. .222

When Foster doesn't play, we are 12-9. .571

I think this is almost worthless to keep track of. It gives Jeff way, way too much credit in either direction.

Mackey_Rose
01-24-2011, 12:51 AM
I think this is almost worthless to keep track of. It gives Jeff way, way too much credit in either direction.

When Foster plays we are now 4-16.

When Foster doesn't play we are 12-9.

You can say that gives Foster too much credit, but when you are a team with an average to below average level of talent, you have to maximize the talent that you do have. Our margin for error is very small.

Unfortunately we do not have a coach capable of maximizing that talent. Nor do we have a member of the front office willing to hold that coach accountable.

Both factors perpetuate this vicious cycle of mediocrity that we are stuck in, and will be stuck in until a change is made at the top.

goodlucksaturday
01-24-2011, 01:45 AM
When Foster plays we are now 4-16.

When Foster doesn't play we are 12-9.

I'll be honest and say I have no idea what that actually means.

When Hansbrough played 20+ minutes in November, the team was 5-0.

But since then, when Hansbrough plays 20+ minutes, the team is 1-6.

So do we play Hansbrough or not?

CableKC
01-24-2011, 03:54 AM
When Foster plays we are now 4-16.

When Foster doesn't play we are 12-9.

You can say that gives Foster too much credit, but when you are a team with an average to below average level of talent, you have to maximize the talent that you do have. Our margin for error is very small.

Unfortunately we do not have a coach capable of maximizing that talent. Nor do we have a member of the front office willing to hold that coach accountable.

Both factors perpetuate this vicious cycle of mediocrity that we are stuck in, and will be stuck in until a change is made at the top.
You also have to consider that the reason why Foster is playing so many minutes is because Hibbert has been sucking it up out there.

I do not agree with the notion that Hibbert should be pulled ( assuming that he doesn't have any foul trouble ) because he is struggling....but I do not think that it is a coincidence that Foster's increase in minutes co-incides with Hibbert's decline at the beginning of December.

Outside of the obvious notion that Foster is JO'Bs security Blanket at the Center spot....as long as Hibbert is not in foul trouble...he should be playing as many minutes to help boost his confidence but also allow him to learn from his experiences EVEN if he is getting owned by the Player he is defending. He has to learn one way or another.

Mackey_Rose
01-24-2011, 09:57 AM
I'll be honest and say I have no idea what that actually means.

When Hansbrough played 20+ minutes in November, the team was 5-0.

But since then, when Hansbrough plays 20+ minutes, the team is 1-6.

So do we play Hansbrough or not?

In the same role he had in November, coming off the bench behind McRoberts? Definitely.

JOB tried to fix something that wasn't broken and shattered it beyond repair.

Eleazar
01-24-2011, 01:50 PM
I'll be honest and say I have no idea what that actually means.

When Hansbrough played 20+ minutes in November, the team was 5-0.

But since then, when Hansbrough plays 20+ minutes, the team is 1-6.

So do we play Hansbrough or not?

The difference is in November McRoberts was also average 20+ minutes. The only way this team is going to win with this roster is to have a 1-2 punch at PF with Josh and Tyler. I'm willing to bet you would see Hibbert performing better if that happened too.

presto123
01-24-2011, 01:58 PM
The offense just flows better when Josh is on the floor. He is a good passer. That is so easy to see. If he would just get in the mind set to play better defense I would easily take Josh over Tyler and Jeff. But to get zero minutes on this team is just stupid. First thing I noticed this year was Josh's improved play.

Mackey_Rose
01-27-2011, 07:08 AM
When Foster plays we are now 4-17.

When Foster doesn't play we are 12-9.

The Pacers are 5-15 since Josh's minutes started being reduced.

They were 11-11 before that.

They started off December losing 3 of 5, and O'Brien panicked. It's been all down hill since then.

Unclebuck
01-27-2011, 08:44 AM
When Foster plays we are now 4-16.

When Foster doesn't play we are 12-9.



That stat means nothing in regards to Foster. Might say something about the team. But if you watched the magic game the pacers needed Foster on the floor for 48 minutes he was probably our most effective player

Mackey - those stats mean nothing. Granger averages more minutes in losses. Lebron James averages more minutes in losses, so does Dwight Howard. You are taking a very narrow view of things

Mackey_Rose
01-27-2011, 08:45 AM
That stat means nothing in regards to Foster. Might say something about the team. But if you watched the magic game the pacers needed Foster on the floor for 48 minutes he was probably our most effective player

I was at the Magic game. He wasn't even the most effective center.

Mackey_Rose
01-27-2011, 08:53 AM
Mackey - those stats mean nothing. Granger averages more minutes in losses. Lebron James averages more minutes in losses, so does Dwight Howard. You are taking a very narrow view of things

Have you noticed that Granger is one of the main problems, if not the biggest? He deserves a lot more of the blame for the losses than he gets around here.

He needs to be getting less minutes, especially when he is playing terribly has he has been for most of the past two months. This also is an indictment on O'Brien. He is quick to bash Roy for playing poorly, yet nary a word about how bad Granger has been.

Granger sets the tone defensively, which basically has meant that defense is non-existent. He sets the tone offensively, which basically has meant the team is going to chuck up as many bad shots as they can get their hands on.

Why is he immune to the JOB scrutiny?

Unclebuck
01-27-2011, 08:55 AM
I was at the Magic game. He wasn't even the most effective center.

he most certainly was the pacers most effective center. he was the most effective power forward also. How many times did he strip Howard and how many offensive fouls did he get on Howard and how come Howard said right after the game that Foster is a good defender.

Mackey_Rose
01-27-2011, 10:31 AM
he most certainly was the pacers most effective center. he was the most effective power forward also. How many times did he strip Howard and how many offensive fouls did he get on Howard and how come Howard said right after the game that Foster is a good defender.

He's the unwanted step-child around here, but Solomon Jones did just as good of a job on Howard as Foster did.