PDA

View Full Version : So Mike Dunleavy is still our starting SG...



Hicks
02-22-2011, 01:57 PM
How do you feel about this?

Personally, I'm ready to move on from Mike.

He's not so great that I think we have to keep playing him at this point. I'd rather move on with Rush and George. And even behind those two we have Dahntay and Lance who can play SG.

And I say that ignoring Mike's recent bad play, which doesn't mean so much to me.

PacersPride
02-22-2011, 02:01 PM
How do you feel about this?

Personally, I'm ready to move on from Mike.

He's not so great that I think we have to keep playing him at this point. I'd rather move on with Rush and George. And even behind those two we have Dahntay and Lance who can play SG.

And I say that ignoring Mike's recent bad play, which doesn't mean so much to me.

how is it you are aware of this, just interested in knowing if its been reported? and if so, the reasons Vogel decided to keep the rotation as is.

pacer4ever
02-22-2011, 02:04 PM
How do you feel about this?

Personally, I'm ready to move on from Mike.

He's not so great that I think we have to keep playing him at this point. I'd rather move on with Rush and George. And even behind those two we have Dahntay and Lance who can play SG.

And I say that ignoring Mike's recent bad play, which doesn't mean so much to me.

I agree! We need a guy who plays defense.

pacer4ever
02-22-2011, 02:04 PM
how is it you are aware of this, just interested in knowing if its been reported? and if so, the reasons Vogel decided to keep the rotation as is.

Mike wells twitter

Peck
02-22-2011, 02:07 PM
I don't dislike Mike but like you (ha a lot of that rhymes) I'm ready to move on.

No, I'm not ready to move to Rush. I'm ready to just end the speculation now and begin the Paul George era.

DemonHunter1105
02-22-2011, 02:08 PM
The main part of me wants to question why Vogel would keep playing him if he isn't a part of our longterm plans. However I do also feel like I need to applaud him for being consistent with the roles he defined for players at the beginning of his tenure.

Like you, I would prefer a healthy dose of Rush/George with Dahntay getting some burn and Lance possibly as well.

Dr. Awesome
02-22-2011, 02:08 PM
You know, I don't want to bash Vogel while he is doing well, but this just doesn't make sense to me. I will give Vogel the benefit of the double(until he drops under .500), but it simply doesn't make sense to me. At best, Mike Dunleavy is our 4th best wing, honestly, more likely the 5th. It seems like he has a big game every once in a while, just frequently enough to have the coach keep him in. In reality, he hurts our team a lot more than he helps.

Weird how no one in the Pacers organization seems to see this.

HC
02-22-2011, 02:11 PM
Well if it isn't gonna be Mike then it needs to be George. I haven't noticed Rush really embrace any role that he has had over his career, so he needs to be fighting for minutes on the bench.

beast23
02-22-2011, 02:20 PM
At best, Mike Dunleavy is our 4th best wing, honestly, more likely the 5th.

Weird how no one in the Pacers organization seems to see this.Well, I would guess that the folks in the organization are far more capable of assessing talent and how they want the pieces to fit together than nearly all of us.

Clearly, the Pacers do not see Dunleavy being the 4th or 5th best wing. Frankly, neither do I. It might not be a stretch to say that Dunleavy could be perceived as the 3rd best wing but that the Pacers think that he fits better with the starters whereas George fits better with the 2nd unit.

But, I do agree with the sentiment of the thread though. I think that it is time to move on with George, especially if the team has no plans to sign Dunleavy. But I would simply exchange roles for George and Dunleavy. Make George the starter and move Dunleavy to the second unit.

Richard_Skull
02-22-2011, 02:25 PM
Vogel should move Dun to Danny's back up, and start PG and have Rush/Lance back up the 2.

I believe this benefits both the starting unit and the 2nd unit.

vnzla81
02-22-2011, 02:27 PM
Mike Dunleavy in the starting lineup= :puke:

Unclebuck
02-22-2011, 02:31 PM
There are many things I could say, but won't.

Evidently Frank Vogel believes Mike will help the team win more so than the other players that are available to him.

vnzla81
02-22-2011, 02:35 PM
There are many things I could say, but won't.

Evidently Frank Vogel believes Mike will help the team win more so than the other players that are available to him.

Yeah he helps the team win......the other team.

BillS
02-22-2011, 02:36 PM
Yep, all 10 of our recent losses under Vogel were because Mike Dunleavy sucked.

Wait...

vnzla81
02-22-2011, 02:40 PM
Yep, all 10 of our recent losses under Vogel were because Mike Dunleavy sucked.

Wait...

Make it 3 losses, because Mike Dunleavy's suckiness played a big part.

PaceBalls
02-22-2011, 02:40 PM
Yep, all 10 of our recent losses under Vogel were because Mike Dunleavy sucked.

Wait...

Well...

Think how much better they would have played without him. :idea:

ColeTheMole
02-22-2011, 02:42 PM
I can't find myself getting too mad at him because his +/- is tied for highest on the team.

I know, I know, it is a flawed statistic that doesn't take into account bla bla bla.

But obviously he helping the team in some way.

CT Pacer
02-22-2011, 02:42 PM
Yep, all 10 of our recent losses under Vogel were because Mike Dunleavy sucked.

Wait...

I look at it as the board just needs someone to complain about. O'Brien, Posey and Solo are all gone so who's next in line? Well Mike Dunleavy of course.

Since86
02-22-2011, 02:43 PM
There are many things I could say, but won't.

Evidently Frank Vogel believes Mike will help the team win more so than the other players that are available to him.

You'd think after the JOb era that you'd be able to acknowledge that not every decision is made with the thought of which option leads to more wins.......

I think the decision is more about not just throwing PG out there, but slowly bringing him into a starting role, by slowly increasing his minutes, rather than trying to evaluate which player starting would result in more wins.

I know that's a crazy thought though, that not every decision comes down to wins and losses. Just CRAAAAAZY.

Merz
02-22-2011, 02:44 PM
Yep, all 10 of our recent losses under Vogel were because Mike Dunleavy sucked.

Wait...

So with that line of thinking Keith Bogans is a good starting shooting guard for the Bulls, after all they haven't lost all 54 games with him starting.

I'm pretty sure they think they can improve that spot even though they are already winning.

Since86
02-22-2011, 02:44 PM
I look at it as the board just needs someone to complain about. O'Brien, Posey and Solo are all gone so who's next in line? Well Mike Dunleavy of course.

Find one internet board, just one and it doesn't even have to be sports related, where there aren't any differing opinions.

Just one.

Happy hunting. You'll need it.

Alabama-Redneck
02-22-2011, 02:45 PM
Mike has not received many minutes under Vogel and seems to be his best early in the game. Start him and if he's hot, go from there.

George, being young, seems to do better coming off the bench. He has a better feel for the game.

Get the most you can from Mike early and go with it.

:cool:

pacer4ever
02-22-2011, 02:47 PM
Mike has not received many minutes under Vogel and seems to be his best early in the game. Start him and if he's hot, go from there.

George, being young, seems to do better coming off the bench. He has a better feel for the game.

Get the most you can from Mike early and go with it.

:cool:

ya like the 20 he gave up to Wade in 8mins gotta love that early production :D

gummy
02-22-2011, 02:49 PM
I don't hate Dun. He has some useful skills. At this point, given the fact that we have so many younger wings and the fact that Dun is in his last year of contract with us I think it's time to move Dun to situational minutes and possibly to the bench entirely on most nights. I don't know if PG is ready for the starting role or not but I do suspect he might be more passive offensively in the game with Danny and Roy. I suppose he'll have to get over that eventually anyway though, so...

I'd be happy with either PG or Rush starting with Dahntay the third wing off the bench. Lance, well - the Pacers seem to be determined to try him as a point guard so I won't put him in the wing mix.

CT Pacer
02-22-2011, 02:49 PM
Find one internet board, just one and it doesn't even have to be sports related, where there aren't any differing opinions.

Just one.

Happy hunting. You'll need it.

Just as I was stating my opinion on the Mike Dunleavy topic. I do not like Mike Dunleavy, but he is our new punching bag. That's all.

pacer4ever
02-22-2011, 02:51 PM
Just as I was stating my opinion on the Mike Dunleavy topic. I do not like Mike Dunleavy, but he is our new punching bag. That's all.

I've been mad at Mike playing so much since just after we traded for him.

PaceBalls
02-22-2011, 02:52 PM
ya like the 20 he gave up to Wade in 8mins gotta love that early production :D

That was about the ugliest exploitation of one player I have seen so far this season, maybe ever. Amare on Posey was bad, but not near as bad as that godawful display was.

Pacerfan
02-22-2011, 02:52 PM
Pacers trying to get hot in time for playoffs

By Conrad Brunner
FOXSportsIndiana.com
Feb. 21, 2011

INDIANAPOLIS, IN Literally speaking, the difference between Packers and Pacers is nothing more than a single "k".

Frank Vogel would like to make the comparison on an entirely different level.

"This is not about this time of year, it's about the next couple months," said Indiana's interim coach. "I told our guys, our intention is to go into the playoffs like Green Bay went into the NFL playoffs, as one of the hottest teams, and I believe we can do it."

The Packers needed victories in their last two games and help from other teams just to qualify for the postseason but peaked at the right time and wound up winning the Super Bowl. The Pacers aren't talking championships but they are focused on ending a four-year postseason drought.

"The rest of the season, we're coming," said Roy Hibbert. "We're not backing down. We're not having any lackadaisical games. We're on the prowl."

Indiana emerges from the All-Star break with a 24-30 record, holding onto the final playoff position in the Eastern Conference. Though the Pacers are looking up the ladder, just two games behind seventh-place Philadelphia and four back of sixth-place New York, they must also keep an eye over their shoulder.

Charlotte is just one game back in ninth, though Indiana already holds the season-series tie-breaker.

This is heady stuff for Vogel, who at 37 is the youngest head coach in the NBA but has guided the Pacers to a 7-3 record since replacing Jim O'Brien on Jan. 30.

As learning experiences go, few are more valuable in coaching.

"I've learned that this is a good basketball team," Vogel said. "I knew they were a good basketball team, I've learned that they have a chance to be a great basketball team and have a special end to this season. I believe it's going to happen. I've learned I'm very comfortable as a head coach and I just believe in this group.

"It's a huge step. I was very nervous coming in. Once I took over and got out there and started doing it, it's what I've lived for and it just has felt surprisingly comfortable and almost easy for me. Ask me that question when we've lost five in a row, though. It won't be so easy then."

Vogel said he still communicates regularly with O'Brien, his long-time mentor, via phone and texts but that they don't talk about strategy or the players.

"He's just happy for me," Vogel said. "We don't talk about any of that."

The Pacers get back in action Tuesday in Washington against the Wizards and return home Wednesday for a rematch with the Pistons, who sent them into the break with a 115-109 loss last Wednesday in Detroit.

http://www.foxsportsmidwest.com/02/21/11/Pacers-trying-to-get-hot-in-time-for-pla/landing_pacers.html?blockID=414875&feedID=3905




Doesn't really relate to Dun but found it interesting they still communicate regularly, but don't talk about basketball.

Alabama-Redneck
02-22-2011, 02:53 PM
ya like the 20 he gave up to Wade in 8mins gotta love that early production :D


And who gave up the other 24 ??

pacer4ever
02-22-2011, 02:59 PM
And who gave up the other 24 ??

lets see Wade went 5-14 with George on him. (Rush didnt play much )


he stared the game going 8-8 18pts in 8 mins



Of course Wade will score damm near 25 pts every game but you cant let him be this efficent.


6 layups is just sad




WindhorstESPN Wade now 8-8, 6 are layups and has 18 points. Pacers have 7. He was not impressed with Mike Dunleavy's defense.


.AustinCroshere Love mike. Can't guard slick, much less D. Wade.
7:18 PM Feb 15th via txt
Retweeted by MikeWellsNBA and 3 others

Hicks
02-22-2011, 02:59 PM
And who gave up the other 24 ??

Did the other 24 come in 8 minutes of game time? How many more shots did those 24 points take than the first 20?

CT Pacer
02-22-2011, 03:02 PM
Mike Dunleavy can not guard Dwyane Wade. That is a fact. It is the coach's job to adjust.

pacer4ever
02-22-2011, 03:04 PM
Mike Dunleavy can not guard Dwyane Wade. That is a fact. It is the coach's job to adjust.

True, but the bigger problem is Mike can't guard damm near anyone.

sportfireman
02-22-2011, 03:07 PM
Pacers trying to get hot in time for playoffs

By Conrad Brunner
FOXSportsIndiana.com
Feb. 21, 2011

INDIANAPOLIS, IN – Literally speaking, the difference between Packers and Pacers is nothing more than a single "k".

Frank Vogel would like to make the comparison on an entirely different level.

"This is not about this time of year, it's about the next couple months," said Indiana's interim coach. "I told our guys, our intention is to go into the playoffs like Green Bay went into the NFL playoffs, as one of the hottest teams, and I believe we can do it."

The Packers needed victories in their last two games and help from other teams just to qualify for the postseason but peaked at the right time and wound up winning the Super Bowl. The Pacers aren't talking championships but they are focused on ending a four-year postseason drought.

"The rest of the season, we're coming," said Roy Hibbert. "We're not backing down. We're not having any lackadaisical games. We're on the prowl."

Indiana emerges from the All-Star break with a 24-30 record, holding onto the final playoff position in the Eastern Conference. Though the Pacers are looking up the ladder, just two games behind seventh-place Philadelphia and four back of sixth-place New York, they must also keep an eye over their shoulder.

Charlotte is just one game back in ninth, though Indiana already holds the season-series tie-breaker.

This is heady stuff for Vogel, who at 37 is the youngest head coach in the NBA but has guided the Pacers to a 7-3 record since replacing Jim O'Brien on Jan. 30.

As learning experiences go, few are more valuable in coaching.

"I've learned that this is a good basketball team," Vogel said. "I knew they were a good basketball team, I've learned that they have a chance to be a great basketball team and have a special end to this season. I believe it's going to happen. I've learned I'm very comfortable as a head coach and I just believe in this group.

"It's a huge step. I was very nervous coming in. Once I took over and got out there and started doing it, it's what I've lived for and it just has felt surprisingly comfortable and almost easy for me. Ask me that question when we've lost five in a row, though. It won't be so easy then."

Vogel said he still communicates regularly with O'Brien, his long-time mentor, via phone and texts but that they don't talk about strategy or the players.

"He's just happy for me," Vogel said. "We don't talk about any of that."

The Pacers get back in action Tuesday in Washington against the Wizards and return home Wednesday for a rematch with the Pistons, who sent them into the break with a 115-109 loss last Wednesday in Detroit.

http://www.foxsportsmidwest.com/02/21/11/Pacers-trying-to-get-hot-in-time-for-pla/landing_pacers.html?blockID=414875&feedID=3905




Doesn't really relate to Dun but found it interesting they still communicate regularly, but don't talk about basketball.
Oh no fire Vogel he's still talking to O'Brien......:)

cdash
02-22-2011, 03:10 PM
...

Can we go back to talking about Carmelo Anthony?

pacer4ever
02-22-2011, 03:11 PM
...

Can we go back to talking about Carmelo Anthony?

What number do u think he will wear 15 is retired in NY?

BPump33
02-22-2011, 03:13 PM
What number do u think he will wear 15 is retired in NY?

I read somewhere that he wore 22 in high school, but that is retired as well. Apparently his favorite player growing up was Bernard King, so he might wear 30.

purdue101
02-22-2011, 03:14 PM
I'm ready to cash in on Dunleavy's expiring deal. If Lance is ready and Dahntay is staying, I'd throw in Rush/picks if the deal was right.

I've soured on Mike quite a bit the past month (Brandon too). Mike only plays well against poor teams and seems to always fold on the big stage - not someone we need going forward. There is a reason he's had decent stats throughout his career but never made the playoffs.

I can't remember who grabbed the offensive board, but Mike was bullied out of a rebound in Miami in the final minute or two. IMO, losing that board cost us the game.

cdash
02-22-2011, 03:14 PM
What number do u think he will wear 15 is retired in NY?

:laugh:

I have no idea. I admit that I am interested in watching more of the Knickerbockers now that they have the Amare/Melo duo.

As for the Dunleavy news, I'm only very mildly surprised, if anything. The things I read makes me think that the Pacers front office isn't nearly as high on Brandon Rush as many around here seem to be, and I think they like Paul George coming off the bench for now. I'm not upset with it and I trust that they know what they're doing more than a bunch of fans on a messageboard.

gummy
02-22-2011, 03:16 PM
. Just CRAAAAAZY.

Like the honey badger? ;)

pacer4ever
02-22-2011, 03:17 PM
:laugh:

I have no idea. I admit that I am interested in watching more of the Knickerbockers now that they have the Amare/Melo duo.

.

Ya i am gonna watch thier 1st game tomorrow.

pacer4ever
02-22-2011, 03:18 PM
I read somewhere that he wore 22 in high school, but that is retired as well. Apparently his favorite player growing up was Bernard King, so he might wear 30.

http://www.pastapadre.com/2011/02/21/carmelo-anthony-traded-to-the-knicks

Pasta has him in a 30 and a 8 jersey

docpaul
02-22-2011, 03:23 PM
Eh, Dunleavy will not be here after this year.

He's playing less than he was when JOB was around. If anything, he's trending towards a bench player anyways:

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/players/3601/gamelog

This is *while* Rush has been out with injury.

OTOH, George's and DJ's time has gone up:

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/players/3723/gamelog
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/players/3723/gamelog

The data suggests this transition is already happening. It's just a matter of time.

Peck
02-22-2011, 03:23 PM
Ya i am gonna watch thier 1st game tomorrow.

As opposed to the Pacers vs. Pistons?

DemonHunter1105
02-22-2011, 03:26 PM
As opposed to the Pacers vs. Pistons?

I think he has league pass and can watch multiple games at once...could be mistaken though.

pacer4ever
02-22-2011, 03:26 PM
As opposed to the Pacers vs. Pistons?

No ill be there. After the game ill watch that game on LP broadband archives.

Slick Pinkham
02-22-2011, 03:31 PM
In when Harry Met Sally, there was a line "When you realize you want to spend the rest of your life with somebody, you want the rest of your life to start as soon as possible"

I think that we all realize that we have an upgrade as the SG of the future (PG), and we all want this "future" to start right now. Certainly I do.

PaceBalls
02-22-2011, 03:33 PM
No ill be there. After the game ill watch that game on LP broadband archives.

Yeah man, that's the only reason I have LP, the broadband archives are awesome! Too much basketball for one man really.

PaceBalls
02-22-2011, 03:35 PM
In when Harry Met Sally, there was a line "When you realize you want to spend the rest of your life with somebody, you want the rest of your life to start as soon as possible"

I think that we all realize that we have an upgrade as the SG of the future (PG), and we all want this "future" to start right now. Certainly I do.

I've never heard anyone quote "When Harry Met Sally" for wise words of universal truth :lol:

But yes, it is time to start the new Paul George era.

Merz
02-22-2011, 03:36 PM
What number do u think he will wear 15 is retired in NY?

#17 after his Pacers idol

Mackey_Rose
02-22-2011, 03:43 PM
I look at this and think there are two possible explanations for why Vogel would want to keep Dunleavy as a starter and in the rotation in general.

1) Dunleavy and his contract are still on the trade blocks. There is no reason to bench the guy when the deadline is so close.

This explanation makes perfect sense to me. If I knew that Bird was actively trying to dump Dunleavy's expiring deal off on somebody else, I would play it exactly the same as Vogel. I'd keep him in the lineup, and as a heavy minutes member of the rotation both tonight and tomorrow night. After that, if Dunleavy is still on the team, his spot, and his minutes in general, become fair game. I'd prefer Rush take it, but wouldn't complain if George did.

2) We are winning, and Vogel wants to maintain consistency in the lineup for the sake of chemistry and team morale.

While I understand the basis of this theory, in practice, it makes little sense to me. I was against JOB's method of changing rotations and lineups purely on what seemed like a whim. There didn't seem logical reasoning behind many of moves, and that was infuriating, both to me as a fan, and to the players involved.

Removing Dunleavy from the lineup would not have the same impact on team morale and chemistry that closing games with Ford and Posey did, for instance. There is obvious reasoning behind it.

Dunleavy is not a bad locker room guy by any stretch of the imagination, but he also does not exactly fit in with the core of our rotation. He doesn't have the same off-the-court interests as most of the players, simply because of the age difference. That isn't a big deal when it comes to the kind of chemistry they have on-the-court obviously, but it does matter when it comes to team morale. My guess is that a majority of the team would be in favor of fully embracing the movement to younger, more athletic, and energetic players, because a majority of the rotation fits into this mold. The fact that Rush and George also are better defenders individually, also helps matters. I believe such a lineup change would actually boost team morale rather than be a cause for concern.

Dunleavy does help the offense. That is undeniable. But he also hampers the team's defense, especially when paired in the back court with Collison and Granger. Whether what he adds offensively is enough to make up for his defensive deficiencies is debatable, but in my opinion, it is not.

Psyren
02-22-2011, 03:45 PM
*Sigh*

More of Mike Dunleavy's sub-par defense.

Oh well, I've dealt with it long enough, I can handle another 28 games (Or whatever it is, assuming he's still here).

I would've rather had Rush start and PG be the first off the bench, and Dun only get spare minutes.

Oh well. Yay, Mike Dunleavy :rolleyes:

Unclebuck
02-22-2011, 03:48 PM
Yeah he helps the team win......the other team.

OK, assuming you believe that, what does that say about Vogel?

BillS
02-22-2011, 03:48 PM
ya like the 20 he gave up to Wade in 8mins gotta love that early production :D

Wow, that number keeps increasing. Will it end up that Dun gave up all 41 of Wade's points in the first 5 minutes? Then, of course, PG will have held Wade to 0% shooting, having lifted Roy into position to block a shot.

Come on, no one is saying this guy is great, but you don't have to distort the stats.

pacer4ever
02-22-2011, 03:50 PM
Wow, that number keeps increasing. Will it end up that Dun gave up all 41 of Wade's points in the first 5 minutes? Then, of course, PG will have held Wade to 0% shooting, having lifted Roy into position to block a shot.

Come on, no one is saying this guy is great, but you don't have to distort the stats.

8-8 18 pts 8 mins thoes arent disorted 6 layups. :puke:

BillS
02-22-2011, 03:55 PM
Dunleavy does help the offense. That is undeniable. But he also hampers the team's defense, especially when paired in the back court with Collison and Granger. Whether what he adds offensively is enough to make up for his defensive deficiencies is debatable, but in my opinion, it is not.

Debatable I can live with. "Debatable" means it isn't some kind of no-brainer and that someone - importantly, it is Vogel - believes he has a place in the starting lineup.

I would not be surprised for things to change at some point, but I'd expect Dun to go to second string rather than dropping straight to DNP-CD.

As for the whole "play mediocre players to showcase them" thing, I've always thought that was garbage in a league where teams are pretty well connected regarding players on other teams. It is really only very young guys who haven't had much time on the floor who would have any sense of mystery for other teams that would be dispelled by public playing time.

BillS
02-22-2011, 03:59 PM
8-8 18 pts 8 mins thoes arent disorted 6 layups. :puke:

Wow. Dun went out at the 6:51 mark. Terrible how he couldn't guard Wade for over two minutes and 10 seconds FROM THE F***ING BENCH.

And only 3 of those first 8 shots were layups. Jeeze.

Mackey_Rose
02-22-2011, 04:02 PM
Wow. Dun went out at the 6:51 mark. Terrible how he couldn't guard Wade for over two minutes and 10 seconds FROM THE F***ING BENCH.

P4E needs to let it go. It was a bad game. A horrible game. I don't think there is any reason to obsess over it so much either.

But I think it also was so bad that there is no reason for you to even bother refuting matters on it. He just plain sucked, and you won't convince anyone that he didn't, regardless of whether or not all the stats are 100% accurate.

pacer4ever
02-22-2011, 04:03 PM
Wow. Dun went out at the 6:51 mark. Terrible how he couldn't guard Wade for over two minutes and 10 seconds FROM THE F***ING BENCH.

And only 3 of those first 8 shots were layups. Jeeze.

Thats even worse 18 pts in 6mins = double :puke:

BPump33
02-22-2011, 04:03 PM
Wow. Dun went out at the 6:51 mark. Terrible how he couldn't guard Wade for over two minutes and 10 seconds FROM THE F***ING BENCH.

And only 3 of those first 8 shots were layups. Jeeze.

Wade had 16 when Dun went out at the 6:51 mark according to nba.com and finished the half with 31.

BillS
02-22-2011, 04:08 PM
Wade had 16 when Dun went out at the 6:51 mark according to nba.com.

Which isn't 20 in 8 with 6 straight uncontested layups.

And, by the way, immediately after PG the miracle defender came in, Wade scored on him.

Look, Dun had major problems against Wade. But to round everything up and keep increasing the myth of how bad he was is piling on.

We're going to end up with people claiming Dunleavy doesn't try on defense, stands around on offense, and pees on people's lockers at half time. Anything to justify this idea that you have to be brain dead to think Mike Dunleavy belongs in the NBA.

BPump33
02-22-2011, 04:09 PM
Which isn't 20 in 8 with 6 straight uncontested layups.

And, by the way, immediately after PG the miracle defender came in, Wade scored on him.

Look, Dun had major problems against Wade. But to round everything up and keep increasing the myth of how bad he was is piling on.

We're going to end up with people claiming Dunleavy doesn't try on defense, stands around on offense, and pees on people's lockers at half time. Anything to justify this idea that you have to be brain dead to think Mike Dunleavy belongs in the NBA.

I was just trying to get the correct numbers out there.

pacer4ever
02-22-2011, 04:10 PM
I was just trying to get the correct numbers out there.

I just went by what Mike Wells put on twitter

Day-V
02-22-2011, 04:11 PM
We're going to end up with people claiming Dunleavy doesn't try on defense, stands around on offense, and pees on people's lockers at half time. Anything to justify this idea that you have to be brain dead to think Mike Dunleavy belongs in the NBA.

He actually does that in-between the 1st and 2nd quarters....



And, IMHO, there really isn't much of a difference in allowing 16 points in 7 minutes to allowing 20 points in 8 minutes.


Either way, it's not good.

BPump33
02-22-2011, 04:12 PM
He actually does that in-between the 1st and 2nd quarter.

Actually, he usually does that during the national anthem. No, really watch. He almost always goes back to the locker room right before the anthem. Ok, so maybe not ON the lockers.

BillS
02-22-2011, 04:13 PM
I just went by what Mike Wells put on twitter

In which case we need to be taking what Wells tweets with a little grain of salt, since the game play-by-play shows very differently.

LG33
02-22-2011, 04:13 PM
Nothing against Dunleavy, but I've been excited to see Rush get extended minutes under a new coach since his rookie season.

Trophy
02-22-2011, 04:13 PM
I really hate it that we go with more than 10 in the rotation.

It ruins the team chemistry and players like Brandon and Dahntay are in and out at random points in the game.

Too many substitutions and I'm sure Frank agrees, but will evaluate who is gonna be the odd man out.

Give it a few more games and he'll probably come to the conclusion that the spot belongs to Brandon, Paul, and Dahntay.

pacer4ever
02-22-2011, 04:14 PM
I really hate it that we go with more than 10 in the rotation.

It ruins the team chemistry and players like Brandon and Dahntay are in and out at random points in the game.

Too many substitutions and I'm sure Frank agrees, but will evaluate who is gonna be the odd man out.

Give it a few more games and he'll probably come to the conclusion that the spot belongs to Brandon, Paul, and Dahntay.

Ya I like a 8 man rotation 9 max

Sookie
02-22-2011, 04:15 PM
Debatable I can live with. "Debatable" means it isn't some kind of no-brainer and that someone - importantly, it is Vogel - believes he has a place in the starting lineup.

I would not be surprised for things to change at some point, but I'd expect Dun to go to second string rather than dropping straight to DNP-CD.

As for the whole "play mediocre players to showcase them" thing, I've always thought that was garbage in a league where teams are pretty well connected regarding players on other teams. It is really only very young guys who haven't had much time on the floor who would have any sense of mystery for other teams that would be dispelled by public playing time.

I thought it was stupid too.

But we got DC for Troy Murphy. And with the minutes we gave Troy, we certainly made him look a heck of a lot better than what he was/is.

Since86
02-22-2011, 04:16 PM
In which case we need to be taking what Wells tweets with a little grain of salt, since the game play-by-play shows very differently.

Or we can just admit that Dunleavy was a turnstyle on defense, and regardless if it was 20 in 8 minutes or 16 in 6 minutes, that's a horrible job and it shouldn't be acceptable.

Regardless of the "real" numbers, Mike got torn alive.

I don't know why the finer details need to be debated, when the overall picture is crystal clear.

BillS
02-22-2011, 04:17 PM
I thought it was stupid too.

But we got DC for Troy Murphy. And with the minutes we gave Troy, we certainly made him look a heck of a lot better than what he was/is.

Yes, but that wasn't "showcasing" Troy, that was because the-coach-who-shall-not-be-named loved his play and (over) used him deliberately.

vnzla81
02-22-2011, 04:19 PM
In which case we need to be taking what Wells tweets with a little grain of salt, since the game play-by-play shows very differently.

Here are some nice stats:

Dwade againts Rush= 4points allowed by Rush

Rush againts Dwade=20 points allowed by Wade.

Yep I think I know who I want to start.

vnzla81
02-22-2011, 04:20 PM
Yes, but that wasn't "showcasing" Troy, that was because the-coach-who-shall-not-be-named loved his play and (over) used him deliberately.

Was this supposed to be green?

Since86
02-22-2011, 04:22 PM
Was this supposed to be green?

No, Bill is correct.

Jim didn't play Troy to showcase him for a trade. He played him, because Troy's skill set fell in line with the style Jim wanted to play.

Hicks
02-22-2011, 04:22 PM
As if the precise time and point total defeats the greater point. What a waste of energy.

pacer4ever
02-22-2011, 04:22 PM
No, Bill is correct.

Jim didn't play Troy to showcase him for a trade. He played him, because Troy's skill set fell in line with the style Jim wanted to play.

yep JOB always loved that trailing 3

Day-V
02-22-2011, 04:23 PM
No, Bill is correct.

Jim didn't play Troy to showcase him for a trade. He played him, because Troy's skill set fell in line with the style Jim wanted to play.

Agreed. Part of Jim's soul died on August 11, 2010. He loved Troy.

DemonHunter1105
02-22-2011, 04:24 PM
I really hope Mike is traded or at least takes on a different role so much of this useless banter can come to an end.

vnzla81
02-22-2011, 04:24 PM
No, Bill is correct.

Jim didn't play Troy to showcase him for a trade. He played him, because Troy's skill set fell in line with the style Jim wanted to play.

Yeah but according to Bills he didn't over use him but in fact he used him the right way, I asked the question because is coming from him.

BPump33
02-22-2011, 04:24 PM
As if the precise time and point total defeats the greater point. What a waste of energy.

It wasn't really that much energy to look at the play by play and see when Mike went out and look at Wade's total. It was easier than watching people make up numbers to try and prove or disprove a point.

We all know the same thing. Wade torched us that night and we lost. Might as well be accurate, though.

Mackey_Rose
02-22-2011, 04:25 PM
In which case we need to be taking what Wells tweets with a little grain of salt, since the game play-by-play shows very differently.

Wow.


As if the precise time and point total defeats the greater point. What a waste of energy.

Thank you.

BillS
02-22-2011, 04:25 PM
Or we can just admit that Dunleavy was a turnstyle on defense, and regardless if it was 20 in 8 minutes or 16 in 6 minutes, that's a horrible job and it shouldn't be acceptable.

Regardless of the "real" numbers, Mike got torn alive.

I don't know why the finer details need to be debated, when the overall picture is crystal clear.

I'm not at all saying that 16 in 5 is somehow fantastic compared to 20 in 8. I agree Dun got abused in that game.

My point is that as soon as you start accepting people inflating numbers because it matches your feelings about it, you begin to lose touch with reality. Maybe not by much in this case, but sooner or later the gaps between reality and acceptable myth widen and you have no foundation other than emotions for your decisions. In its way, that's as bad as relying solely on stats and averages to play guys who aren't producing.

I don't know that Dun is going to stay starting long term. I don't think Vogel is a moron who is playing Dun in spite of Dun's glaring inability to play the game of basketball. I definitely don't think he is being showcased.

I think at worst Vogel feels that what Dun provides is more important than (or that losing it is more of a problem than) what he gives up on man-to-man defense. As soon as someone else is ready in Vogel's eyes to step in, I think Vogel will make that adjustment - something none of us thought his predecessor would ever do.

BillS
02-22-2011, 04:29 PM
Yeah but according to Bills he didn't over use him but in fact he used him the right way, I asked the question because is coming from him.

No no no no no no no no.

What part of "(over) used" makes you think I thought JOB used Troy correctly?

Good lord, does ANYONE pay attention?

JOB used Troy in exactly the way JOB WANTED to use Troy. That says nothing about whether it was correct in anyone else's opinion, just that JOB wasn't using Troy for some conspiracy reason.

Day-V
02-22-2011, 04:29 PM
I really hope Mike is traded or at least takes on a different role so much of this useless banter can come to an end.

Oh, if only it were that simple. When the team experiences increased performance at the SG position, there'll be banter from the former saying "If only we had benched Dunleavy sooner" and then counter-banter from the latter whining and complaining about the former celebrating the non-existance of Dunleavy by telling them to move on or even still trying to vomit out stats by showing how the current SG has a worse 3PT% than Dunleavy, completely ignoring the Eye-Ball Test in the process.

[/soothsayer]

BillS
02-22-2011, 04:32 PM
As if the precise time and point total defeats the greater point. What a waste of energy.

If the real stats make your point, why make up worse ones? It only damages the credibility of the person quoting the wrong stats, it doesn't advance the argument.

If he'd said something to the effect of "something like 20 points in 8 minutes" then it lets people know he's guessing in the ballpark. To assert exact numbers that are wrong is bad discussion. Even if they aren't wrong by much they are still wrong.

Getting this kind of thing right is really just minimal respect for people reading what is posted.

PaceBalls
02-22-2011, 04:33 PM
I'm not at all saying that 16 in 5 is somehow fantastic compared to 20 in 8. I agree Dun got abused in that game.

My point is that as soon as you start accepting people inflating numbers because it matches your feelings about it, you begin to lose touch with reality. Maybe not by much in this case, but sooner or later the gaps between reality and acceptable myth widen and you have no foundation other than emotions for your decisions.

This is a major problem with how people think as a whole. Our schools have failed us :(

The scientific method, critical analysis, skeptical thought.. They are almost frowned on.

Since86
02-22-2011, 04:34 PM
My point is that as soon as you start accepting people inflating numbers because it matches your feelings about it, you begin to lose touch with reality. Maybe not by much in this case, but sooner or later the gaps between reality and acceptable myth widen and you have no foundation other than emotions for your decisions. In its way, that's as bad as relying solely on stats and averages to play guys who aren't producing.

Well why don't we save that conversation when the time comes, instead of bickering about this one?


If the real stats make your point, why make up worse ones? It only damages the credibility of the person quoting the wrong stats, it doesn't advance the argument.

If he'd said something to the effect of "something like 20 points in 8 minutes" then it lets people know he's guessing in the ballpark. To assert exact numbers that are wrong is bad discussion. Even if they aren't wrong by much they are still wrong.

Getting this kind of thing right is really just minimal respect for people reading what is posted.

You're starting to argue semantics.

Instead of keeping the conversation going, it has grinded to a halt over minor details.

BillS
02-22-2011, 04:37 PM
Well why don't we save that conversation when the time comes, instead of bickering about this one?

All I'm asking is for people to be accurate. It isn't like it is that hard given the resources we have. How is that unreasonable?

vnzla81
02-22-2011, 04:37 PM
I think Vogel will make that adjustment - something none of us thought his predecessor would ever do.

None of US? Who is this new Bills?

Since86
02-22-2011, 04:39 PM
All I'm asking is for people to be accurate. It isn't like it is that hard given the resources we have. How is that unreasonable?

Because unless someone goes back and watches the game film the "accuracy" of posts can be debated.

What's going to stop you, or someone else, from trying to say that DWade didn't actually score that much on Mike, but rather scored on whomever due to a switch, or a fast break.

Who gives a flip about the EXACT numbers?

Mike got embarassed. End of story.

EDIT: And like I said, instead of keeping the discussion flowing, we now have to spend 3 pages bickering the difference between 20pts and 16pts and whether it happend in 8 mins or 6 mins. The EXACT numbers don't mean crap, because the conclusion that Mike got torn up still remains true.

Let's focus on the big picture, rather than the fine print.

Day-V
02-22-2011, 04:40 PM
Who gives a flip about the EXACT numbers?

Mike got embarassed. End of story.

As long as the numbers are in the ballpark, that's all I really care about.

cdash
02-22-2011, 04:44 PM
I like that the whole crux of the argument against Mike Dunleavy starting is because he let one of the 5 best players in the game go off on him for 6 or 8 minutes. A guy he clearly shouldn't have been guarding in the first place. He's a bad defender, but he is not bad enough consistently that he is costing us games left and right.

Unclebuck
02-22-2011, 04:44 PM
ya like the 20 he gave up to Wade in 8mins gotta love that early production :D

For the record this was the first mention (in this thread ) of how Mike did when he guarded Wade.

Post #23

BPump33
02-22-2011, 04:44 PM
As long as the numbers are in the ballpark, that's all I really care about.

Agreed, but when going back and forth we might as well just go to the source and find out the actual numbers. Seems common sense to me and it took less than a minute to look up. I don't see the big deal.

Hicks
02-22-2011, 04:46 PM
It wasn't really that much energy to look at the play by play and see when Mike went out and look at Wade's total. It was easier than watching people make up numbers to try and prove or disprove a point.

We all know the same thing. Wade torched us that night and we lost. Might as well be accurate, though.

Wasn't really directing that at you.

Since86
02-22-2011, 04:48 PM
I like that the whole crux of the argument against Mike Dunleavy starting is because he let one of the 5 best players in the game go off on him for 6 or 8 minutes. A guy he clearly shouldn't have been guarding in the first place. He's a bad defender, but he is not bad enough consistently that he is costing us games left and right.

Mike gets beat by everyone he guards. Let's not go in the other direction and act like it was an isolated incident that happened because he was guarding DWade.

Mike has trouble defending one-on-one regardless if it's Dwayne Wade or Duane Waid.

That's why when people talk about his defense it always resorts to "but atleast he plays good team defense, like how he draws charges."

Hicks
02-22-2011, 04:48 PM
If the real stats make your point, why make up worse ones?

If either will do, and everyone realizes it's an exaggeration, who gives a ****?

Did you really think there was this belief that those #s were 100% accurate?

pacer4ever
02-22-2011, 04:49 PM
For the record this was the first mention (in this thread ) of how Mike did when he guarded Wade.

Post #23

Thats obviously a smart alec remark to what the other poster said later I posted




WindhorstESPN Brian Windhorst
by MikeWellsNBA
Wade now 8-8, 6 are layups and has 18 points. Pacers have 7. He was not impressed with Mike Dunleavy's defense. via twitter

BillS
02-22-2011, 04:52 PM
None of US? Who is this new Bills?

I stated over and over and over and over again that one of JOBs flaws was an inability to adjust away from the way he planned things to go based on his statistical analysis. When did I ever not say it?

But, yes, the myth of PD is that Unclebuck and I both thought JOB walked on water, was the greatest coach in the NBA, and never did anything wrong. Who am I to argue with that?

Sookie
02-22-2011, 04:52 PM
I like that the whole crux of the argument against Mike Dunleavy starting is because he let one of the 5 best players in the game go off on him for 6 or 8 minutes. A guy he clearly shouldn't have been guarding in the first place. He's a bad defender, but he is not bad enough consistently that he is costing us games left and right.

Against good teams, it will cost us games.

Not because of just Dun individually, but because of our DC/Dun/Granger backcourt defense.

Now Danny can play defense and doesn't have an excuse, but DC and Dun together is just brutal.

And you have to remember, not only will opponents get by those two at will and score, but it'll also do things like, put Roy and Josh in foul trouble (and quickly add up team fouls)

edit: I trust Vogel too. And I think he's just trying to stay consistent. If he needs to, he'll adjust quickly. Dun only played nine minutes against Miami. And no, his nine minutes did not lose the game for the team, Despite Wade's ridiculous stats. The team came back and took the lead, Dun didn't lose that game for us.

MTM
02-22-2011, 04:53 PM
The thing about Coach Vogel is that I trust him to play who should be playing, and I didn't feel that way before. So regardless of who starts, I know that the wrong players won't be getting an undeserved 35 mins a night.

dal9
02-22-2011, 04:53 PM
does anybody want to point out that 16 pts given up in 5 minutes (= 3.2 pts per minute) is actually worse than 20 pts in 8 minutes (=2.5 pts per minute)?

cdash
02-22-2011, 04:55 PM
Against good teams, it will cost us games.

Not because of just Dun individually, but because of our DC/Dun/Granger backcourt defense.

Now Danny can play defense and doesn't have an excuse, but DC and Dun together is just brutal.

And you have to remember, not only will opponents get by those two at will and score, but it'll also do things like, put Roy and Josh in foul trouble (and quickly add up team fouls)

Yeah I'm sorry I even posted anything. The legions of anti-Dunleavy posters are frothing at the mouth to spew their venom at anyone who dares to defend Mike in the slightest of ways. He's not as bad as people on here make him out to be. That is my point, my only point, and my last bit of discussion about it.

BillS
02-22-2011, 04:55 PM
does anybody want to point out that 16 pts given up in 5 minutes (= 3.2 pts per minute) is actually worse than 20 pts in 8 minutes (=2.5 pts per minute)?

It's the accuracy not whether it looks better or worse.

Unclebuck
02-22-2011, 04:57 PM
The Pacers were a very good (better than they are right now) defensive team through the first half of December and Dunleavy played a lot then.

cdash
02-22-2011, 04:58 PM
The Pacers were a very good (better than they are right now) defensive team through the first half of December and Dunleavy played a lot then.

"They played good defense in spite of Dunleavy!"

Sincerely,
The next 15 posts in this thread

Mackey_Rose
02-22-2011, 04:58 PM
The Pacers were a very good (better than they are right now) defensive team through the first half of December and Dunleavy played a lot then.

Granger tried.

Sookie
02-22-2011, 04:58 PM
Yeah I'm sorry I even posted anything. The legions of anti-Dunleavy posters are frothing at the mouth to spew their venom at anyone who dares to defend Mike in the slightest of ways. He's not as bad as people on here make him out to be. That is my point, my only point, and my last bit of discussion about it.

I think that point is fair, valid..and I've said enough times that I agree with it. And I've also said that it's a tough decision, and if Frank decides to stay with Mike, I understand even though I disagree with it.

But terrible backcourt defense will cost us games. (It'll only cost us games if Dun is given a ton of minutes. Not if he starts and then is pulled in 6 minutes, IE Miami) And people aren't just basing their opinion on Dun off of what Wade was doing to him. There's a definite inbetween here, when it comes to Dun, and the strawman arguments (on both sides) are just silly.

Unclebuck
02-22-2011, 04:59 PM
The thing about Coach Vogel is that I trust him to play who should be playing, and I didn't feel that way before. So regardless of who starts, I know that the wrong players won't be getting an undeserved 35 mins a night.

Isn't it a matter of opinion on who the right player is. We cannot agree who should play and for how long. No two coaches can agree, so I think you are setting yourself up to be disappointed with Vogel if you think his approach is going to match up perfectly with yours

Since86
02-22-2011, 05:06 PM
Yeah I'm sorry I even posted anything. The legions of anti-Dunleavy posters are frothing at the mouth to spew their venom at anyone who dares to defend Mike in the slightest of ways. He's not as bad as people on here make him out to be. That is my point, my only point, and my last bit of discussion about it.

And people ***** about exaggeration.....

Can we leave emotions out of it? No one hates Dunleavy and there definitely isn't a legion.

ilive4sports
02-22-2011, 05:08 PM
The Pacers were a very good (better than they are right now) defensive team through the first half of December and Dunleavy played a lot then.

Remember though, against good SG's Rush would start.

I've been saying it for how long now, Dunleavy needs to come off the bench. We aren't the same team we were through the first half of December. Sure the players are the same, but I believe some play fatigue is setting in. Especially for Mike. He's gotten the third most minutes on the team. And Mike is not the same guy he was before his knee injury. It took a lot out of him. I don't think he can handle this many minutes any more. He should come off the bench, backing up Danny at the SF. I like his game with the second unit better too.

cdash
02-22-2011, 05:11 PM
And people ***** about exaggeration.....

Can we leave emotions out of it? No one hates Dunleavy and there definitely isn't a legion.

Did I say hate? I said anti-Dunleavy. Those of you in favor of completely benching Mike and who argue against him every chance you get are the legion, and there are at least 6 or 7 of you out there. In relative terms of regular posters on this board, I'll consider that a legion. Exaggeration? Very slight one, if at all.

docpaul
02-22-2011, 05:11 PM
Youch, in reading this thread, it's clear that the team hasn't played for a few days. We've run out of things to debate. :)

cdash
02-22-2011, 05:12 PM
Youch, in reading this thread, it's clear that the team hasn't played for a few days. We've run out of things to debate. :)

No we debate this in some form or another after every single game :laugh:

ilive4sports
02-22-2011, 05:14 PM
Did I say hate? I said anti-Dunleavy. Those of you in favor of completely benching Mike and who argue against him every chance you get are the legion, and there are at least 6 or 7 of you out there. In relative terms of regular posters on this board, I'll consider that a legion. Exaggeration? Very slight one, if at all.

Why wouldn't we when we see Mike play badly game after game? He sprinkles in a good shooting night so some think, oh well I guess Mike can play. But people talk about Rush being inconsistent, when Dunleavy is the same exact way. And at least Rush is giving us good defense each night.

xIndyFan
02-22-2011, 05:16 PM
Ya I like a 8 man rotation 9 max

:iagree: i like 8 2PG/3wing/3bigs also. but until the pacers have a real PF, it looks like 9. or rather 9+1 with lance getting development minutes. or rookie minutes or whatever else you want to call them.


"They played good defense in spite of Dunleavy!"

Sincerely,
The next 15 posts in this thread

:laugh:

pacer4ever
02-22-2011, 05:17 PM
Did I say hate? I said anti-Dunleavy. Those of you in favor of completely benching Mike and who argue against him every chance you get are the legion, and there are at least 6 or 7 of you out there. In relative terms of regular posters on this board, I'll consider that a legion. Exaggeration? Very slight one, if at all.

no that just our view just as urs is for Dunleavy to start.

Since86
02-22-2011, 05:19 PM
Did I say hate? I said anti-Dunleavy. Those of you in favor of completely benching Mike and who argue against him every chance you get are the legion, and there are at least 6 or 7 of you out there. In relative terms of regular posters on this board, I'll consider that a legion. Exaggeration? Very slight one, if at all.

Yeah, you're right. People are definitely "frothing at the mouth to spew their venom."

I think I heard a story that P4E had to replace a few monitors because all the venom he has been spewing ate through his screens.

It's kind of hard to talk rationally about the situation, when you have to defend your position from this kind of emotional outbursts.

Sookie
02-22-2011, 05:20 PM
Why wouldn't we when we see Mike play badly game after game? He sprinkles in a good shooting night so some think, oh well I guess Mike can play. But people talk about Rush being inconsistent, when Dunleavy is the same exact way. And at least Rush is giving us good defense each night.

That's not all Mike Dunleavy does well (shoot)

HC
02-22-2011, 05:21 PM
no that just our view just as urs is for Dunleavy to start.

Apparently so much so that not too long ago there were 4 or 5 anti Dunleavy threads on the front page alone.

pacer4ever
02-22-2011, 05:28 PM
Apparently so much so that not too long ago there were 4 or 5 anti Dunleavy threads on the front page alone.

How many did I start?? 0

vnzla81
02-22-2011, 05:30 PM
And people ***** about exaggeration.....

Can we leave emotions out of it? No one hates Dunleavy and there definitely isn't a legion.

You should think about signing up to our "legion" guys like Croshere, JMV,MG,DD and Wells because all this guys pretty much say the same stuff we talk about here, what a bunch of haters ..........

BillS
02-22-2011, 05:42 PM
Croshere, JMV,MG,DD and Wells because all this guys pretty much say the same stuff we talk about here

On a serious note, these guys are all in the media. Why doesn't one of them ask Vogel the interview question "Why are you still starting Dunleavy" and then ask follow ups if they pooh-pooh the answer?

We can bicker and argue all we want but we don't have access to the source. Why doesn't one of those guys do their job and ask the hard questions instead of giving their own opinions and making everyone else play "guess the right answer"?

vnzla81
02-22-2011, 05:46 PM
On a serious note, these guys are all in the media. Why doesn't one of them ask Vogel the interview question "Why are you still starting Dunleavy" and then ask follow ups if they pooh-pooh the answer?

We can bicker and argue all we want but we don't have access to the source. Why doesn't one of those guys do their job and ask the hard questions instead of giving their own opinions and making everyone else play "guess the right answer"?

Wells asked him and he said that didn't want to mess up with the rotation.

O'Braindead
02-22-2011, 05:52 PM
Just in general I wish to point some things out that guage my opinion on the whole subject and fiasco about Mike:

1.) Mike Dunleavy is not a a shooting guard. He is a small forward. That alone creates mis-matches for the other team.

2.) Mike Dunleavy is strictly a shooter and he averages 1.9 free throw attempts a game while playing 28.8 minutes per game. That isn't a "Smashmouth" player by any means anymore. Two years ago he averaged 4.5 free throw attempts per game which is passable. The year after that he averaged 3.6 free throw attempts per game which is good for a backup small forward.

3.) Mike Dunleavy is getting older and he has no ability to attack the rim at all anymore. His game has slowed down and he's not all that effective. Give any wing on this roster 28.8 minutes per game and they will average more than 11.2 points per game.

4.) Paul George, Dahntay Jones, and Brandon Rush are better options for the team and they will in all likelihood be here next season.

5.) He is a bad defensive matchup on offense and defense with Darren Collison in the back-court. Darren needs a slasher to compliment him and they are just a horrid defensive pair.

Do those things make me a Dunleavy hater? No. All I am saying is that there are better options on the team and Mike isn't the same player anymore, not to even mention that he has no future with this team.

Slick Pinkham
02-22-2011, 05:57 PM
23 years ago I thought John Long was a servicable SG but that he ought to be relegated to 6th man duty because of a more talented rookie stuck to the bench, a guy named Reggie Miller. I feel the same way right now about Mike Dunleavy and Paul George. I don't see how this makes me anti-Dunleavy or how all those years ago it made me anti-John Long. Dun can be a fine 6th man, getting minutes at 2 and 3. And no I am not saying that Paul George is Reggie Miller, I am saying that PG is more skilled than Dun and can get better sooner by getting more minutes now.

ilive4sports
02-22-2011, 06:01 PM
That's not all Mike Dunleavy does well (shoot)

While this is true, it is a big reason he does start. When Mike gets hot, theres no stopping him. I think his ball movement is overrated with the starting unit since McRoberts is starting. He really does the same things.

hoops_guy
02-22-2011, 06:08 PM
The day that Paul George starts is the beginning of a new era for Pacers basketball.

ilive4sports
02-22-2011, 06:08 PM
23 years ago I thought John Long was a servicable SG but that he ought to be relegated to 6th man duty because of a more talented rookie stuck to the bench, a guy named Reggie Miller. I feel the same way right now about Mike Dunleavy and Paul George. I don't see how this makes me anti-Dunleavy or how all those years ago it made me anti-John Long. Dun can be a fine 6th man, getting minutes at 2 and 3. And no I am not saying that Paul George is Reggie Miller, I am saying that PG is more skilled than Dun and can get better sooner by getting more minutes now.

This is exactly how I feel. Paul George is already a better player than Mike Dunleavy. Sure he will make mistakes, but lets not act like Mike hasn't made any. He's had quite a few bad TO's at terrible times as of late (not the only one on the team, but thats not an excuse).

Paul is a more complete offensive player. Paul is a better defender. Paul is younger and can certainly handle bigger minutes better than Dunleavy. Paul will make rookie mistakes. But how much worse are his rookie mistakes than Dunleavy's veteran mistakes and terrible defense.

BillS
02-22-2011, 06:10 PM
Wells asked him and he said that didn't want to mess up with the rotation.

Then the follow up question would be at what point the rotation would be open to better players being inserted (since Wells is one who believes Mike isn't very good), or (for someone who isn't thinking that way) what Mike brings that means the solidity of the rotation is more important than fixing his flaws.

It isn't usually the first question that gets you insight, it is the second and subsequent ones.

NapTonius Monk
02-22-2011, 06:13 PM
I'm ok with steady progression. Sometimes, the worst thing you can do is serve someone the world on a platter (JTins). The PG era is only 46 games old. No need to panic over Dun starting.

ilive4sports
02-22-2011, 06:32 PM
I'm ok with steady progression. Sometimes, the worst thing you can do is serve someone the world on a platter (JTins). The PG era is only 46 games old. No need to panic over Dun starting.

Tin's game was never the real problem. It was the work ethic and off the court issues. And the sinus infections...

Everything I have seen from PG is that he is capable of starting right now. I could get it if he seemed like he wasn't ready, but I haven't seen anything to suggest that.

BlueNGold
02-22-2011, 07:32 PM
Vogel recognized that Mike couldn't guard DWade and benched him in the second half of the Miami game. So, clearly Frank knows Mike is a big liability at times. Obviously another common sense move by Frank.

Anyway, there's not much to this conversation. Mike, due to his experience level, is probably the best starter against about 25% of the league. He can toast some teams with his shooting and not pay much of a price on the other end. He is deadly against some teams. Against the other 75%, the benefits he brings on offense are not enough to exceed the detriment he brings attempting to defend the position. Miami is the perfect example. When he gets shut down on offense by better defenders or lit up by athletic freaks he becomes an enormous liability at SG. Miami was just a gross example of a problem that happens in other games to lesser extents.

BTW, I like Mike a lot. I have never EVER lumped him into the Troy Murphy camp of players. In fact, I thought Mike was an all-star calibre player in '07. But times have changed and he's no longer playing close to that level. That's potentially due to his age, post-injury status and Vogel's system, btw. Just as Jim's system didn't play to most of the player's strengths, Vogel's system doesn't play to Mike's strengths. Still, looking at the big picture, it's a far better system for this team to win games.

PacerPenguins
02-22-2011, 07:33 PM
i still have a gut feeling that mike wont be a pacer after thusday

ilive4sports
02-22-2011, 07:37 PM
Vogel recognized that Mike couldn't guard DWade and benched him in the second half of the Miami game. So, clearly Frank knows Mike is a big liability at times. Obviously another common sense move by Frank.

Anyway, there's not much to this conversation. Mike, due to his experience level, is probably the best starter against about 25% of the league. He can toast some teams with his shooting and not pay much of a price on the other end. He is deadly against some teams. Against the other 75%, the benefits he brings on offense are not enough to exceed the detriment he brings attempting to defend the position. Miami is the perfect example. When he gets shut down on offense by better defenders or lit up by athletic freaks he becomes an enormous liability at SG. Miami was just a gross example of a problem that happens in other games to lesser extents.

BTW, I like Mike a lot. I have never EVER lumped him into the Troy Murphy camp of players. In fact, I thought Mike was an all-star calibre player in '07. But times have changed and he's no longer playing close to that level. That's potentially due to his age, post-injury status and Vogel's system, btw. Just as Jim's system didn't play to most of the player's strengths, Vogel's system doesn't play to Mike's strengths. Still, looking at the big picture, it's a far better system for this team to win games.

All of this is true. I don't look at Mike have no value on this team either. I like him a lot backing up Danny. He will be able to play his natural position which is better for his offense and defense. Plus he will help the ball movement in the second unit which needs it badly. And less minutes is better for Mike and his career.

NapTonius Monk
02-22-2011, 08:20 PM
i still have a gut feeling that mike wont be a pacer after thusday
They have pills for that. :sick: :yuck:

cdash
02-22-2011, 08:47 PM
Yeah, you're right. People are definitely "frothing at the mouth to spew their venom."

I think I heard a story that P4E had to replace a few monitors because all the venom he has been spewing ate through his screens.

It's kind of hard to talk rationally about the situation, when you have to defend your position from this kind of emotional outbursts.

Yeah, that's actually a true story. He's gone through four or five laptops already due to this persistant venom spewing. It happens.

Just don't respond to any more of my posts if they bother you so much. You disagree with virtually everything I say, even if I'm just having fun with something. Then you come back with your sassy, sarcastic, slightly condescending posts. Let's just agree to disagree on pretty much everything and call it a day.

cdash
02-22-2011, 08:50 PM
Just in general I wish to point some things out that guage my opinion on the whole subject and fiasco about Mike:

1.) Mike Dunleavy is not a a shooting guard. He is a small forward. That alone creates mis-matches for the other team.

2.) Mike Dunleavy is strictly a shooter and he averages 1.9 free throw attempts a game while playing 28.8 minutes per game. That isn't a "Smashmouth" player by any means anymore. Two years ago he averaged 4.5 free throw attempts per game which is passable. The year after that he averaged 3.6 free throw attempts per game which is good for a backup small forward.

3.) Mike Dunleavy is getting older and he has no ability to attack the rim at all anymore. His game has slowed down and he's not all that effective. Give any wing on this roster 28.8 minutes per game and they will average more than 11.2 points per game.

4.) Paul George, Dahntay Jones, and Brandon Rush are better options for the team and they will in all likelihood be here next season.

5.) He is a bad defensive matchup on offense and defense with Darren Collison in the back-court. Darren needs a slasher to compliment him and they are just a horrid defensive pair.

Do those things make me a Dunleavy hater? No. All I am saying is that there are better options on the team and Mike isn't the same player anymore, not to even mention that he has no future with this team.

See, this type of thing I have absolutely no problem with. I agree with just about all of it, it's clearly thought out and well reasoned. It's not honing in on one game or one situation. Thank you.

pacer4ever
02-22-2011, 09:13 PM
Mike played decent and the 2nd unit played good. Everyone eles needs to step it up for the 2nd half

xBulletproof
02-22-2011, 10:49 PM
I thought Mike was sick the last 3-4 games. The way he played today didn't look like those games at all. I'm sure if I said he was sick before today it would have been blown off as an excuse or whatever, but he didn't look right the last few games. He looked like himself today.

Taterhead
02-22-2011, 10:51 PM
Mike gets beat by everyone he guards. Let's not go in the other direction and act like it was an isolated incident that happened because he was guarding DWade.

Mike has trouble defending one-on-one regardless if it's Dwayne Wade or Duane Waid.

That's why when people talk about his defense it always resorts to "but atleast he plays good team defense, like how he draws charges."

Yeah somebody even told me defense is more about helping others than guarding your own man in Mikes defense. And that an NBA coach would roll over in his grave if they heard me say differently. Whatever that means.

Mike Dunleavy sucks on defense and the only thing that keeps the silly debate going is the jack asses that think he doesn't. Well I guess I believe my lying eyes, because he is among the worst in basketball and all Wade did was show it. As many have before and many will do in the future.

Beyond that this team is still playing lack luster defense overall. They are just beating the bad teams in spite of it. Don't get me wrong that is indeed a change and a step in the right direction, however more changes and steps need to be made to continue the process. It isn't over by a long shot and replacing Dun with a better 2 way player seems to be the next step.

PaceBalls
02-22-2011, 10:56 PM
Does anyone ever wonder why almost everyone here is in love with Paul George and does not like Mike Dunleavy?

Are we (most of us) just deluded fans who just don't understand the game? Or mabe we are just not as smart as the coach or past coach? Maybe we just don't don't recognize high basketball IQ when we see it...

Hogwash.

It is obvious to almost everyone Paul is a far superior player in his Rookie year than Mike has ever been or will be.

xBulletproof
02-22-2011, 11:31 PM
Yeah somebody even told me defense is more about helping others than guarding your own man in Mikes defense. And that an NBA coach would roll over in his grave if they heard me say differently. Whatever that means.

Mike Dunleavy sucks on defense and the only thing that keeps the silly debate going is the jack asses that think he doesn't.

For the first paragraph, you're full of it. I never said it was MORE about one thing or the other. However you're supposedly a fan of the Pacers. Look at the 90's Pacers teams. Were Mark Jackson, Reggie Miller, or Rik Smits good 1 on 1 defenders? Of course not. Yet somehow they played good defense as a team, and this team played good defense with Dunleavy in for 2 months. Must have been some kind of miracle there, twice. Your words exactly were ....


Defense is about guarding your man not someone elses.

I simply said an NBA coach would have a heart attack if they heard that mess, and they would. I never said ANYTHING about what's more important or what isn't. That's your ignorant assumption and misremembering of the issue.

Get real.

.

vnzla81
02-22-2011, 11:35 PM
I thought Mike was sick the last 3-4 games. The way he played today didn't look like those games at all. I'm sure if I said he was sick before today it would have been blown off as an excuse or whatever, but he didn't look right the last few games. He looked like himself today.

If he is sucking on defense because he is sick, this means that he is been sick for few years now, somebody please take that man to the doctor. :D

spazzxb
02-22-2011, 11:40 PM
Does anyone ever wonder why almost everyone here is in love with Paul George and does not like Mike Dunleavy?

Are we (most of us) just deluded fans who just don't understand the game? Or mabe we are just not as smart as the coach or past coach? Maybe we just don't don't recognize high basketball IQ when we see it...

Hogwash.

It is obvious to almost everyone Paul is a far superior player in his Rookie year than Mike has ever been or will be.

It could be that wether or not a certain person plays in the first second of the game (while important to some fans) just isn't really important in real life. Again tonight, George played more than Dunleavy.

xBulletproof
02-22-2011, 11:43 PM
If he is sucking on defense because he is sick, this means that he is been sick for few years now, somebody please take that man to the doctor. :D

I think this is the 100th anniversary of the same joke.

"Hey Dunleavy twisted his ankle today, and gave up that layup because of it!"

..... vnzla 5 minutes later ...

"He must have twisted his ankle every day for the last 10 years! :dance:"

..... do you really not remember that you've done the same jokes 100 times, or are you simply easily amused by the same joke every day? At this point, I'm being very serious. I'm starting to think you don't even remember using the same joke, over and over. I recommend you watch Carlos Mencia if you do enjoy the same joke repeated over and over, you'll enjoy jokes that Bill Cosby and other comedians have been telling for years if you enjoy unoriginal idea's that much.

I might have chuckled the first time, but quality over quantity, please.

PaceBalls
02-22-2011, 11:47 PM
It's funny because it is true every time X, way funnier than your post!

vnzla81
02-22-2011, 11:51 PM
I think this is the 100th anniversary of the same joke.

"Hey Dunleavy twisted his ankle today, and gave up that layup because of it!"

..... vnzla 5 minutes later ...

"He must have twisted his ankle every day for the last 10 years! :dance:"

..... do you really not remember that you've done the same jokes 100 times, or are you simply easily amused by the same joke every day? At this point, I'm being very serious. I'm starting to think you don't even remember using the same joke, over and over. I recommend you watch Carlos Mencia if you do enjoy the same joke repeated over and over, you'll enjoy jokes that Bill Cosby and other comedians have been telling for years if you enjoy unoriginal idea's that much.

I might have chuckled the first time, but quality over quantity, please.

I think is also fair to point out that Wade was also hurt when he destroyed him, another excuse?

xBulletproof
02-22-2011, 11:55 PM
I think is also fair to point out that Wade was also hurt when he destroyed him, another excuse?

Awesome. You don't even read what you quote. You reply to the voice in your head. That post didn't even talk about Wade-Dunleavy. :laugh:

Makes more sense. Answered my question without even noticing there was one. Perfect.

PaceBalls
02-22-2011, 11:56 PM
It could be that wether or not a certain person plays in the first second of the game (while important to some fans) just isn't really important in real life. Again tonight, George played more than Dunleavy.

Ok, fair enough, but Mike is always first in line, he sets us up for failure by being easily exploited on defense. The weak link so to speak. It is keeping us from really starting strong on defense and also that is time that the more talented guards could be playing.

I do think he played solid in the first Q, making an overall positive contribution. The first play of the game was kinda bad where he just left his man, Nick, wide open. Luckily Nick was laying bricks and it didn't really matter.

cdash
02-22-2011, 11:58 PM
I think this is the 100th anniversary of the same joke.

"Hey Dunleavy twisted his ankle today, and gave up that layup because of it!"

..... vnzla 5 minutes later ...

"He must have twisted his ankle every day for the last 10 years! :dance:"

..... do you really not remember that you've done the same jokes 100 times, or are you simply easily amused by the same joke every day? At this point, I'm being very serious. I'm starting to think you don't even remember using the same joke, over and over. I recommend you watch Carlos Mencia if you do enjoy the same joke repeated over and over, you'll enjoy jokes that Bill Cosby and other comedians have been telling for years if you enjoy unoriginal idea's that much.

I might have chuckled the first time, but quality over quantity, please.

Hehehe...

I support you, but I have to warn you, these things fall on deaf ears with this gentleman.

xBulletproof
02-23-2011, 12:00 AM
Hehehe...

I support you, but I have to warn you, these things fall on deaf ears with this gentleman.

That'll happen when someone replies to what they hoped you said, not what you actually said.

spazzxb
02-23-2011, 12:06 AM
I am currently at the 9 minute mark in the fourth on my DVR, so didn't see that play. Regardless, George consistently gets more minutes than Dunleavy, at times he is top 5 on the team. I just think George is being utilized properly and is being treated like the 2nd best wing on the team behind Granger. The argument is more about Dunleavy vs. Rush vs. Jones. Personally, I am not strongly attached to any of those three.

Major Cold
02-23-2011, 12:08 AM
First quarter Mike played Nick Young really well. He challenged him and stayed with him. His closeout defense was stellar. His movement on offense kept Nick Young real busy.

pacer4ever
02-23-2011, 12:15 AM
First quarter Mike played Nick Young really well. He challenged him and stayed with him. His closeout defense was stellar. His movement on offense kept Nick Young real busy.

(he wasnt guarding Nick he was guard Josh Howard)

Anthem
02-23-2011, 12:28 AM
Wow, any chance we could dial back the emotion a bit in this thread?

I think we all believe that, if he stays here, Mike will eventually move to the bench and Paul George will start. My question is "What then?"

I think it makes sense for Mike to play backup SF and get all of the minutes that Granger's not on the floor. Moving him to 5th wing is the same type of yo-yo move that we all hated from Obie. So assume that our wings are Granger-Dun and George-???.

Who is player ???? Rush or Jones?

Anthem
02-23-2011, 12:30 AM
Tin's game was never the real problem. It was the work ethic and off the court issues. And the sinus infections...
It wasn't even his work ethic. The dude worked hard.

Too many problems upstairs, though. In an alternate universe where his mom survived the cancer, I bet he's an all-star player.

imawhat
02-23-2011, 01:17 AM
Mike's defense tonight was pretty good, for him. He played stellar team defense, which is actually a rarity despite being overrated on team defense.

I like Mike, but arguing about his defense is like arguing about a basketball's roundness.

pizza guy
02-23-2011, 01:30 AM
I skipped everything between Hicks' OP and the last page because I've read it all before. So, excuse me if someone already mentioned this (and I assume as much), but unless Dun is traded for a clear-cut starting SG, he's going to finish the season there.

We're all chomping at the bit to see PG24 get the start, but we knew coming into this season that he was a work in progress and would take his time developing. We all love what we've seen in him, but let's not rush it too much. My guess is that he's the starting SG from Day 1 next season, and I'm perfectly fine with that. We're not going to win the Trophy this season and nothing is riding on the kid's shoulders, so let's just allow him to progress at a gentle rate.

Mike, if resigned, will make a very good 6th man, IMO. He can play either wing spot, provide a spark on offense, and coming off the bench will mean he's not going to guard the DWade's and Kobe's, so his defensive weaknesses won't matter as much. And, if he is resigned to a reasonable deal, I'd be very happy with that. I like the guy, I think he plays hard, plays smart, and plays for the team first.

Taterhead
02-23-2011, 01:35 AM
For the first paragraph, you're full of it. I never said it was MORE about one thing or the other. However you're supposedly a fan of the Pacers. Look at the 90's Pacers teams. Were Mark Jackson, Reggie Miller, or Rik Smits good 1 on 1 defenders? Of course not. Yet somehow they played good defense as a team, and this team played good defense with Dunleavy in for 2 months. Must have been some kind of miracle there, twice. Your words exactly were ....



I simply said an NBA coach would have a heart attack if they heard that mess, and they would. I never said ANYTHING about what's more important or what isn't. That's your ignorant assumption and misremembering of the issue.

Get real.

.

Sorry man, I go out of my way to avoid remembering things I don't agree with. Just a recollection. Didn't even remember it was you that said it.
Anyways, help defense should be avoided as much as possible. If you have to help, someone is usually playing bad defense. Unless you're a big man protecting the basket of course.

Comparing those Pacers players to Mike Dunleavy is an insult to them. The difference is they were competitors. Dun doesn't have a competitive bone in his body. That's why he sucks at defense, not a lack of athletic ability or physical make-up.

cdash
02-23-2011, 01:37 AM
Sorry man, I go out of my way to avoid remembering things I don't agree with. Just a recollection. Didn't even remember it was you that said it.
Anyways, help defense should be avoided as much as possible. If you have to help, someone is usually playing bad defense. Unless you're a big man protecting the basket of course.

Comparing those Pacers players to Mike Dunleavy is an insult to them. The difference is they were competitors. Dun doesn't have a competitive bone in his body. That's why he sucks at defense, not a lack of athletic ability or physical make-up.

:hmm:

Can't say I agree with anything you said here. Especially about help defense.

Taterhead
02-23-2011, 03:10 AM
:hmm:

Can't say I agree with anything you said here. Especially about help defense.

Ok, well then we disagree. Do you coach? Do you scout? I do. Not on the highest of levels, but not on the lowest either. And I am not sure how good I am but I ain't bad.

There are a lot of different views about what is good defense, good offense, etc. But, I don't want my defense scrambling. I don't want my defense sagging off of wide open three point shooters and taking their eyes off their man to try and disrupt a post player no matter how good he is. I want my big man to play good post defense and keep him out of the lane. That helps control the glass and allows the perimeter players to focus on defending their man and keeping him off the glass. And the only way I change that philosophy is if I am already getting owned in the paint. Then I will bring guys down to help. But the bigs should defend the basket. That's why they are big, to play close to the basket.

Scrambling around playing help defense might sound nice, but the truth is that is a recipe for giving up offensive rebounds and easy shots. If you don't believe me go watch some JOB coached teams game tapes. He's got big guys running out on three point shooters, little guys helping on post players who can't score, the whole nine yards. You'll get a whole lot of wasted energy and lots of nice offensive highlights. Eat your heart out.

Help means breakdown.

Some people watch Mike Dunleavy running around and think that he's playing good defense when really he's just a chicken with no head. Rajon Rondo is a good help defender, Mike is rarely effective at it. Good help defenders get steals and blocked shots. They forced bad passes and missed shots. Dunleavy does not do any of those things effectively or consistently. Therefor he isn't a good help defender. That's just my opinion.

spazzxb
02-23-2011, 03:19 AM
Is the lowest level Upwards? jk

Taterhead
02-23-2011, 03:27 AM
Is the lowest level Upwards? jk

Hate on hater.

Isaac
02-23-2011, 03:39 AM
Taterhead, every defensive system in the NBA is built to use help defense, if they weren't then double teams would never happen, big men would never stop the progress of guards on pick and rolls, you'd never front the post, etc. I could go on naming examples of situations where you are intentionally setting your defense up to have rotation all night. To think that players are always supposed to stay locked on to your man that you are assigned to at all times is quite frankly wildly inaccurate even at an 8th grade level.

pizza guy
02-23-2011, 03:41 AM
Some people watch Mike Dunleavy running around and think that he's playing good defense when really he's just a chicken with no head. Rajon Rondo is a good help defender, Mike is rarely effective at it. Good help defenders get steals and blocked shots. They forced bad passes and missed shots. Dunleavy does not do any of those things effectively or consistently. Therefor he isn't a good help defender. That's just my opinion.

Actually, it seems to me like he's in the middle of a lot of loose balls and he gets a blocked shot here and there. We play him at SG, so blocks aren't something I'm worried about.

Don't get me wrong, I like the guy but I suffer no illusions about his defense. I just think this entire "help defense" thing gets a little ridiculous. Either he's "the best team defender in the NBA" or "he is not competitive and doesn't do anything on defense." Why is there no middle ground here? He's a bad one-on-one defender, but he's active and has long arms, so he gets in the mix occasionally. You could do a lot better, you could do worse.

Taterhead
02-23-2011, 03:51 AM
Taterhead, every defensive system in the NBA is built to use help defense, if they weren't then double teams would never happen, big men would never stop the progress of guards on pick and rolls, you'd never front the post, etc. I could go on naming examples of situations where you are intentionally setting your defense up to have rotation all night. To think that players are always supposed to stay locked on to your man that you are assigned to at all times is quite frankly wildly inaccurate even at an 8th grade level.

I never said any of that. Help defense is obviously necessary, but the idea is to avoid it as much as possible. By playing good man on man defense. Fronting the post is a tactic you use when you can't defend the post. There are many ways to defend the pick and roll my friend and they don't all require help from a team mate.



Actually, it seems to me like he's in the middle of a lot of loose balls and he gets a blocked shot here and there. We play him at SG, so blocks aren't something I'm worried about.

Don't get me wrong, I like the guy but I suffer no illusions about his defense. I just think this entire "help defense" thing gets a little ridiculous. Either he's "the best team defender in the NBA" or "he is not competitive and doesn't do anything on defense." Why is there no middle ground here? He's a bad one-on-one defender, but he's active and has long arms, so he gets in the mix occasionally. You could do a lot better, you could do worse.

What is a lot? And does he do it consistently? Or just enough that you notice it? I think it's the latter. Just my opinion. Tonight I think Nick Young and the whole Wizards team suffered through some growing pains, so Mike didn't hurt us tonight.

I have said it before, I don't think Mike is incapable. I don't think he's competitive enough. When a guy challenges him he folds.

HOOPFANATIC
02-23-2011, 07:18 AM
It wasn't even his work ethic. The dude worked hard.

Too many problems upstairs, though. In an alternate universe where his mom survived the cancer, I bet he's an all-star player.

Tinsley also only played for one coach "zeke" who wanted a pass first pass second point. Rick used to use Chucky Atkins over Billups a lot in Detroit, and then came here and used Kenny Anderson and Beetle. Now he uses Barea and Beaubois over Kidd. Granted Kidd is in the sunrise. But Tins best years were with Zeke who let him run the offense more.

HOOPFANATIC
02-23-2011, 07:33 AM
It wasn't even his work ethic. The dude worked hard.

Too many problems upstairs, though. In an alternate universe where his mom survived the cancer, I bet he's an all-star player.

Tinsley also only played for one coach "zeke" who wanted a pass first pass second point. Rick used to use Chucky Atkins over Billups a lot in Detroit, and then came here and used Kenny Anderson and Beetle. Now he uses Barea and Beaubois over Kidd. Granted Kidd is in the sunrise. But Tins best years were with Zeke who let him run the offense more.

Unclebuck
02-23-2011, 09:24 AM
From Mike Wells. I could say so many things in regards to this, but really there is no need, it speaks for itself

http://www.indystar.com/article/20110223/SPORTS04/102230342/1062/SPORTS04/Notebook-Granger-doesn-t-like-new-free-agent-trend

Vogel likes Dunleavy because he knows the Pacers' defensive concepts

vnzla81
02-23-2011, 09:28 AM
From Mike Wells. I could say so many things in regards to this, but really there is no need, it speaks for itself

http://www.indystar.com/article/20110223/SPORTS04/102230342/1062/SPORTS04/Notebook-Granger-doesn-t-like-new-free-agent-trend

Vogel likes Dunleavy because he knows the Pacers' defensive concepts

Nobody is saying that he doesn't know the defensive concepts, I might know how to dunk but I'm 100% sure that I can't.

Unclebuck
02-23-2011, 09:58 AM
Nobody is saying that he doesn't know the defensive concepts, I might know how to dunk but I'm 100% sure that I can't.

so are you saying that Vogel is going to play Dunleavy just because Mike has an understanding of the defense, but that he cannot play it at all.

Rogco
02-23-2011, 10:02 AM
Said it before, but the team's playing well and I see no reason to change our starting five.

Also, did anyone notice that Mike played some lockdown defense last night? Seriously, the only time I can remember anyone scoring on him was when he was fouling Wall, which was a good foul stopping an easy basket. He came up with a couple loose balls, and his block on Wall was one of those WTF?? moments.

vnzla81
02-23-2011, 10:13 AM
so are you saying that Vogel is going to play Dunleavy just because Mike has an understanding of the defense, but that he cannot play it at all.

Yep, his mind tells his body to do it but he can't, his defense just sucks.

Is funny to me how Vogel is telling us this, but in those games were he got destroyed, Vogel made the right adjustment and benched Mike for almost the rest of the game, if he was so high in Mikes defensive abilities, why is he benching him then?

Edit: even Jim knew this and he was his favorite player.(starting Rush for defensive purposes)

Unclebuck
02-23-2011, 10:19 AM
Yep, his mind tells his body to do it but he can't, his defense just sucks.

Is funny to me how Vogel is telling us this, but in those games were he got destroyed, Vogel made the right adjustment and benched Mike for almost the rest of the game, if he was so high in Mikes defensive abilities, why is he benching him then?

He is high on his team defense, not his one-on-one individual defense. There a huge difference when Mike has to guard a top player. he is not able to do that. But when Mike can guard an average offensive player that is when his team defense shines through. That is what Vogel is saying.

In fact here is exactly what Frank said.
http://www.indystar.com/article/20110223/SPORTS04/102230342/Notebook-Granger-doesn-t-like-new-free-agent-trend
The only time Mike's minutes go down is if it's based off matchups or a guy gets red hot," Vogel said

vnzla81
02-23-2011, 10:27 AM
He is high on his team defense, not his one-on-one individual defense. There a huge difference when Mike has to guard a top player. he is not able to do that. But when Mike can guard an average offensive player that is when his team defense shines through. That is what Vogel is saying.

In fact here is exactly what Frank said.
http://www.indystar.com/article/20110223/SPORTS04/102230342/Notebook-Granger-doesn-t-like-new-free-agent-trend
The only time Mike's minutes go down is if it's based off matchups or a guy gets red hot," Vogel said

So why he is starting if he can only guard crappy offensive players? Why have such a defensive liability in the starting unit?

Unclebuck
02-23-2011, 10:33 AM
So why he is starting if he can only guard crappy offensive players? Why have such a defensive liability in the starting unit?

Crappy offensive players??? When in the H did I say that. He IMO his not a defensive liability excpt if he has to guard Wade, Kobe, Ray Allen.....

There are only a handful of teams, where it becomes necessary to take Mike out. Very few teasm have two very good offensive players at the 2 or 3.

dryley
02-23-2011, 10:43 AM
I just want to say here, that this thread was started in order to get some conversation going (which it did!). We should ALWAYS be trying to improve, which means focusing on one problem til it's fixed, then moving to the next one. So now that OB is gone, and most of us are liking the rotations and schemes better, the next thing to focus on seems to be...Mike Dunleavey. I've always liked Mike, but I have no problem with him being the next tweak to make our team a little better (if that's the case)....
just sayin for the folks who think this is too much complaining.

Dr. Awesome
02-23-2011, 10:45 AM
Can we please stop talking about this mythical "good team defense" nonsense?

Unclebuck
02-23-2011, 10:47 AM
Can we please stop talking about this mythical "good team defense" nonsense?

so you are saying Vogel is just wrong or that he should stop talking about it?

Take it up with him.

I'll side with Vogel in this discussion. Mike is as good of a team defender we have on the team. I would put Mike, Posey, Jeff as probably the best team defenders. There are others who are pretty good. (experience plays a large factor in team defense because it takes feel and knowledge)

RWB
02-23-2011, 10:48 AM
I just want to say here, that this thread was started in order to get some conversation going (which it did!). We should ALWAYS be trying to improve, which means focusing on one problem til it's fixed, then moving to the next one. So now that OB is gone, and most of us are liking the rotations and schemes better, the next thing to focus on seems to be...Mike Dunleavey. I've always liked Mike, but I have no problem with him being the next tweak to make our team a little better (if that's the case)....
just sayin for the folks who think this is too much complaining.

Holy smokes, another Pacer fan from my hometown of Clinton. :buddies:

vnzla81
02-23-2011, 10:49 AM
Crappy offensive players??? When in the H did I say that. He IMO his not a defensive liability excpt if he has to guard Wade, Kobe, Ray Allen.....

There are only a handful of teams, where it becomes necessary to take Mike out. Very few teasm have two very good offensive players at the 2 or 3.

Yeah when he has to guard guys like an old Tmac........

I would also say again that Mike looks good against horrible teams and looks horrible against good teams, if we are planning in competing in the playoffs he needs to sit on the bench, unless we are lucky enough to play the Wizards or Cleveland in the first round.

Unclebuck
02-23-2011, 10:57 AM
Yeah when he has to guard guys like an old Tmac........

I would also say again that Mike looks good against horrible teams and looks horrible against good teams, if we are planning in competing in the playoffs he needs to sit on the bench, unless we are lucky enough to play the Wizards or Cleveland in the first round.

In the playoffs if we play the Celtics or the Heat - yes Mike will have to come off the bench. Bulls, Hawks (Danny can guard JJ) and maybe Magic, Mike should be OK to start.

Dr. Awesome
02-23-2011, 10:59 AM
so you are saying Vogel is just wrong or that he should stop talking about it?

Take it up with him.

I'll side with Vogel in this discussion. Mike is as good of a team defender we have on the team. I would put Mike, Posey, Jeff as probably the best team defenders. There are others who are pretty good. (experience plays a large factor in team defense because it takes feel and knowledge)

I'm saying that Vogel is wrong. I haven't seen one Pacers game where I've thought to myself "Hmm, Mike Dunleavy is a good defender." To say he is a decent defender is a crime to people who actually play defense.

Unclebuck
02-23-2011, 11:00 AM
I'm saying that Vogel is wrong. I haven't seen one Pacers game where I've thought to myself "Hmm, Mike Dunleavy is a good defender." To say he is a decent defender is a crime to people who actually play defense.

I am glad we disagree on this issue

vnzla81
02-23-2011, 11:04 AM
In the playoffs if we play the Celtics or the Heat - yes Mike will have to come off the bench. Bulls, Hawks (Danny can guard JJ) and maybe Magic, Mike should be OK to start.

So Vogel is gonna have to pull and JOB and mix and match players instead of starting the right guys now? What a horrible idea.

BillS
02-23-2011, 11:11 AM
Comparing those Pacers players to Mike Dunleavy is an insult to them. The difference is they were competitors. Dun doesn't have a competitive bone in his body. That's why he sucks at defense, not a lack of athletic ability or physical make-up.

:jawdrop:

Do you watch the games or just look at the box scores? You can't possibly be telling me Dunleavy just goes through the motions on the floor.

His ability is debatable but his attitude is definitely not the problem.


Some people watch Mike Dunleavy running around and think that he's playing good defense when really he's just a chicken with no head. Rajon Rondo is a good help defender, Mike is rarely effective at it. Good help defenders get steals and blocked shots. They forced bad passes and missed shots. Dunleavy does not do any of those things effectively or consistently. Therefor he isn't a good help defender. That's just my opinion.

So are you discounting his steal and blocked shot (for which he literally ran cross-court) last night? Or is it that since he only got credited with one each he really didn't do anything?

If you look at his steals and assists stats they are right in there with the other wings. He isn't going to be the best, but it isn't like he gets constant goose eggs either.

Taterhead
02-23-2011, 11:26 AM
Do you watch the games? One blocked shot on a player off balance throwing up a prayer that wouldn't of went in anyways doesn't really mean a whole lot. Mike doesn't give a consistent effort every night, and he never has.

vnzla81
02-23-2011, 11:30 AM
Do you watch the games? One blocked shot on a player off balance throwing up a prayer that wouldn't of went in anyways doesn't really mean a whole lot. Mike doesn't give a consistent effort every night, and he never has.

That is because he was sick and then he was exhausted by playing amazing team defense.(green)

pizza guy
02-23-2011, 12:39 PM
I've just never seen this lack of effort you're talking about. To me, it seems like Dun is one of the more active guys on the court. Effort and statistics correlate, but not necessarily directly, so you can't base it on that. I'm just confused how you came to the conclusion that he doesn't give effort.

Mackey_Rose
02-23-2011, 12:53 PM
I've just never seen this lack of effort you're talking about. To me, it seems like Dun is one of the more active guys on the court. Effort and statistics correlate, but not necessarily directly, so you can't base it on that. I'm just confused how you came to the conclusion that he doesn't give effort.

I do get frustrated at the lack of effort he puts into staying with his man around off-the-ball screens. He doesn't fight through them, he just gives up and lets him shoot an open jump shot.

Since86
02-23-2011, 01:17 PM
Yeah, that's actually a true story. He's gone through four or five laptops already due to this persistant venom spewing. It happens.

Just don't respond to any more of my posts if they bother you so much. You disagree with virtually everything I say, even if I'm just having fun with something. Then you come back with your sassy, sarcastic, slightly condescending posts. Let's just agree to disagree on pretty much everything and call it a day.

I don't know if you're just having a bad day, or what, but we definitely don't disagree on everything. We disagree on Mike.

If you're going to say outlandish things, and then say you slightly exaggerated, then I'm going to point them out.

Bill and UB, and you for that matter, kept saying you guys defended JOb not because you thought he should remain the coach but at the absurd level of dislike.

This is the exact same thing, but opposite.

Let's have a rational discussion about the situation, instead of going overboard and accusing every of being a simple "hater." I know you didn't say that, but that's just about all that's missing.

Can we not calm down and actually talk about the situation, instead of throwing out ridiculous comments?

Since86
02-23-2011, 01:24 PM
He is high on his team defense, not his one-on-one individual defense. There a huge difference when Mike has to guard a top player. he is not able to do that. But when Mike can guard an average offensive player that is when his team defense shines through. That is what Vogel is saying.

In fact here is exactly what Frank said.
http://www.indystar.com/article/20110223/SPORTS04/102230342/Notebook-Granger-doesn-t-like-new-free-agent-trend
The only time Mike's minutes go down is if it's based off matchups or a guy gets red hot," Vogel said

And we've also been told that Vogel hasn't touched the defensive side of the ball yet, and that they're running Jim's system still.

I think the common sense answer is to stick with the guys who know that system the best, and then when you start making scheme changes you can start making lineup changes as well.

Let's not forget the most important part of it though, they're still running Jim's system......

BillS
02-23-2011, 01:31 PM
I do get frustrated at the lack of effort he puts into staying with his man around off-the-ball screens. He doesn't fight through them, he just gives up and lets him shoot an open jump shot.

He gets caught in screens far less than Collison, though DC is a lot better than he was at the beginning of the year.

What I see him do - and I see it often enough that I wonder if it isn't part of the way the defense has been designed - is sag off his man at the same time a screen comes in order to be in position to help on a drive from somewhere else to the basket.

That said, fighting through a screen is not always the right thing to do.

BillS
02-23-2011, 01:33 PM
And we've also been told that Vogel hasn't touched the defensive side of the ball yet, and that they're running Jim's system still.

I think the common sense answer is to stick with the guys who know that system the best, and then when you start making scheme changes you can start making lineup changes as well.

This.

I also think the decision to work with the offense first was an acknowledgment that the offense was in severe trouble while the defense, though not perfect, has been at least serviceable.

Peck
02-23-2011, 01:42 PM
He gets caught in screens far less than Collison, though DC is a lot better than he was at the beginning of the year.

What I see him do - and I see it often enough that I wonder if it isn't part of the way the defense has been designed - is sag off his man at the same time a screen comes in order to be in position to help on a drive from somewhere else to the basket.

That said, fighting through a screen is not always the right thing to do.

You know I really wonder who was the defensive coach for G.S. while both Troy & Dun were there.

The reason I ask is that both seem to have a similar reaction to when they know they are outclassed defensively and that is to offer token resistance on the shot but immediatley get into defensive rebounding position. It's almost like that is what they were told to do and have stuck with it.

BillS
02-23-2011, 01:47 PM
The reason I ask is that both seem to have a similar reaction to when they know they are outclassed defensively and that is to offer token resistance on the shot but immediatley get into defensive rebounding position. It's almost like that is what they were told to do and have stuck with it.

Interesting, because I don't see that at all from Dun. I see him go into what I would call "team defense" mode but not "rebounding" mode. He isn't facing the basket or watching the shot before it goes up.

Mackey_Rose
02-23-2011, 01:51 PM
He gets caught in screens far less than Collison, though DC is a lot better than he was at the beginning of the year.

What I see him do - and I see it often enough that I wonder if it isn't part of the way the defense has been designed - is sag off his man at the same time a screen comes in order to be in position to help on a drive from somewhere else to the basket.

That said, fighting through a screen is not always the right thing to do.

Collison gets hung up on ball screens. He is really bad about that, but Dunleavy's biggest problem is away from the ball.

BillS
02-23-2011, 01:57 PM
Collison gets hung up on ball screens. He is really bad about that, but Dunleavy's biggest problem is away from the ball.

Sure, which is why I think Dun's problem is more intent than ability. I think he is handling the screen differently on purpose for a reason, not out of inability or laziness.

I'll try to watch specifically tonight (it is very hard to watch for these things on TV) to see if the screener's man is being expected to switch when Dun sags off.

I will say that I notice constantly that Dun sags away to be between his man and the action and ends up too far away from his man than I am often comfortable with. I firmly believe this is on purpose and is so that he can jump in on team defense, but I'd sure be happier if he could hang closer, screen or no screen. When his man is quick, he gets abused. When his man is not quick, it works.

Peck
02-23-2011, 02:01 PM
Interesting, because I don't see that at all from Dun. I see him go into what I would call "team defense" mode but not "rebounding" mode. He isn't facing the basket or watching the shot before it goes up.

You might watch him a little more. It was really obvious to me in the Wizards game last night.

He tends to sag off of his guy to get into rebounding position. BTW, I'm not using that as a slam against Mike, I just honestly wonder if both Troy & him weren't told to do this.

BillS
02-23-2011, 02:12 PM
You might watch him a little more. It was really obvious to me in the Wizards game last night.

He tends to sag off of his guy to get into rebounding position. BTW, I'm not using that as a slam against Mike, I just honestly wonder if both Troy & him weren't told to do this.

I agree he sags off his guy, but when I watch him his eyes are on the play on the floor, not the basket or the likely shot. Murphy used to not just get into position but lock his focus on the rim or the likely shot, so I think it isn't the same thing.

I think Mike is sagging off because of the "deny the paint, force/allow the jumper" defensive system philosophy.

Unclebuck
02-23-2011, 02:25 PM
I think a lot of time Mike is playing the defensive system as the team was taught to play it while most of the other players are not playing it correctly. Makes Mike look bad a lot of the time. Causes Mike a lot of frustration

I would need to show this with actual game film. Know it when I see it type of thing.

Peck
02-23-2011, 02:29 PM
I think a lot of time Mike is playing the defensive system as the team was taught to play it while most of the other players are not playing it correctly. Makes Mike look bad a lot of the time. Causes Mike a lot of frustration

I would need to show this with actual game film. Know it when I see it type of thing.

I'll be honest with you, I'd love for you to show that to me. Cause I do see him getting frustrated a lot but honestly to me it always appears that he is mad because he got beat and his team mate did not bail him out.

But again that is just my perspective on it, I would really love it if someone could break it down and show it to us.

Peck
02-23-2011, 02:31 PM
I agree he sags off his guy, but when I watch him his eyes are on the play on the floor, not the basket or the likely shot. Murphy used to not just get into position but lock his focus on the rim or the likely shot, so I think it isn't the same thing.

I think Mike is sagging off because of the "deny the paint, force/allow the jumper" defensive system philosophy.

Yea I'm not trying to compare the two at all as I do believe Mike tries where I do not believe Troy even cared to try on most occasions.

Like I said to U.B. I would really love to get some game film to view that.

Unclebuck
02-24-2011, 09:17 AM
I'm starting to like Vogel more and more

http://www.indystar.com/article/20110224/SPORTS04/102240394/1062/SPORTS04/Notebook-Pacers-Dunleavy-breaks-thumb

"A very tough loss," Pacers interim coach Frank Vogel said. "He's been playing great for us, especially since the coaching change. You lose his shooting. His player leadership on the court is always key. He's probably our best team defensive player.

vnzla81
02-24-2011, 09:28 AM
I'm starting to like Vogel more and more

http://www.indystar.com/article/20110224/SPORTS04/102240394/1062/SPORTS04/Notebook-Pacers-Dunleavy-breaks-thumb

"A very tough loss," Pacers interim coach Frank Vogel said. "He's been playing great for us, especially since the coaching change. You lose his shooting. His player leadership on the court is always key. He's probably our best team defensive player.

He's been playing great? Should I bring his numbers since Vogel up? Best defender? :wtf2:

Unclebuck
02-24-2011, 09:37 AM
He's been playing great? Should I bring his numbers since Vogel up? Best defender? :wtf2:

No not best defender - probably our best team defender.

And judging how well or how poorly a player is playing is not all about numbers.

I just wish more of you would listen to Vogel.

Amazing to me how many of the posters in this thread don't see the importance of team defense. it really isn't about Mike, it is about defense and I wonder why the disconnect

vnzla81
02-24-2011, 09:51 AM
No not best defender - probably our best team defender.

And judging how well or how poorly a player is playing is not all about numbers.

I just wish more of you would listen to Vogel

UB we would always disagree about this guy amazing team defense but guess what? We don't have to talk about this anymore because is possible that the guy is hurt for the rest of the year and won't be in a Pacers uniform ever again.

pacer4ever
02-24-2011, 11:04 AM
No not best defender - probably our best team defender.

And judging how well or how poorly a player is playing is not all about numbers.

I just wish more of you would listen to Vogel.

Amazing to me how many of the posters in this thread don't see the importance of team defense. it really isn't about Mike, it is about defense and I wonder why the disconnect

his good team defense is a myth

Unclebuck
02-24-2011, 11:14 AM
his good team defense is a myth

So why did Vogel just say yesterday that Mike was probably our best team defender.

ColeTheMole
02-24-2011, 11:18 AM
Vogel is in on the myth!

Mackey_Rose
02-24-2011, 11:24 AM
While I agree with some of what Vogel says, nobody will ever be able to convince me that we get worse because of this injury.

Sookie
02-24-2011, 01:40 PM
He's been playing great? Should I bring his numbers since Vogel up? Best defender? :wtf2:

He said best team defender. And I think Frank is just being nice. Although I do think our starting unit offense will be a little off for a bit.

Kraft
02-24-2011, 01:48 PM
Dunleavy should go back and ask for more NCAA eligibility. Then, his team defense would really shine. Getting beat off the ball regularly is OK in college because there's actually time to recover. In the big leagues, players are far too athletic and quick. You can't just hedge and switch your way to a good defensive night.