PDA

View Full Version : 18 months from now, who's the better player? Hansbrough or McRoberts?



BRushWithDeath
03-07-2011, 11:39 PM
Over a year and a half ago, Anthem, one of the best and most underutilized posters on this site made a poll asking in three years, who would better between Josh and Tyler.

http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthread.php?t=47703

Now that we are more than half way into that time frame, I thought I would get an update. The numbers of that first poll were overwhelmingly in Tyler's favor. I expect that to stay the same now. But I thought I would post some unbiased statistics from this season since Tyler and Josh have had essentially the same opportunity. However, Josh has played a few more minutes per game so I have adjusted their averages to per 48 minutes. This provides the most accurate comparison I could come up with. I will also post some advanced stats courtesy of basketball-reference.com for further evaluation. My personal favorite stat is Win Share (WS) as all that really matters is how much a player helps you win games. WS is the amount of wins a players creates versus an average player. OWS is wins created from offense. DWS is wins created from defense. Everything else is pretty self explanatory. Please take all these into account as well as what your eyes have told you before answering the question.

Josh 2010-2011 per 48:

FGA: 11.2
FGM: 6.1
PTS: 15.7
REB: 11.3
AST: 4.8
ORB: 3.1
DRB: 8.1
STL: 1.5
BLK: 1.7
TOs: 2.7
FTA: 3.5
FTM: 2.5
3PA: 2.3
3PM: 0.8
A:TO: 1.8
PTS+(AST*2): 25.3
FG%: 54.1
FT%: 70.5
3PT%: 37.9
Rating (ESPN): 17.96
Scoring Efficiency: 1.378



Tyler 2010-2011 per 48:

FGA: 19.1
FGM: 8.2
PTS: 23.0
REB: 12.0
AST: 1.3
ORB: 5.1
DRB: 6.9
STL: 1.0
BLK: 0.8
TOs: 2.6
FTA: 7.9
FTM: 6.4
3PA: 0.0
3PM: 0.0
A:TO: 0.5
PTS+(AST*2): 25.6
FG%: 43.0
FT%: 81.3
3PT%: 0.0
Rating (ESPN): 14.48
Scoring Efficiency: 1.156

Advanced Josh:

PER: 15.8
TS%: 60.6
eFG%: 58.0
ORB%: 7.3
DRB%: 18.6
TRB%: 13.0
AST%: 15.1
ORtg: 116
DRtg: 104
OWS: 1.9
DWS: 1.7
WS: 3.7
WS/48: .147 (league avg. is .100)

Advanced Tyler:

PER: 15.2
TS%: 50.5
eFG%: 43.0
ORB%: 12.0
DRB%: 15.8
TRB%: 13.9
AST%: 4.4
ORtg: 105
DRtg: 106
OWS: 0.9
DWS: 1.0
WS: 1.9
WS/48: .100 (league avg. is .100)

As you can see, the numbers are awfully close. My personal choice is Josh because he brings more of the things I value (wins, efficiency, ball movement, team play) in the game than Tyler. Josh is also more than 16 months younger than Tyler. Josh has been in the league longer but I imagine his mileage is lower since he barely played his first three years while Tyler was logging huge minutes at the collegiate level but that is probably not relevant. With all this information, and what you have seen with your own eyes, what's your answer now?

pacer4ever
03-07-2011, 11:40 PM
is there an other choice? or none of the above? or I dont like ethier of there games?

BRushWithDeath
03-07-2011, 11:43 PM
is there an other choice? or none of the above? or I dont like ethier of there games?
Those are your options.

Those are the options from the previous poll.

If you can't choose one, don't vote.

luis3ep
03-07-2011, 11:49 PM
Tyler gets my vote. Josh is a quiet, hard worker who will have a nice dunk or two every couple nights, and a nice pass too. Decent defender and rebounder. Tyler is a hard worker as well, but he works harder and throws his body around and puts it on the line for a rebound every time and hustles and stays with it.. he can score in more than one way and needs more minutes in my opinion. (not trying to take anything away from Josh)

BringJackBack
03-07-2011, 11:49 PM
Tyler. He'll flat out win games by himself with his energy, scoring, and rebounding and his mid range jumper will be deadly off the bench. That's his role.

Josh will be fine, but he won't have huge games like Tyler will. His lack of assertiveness and lack of boxing out will probably always be a problem of his.

I don't think Tyler has a lack of potential issue. He is remarkably better from his rookie year. In two years his jumper will probably be automatic and then that will open up his drives. He also has a couple of post moves too.

huber14
03-07-2011, 11:55 PM
Neither will be in an NBA rotation? They aren't THAT bad

pacer4ever
03-07-2011, 11:56 PM
Neither will be in an NBA rotation? They aren't THAT bad

Thats why I didnt like the chocies

cdash
03-07-2011, 11:58 PM
Thats why I didnt like the chocies

Explain this to me. From my angle, this is really simple: Which player do you think will be better than the other in 18 months? That's great if you don't think either of them will be that good, but which one do you feel will be better?

BRushWithDeath
03-07-2011, 11:58 PM
Thats why I didnt like the chocies

It is simply of the two, which will be better.

The third choice, which nobody should choose now, is only there because it was last time.

Not hard.

BRushWithDeath
03-08-2011, 12:00 AM
Explain this to me. From my angle, this is really simple: Which player do you think will be better than the other in 18 months? That's great if you don't think either of them will be that good, but which one do you feel will be better?

It isn't rocket science.

Mackey_Rose
03-08-2011, 12:05 AM
Neither will be in an NBA rotation? They aren't THAT bad

Not so long ago, that wasn't considered too far out there at all. Just ask Unclebuck.

Mackey_Rose
03-08-2011, 12:07 AM
BWD, what is TS%?

BRushWithDeath
03-08-2011, 12:10 AM
BWD, what is TS%?

True Shooting Percentage

True shooting percentage is a measure of shooting efficiency that takes into account field goals, 3-point field goals, and free throws.

Day-V
03-08-2011, 12:14 AM
PAUL GEORGE!


Tyler.

Psyren
03-08-2011, 12:21 AM
Tyler.

Sorry, I just can't stand Josh. I don't see what he brings to this team other than passing. And the way we shoot the ball, the passing doesn't do us much good.

Maybe his passing can be utilized somewhere with a team that can actually score.

Still, Tyler will be better IMO. He works harder, and just has a better skillset.

Ozwalt72
03-08-2011, 12:41 AM
I'll say Josh. He's good in transition and has good vision. His shooting percentage is solid but he's by no means a scorer. He's just an efficient plus player that if he could defend or rebound a bit better would be an above average starter.

DrFife
03-08-2011, 12:44 AM
It is simply of the two, which will be better.

The third choice, which nobody should choose now, is only there because it was last time.

Not hard.

Not to be a pene, BRush, but I choose not to vote in part because I think both players will improve yet remain quite different in their skill sets. (Therefore, I vote for neither ... sort of.) If I were to define "better" as "more productive" -- using the analyses that I generate -- then I'd venture to say that Hansbrough will be more productive because I believe he'll be getting more minutes than Josh (wherever he ends up, and whomever he backs up). But in terms of who I think is a better player, overall, or whose game I prefer, or even who I think might be more useful to the Pacers in 18 months? I'd say JMac.

Ozwalt72
03-08-2011, 12:47 AM
I don't know if I see Tyler consistently starting for a team. His style of game offensively... I don't know it just screams specialty player.

Day-V
03-08-2011, 12:59 AM
I don't know if I see Tyler consistently starting for a team. His style of game offensively... I don't know it just screams specialty player.

Nothing wrong with being a bench player.

Jared Sullinger
03-08-2011, 01:08 AM
Statistically, McBob is better. He fills up the stat sheet slightly more with his assists and is more efficient.

Watching the games, it seems to me that Hansbrough has the bigger positive impact. I like his superior physicality and aggressiveness. He's a better rebounder and has bursts of offensive explosions that McBob could never match. I also think he's a better defender due to the aforementioned physicality and aggressiveness. He's very disruptive.

I don't think either will ever be a top-10 power forward, but I could see both being mid-tier starters in the future.

BRushWithDeath
03-08-2011, 03:29 AM
Not so long ago, that wasn't considered too far out there at all. Just ask Unclebuck.

Just read the original thread I linked in the first post.

Mackey_Rose
03-08-2011, 08:11 AM
Statistically, McBob is better. He fills up the stat sheet slightly more with his assists and is more efficient.

Watching the games, it seems to me that Hansbrough has the bigger positive impact. I like his superior physicality and aggressiveness. He's a better rebounder and has bursts of offensive explosions that McBob could never match. I also think he's a better defender due to the aforementioned physicality and aggressiveness. He's very disruptive.

I don't think either will ever be a top-10 power forward, but I could see both being mid-tier starters in the future.

Do you think it is fair to say, that in about every other game he also has the bigger negative impact?

It seems like he's either good, or really bad.

The Jackson shimmy
03-08-2011, 08:41 AM
My initial reaction to the question was this. Do I care ?
Answer: No, I don't.

I tried to answer the poll anyway, but I couldn't. I have no idea
whatsoever which of those guys will be the better player in 18 months.

vnzla81
03-08-2011, 08:54 AM
Do you think it is fair to say, that in about every other game he also has the bigger negative impact?

It seems like he's either good, or really bad.

You could say this pretty much about almost anybody on the team.

Mackey_Rose
03-08-2011, 09:14 AM
You could say this pretty much about almost anybody on the team.

Probably true, to a point. It just seems like Hansbrough's peaks and valleys are a lot more severe than most guys.

Brad8888
03-08-2011, 10:00 AM
I think we need to keep in mind how O'Sideburns used Josh (and Hansbrough during his limited time available) and what statistical and visual performance impact that had on each.

In my opinion, McRoberts suffered quite a bit due to being out of position, particularly on the offensive end, both developmentally and statistically, though his overall True Shooting % increased a lot due to shooting well from the arc, and he may have gotten a bump in his number of assists this year due to being a frequent passer from the high post. That did decrease his offensive rebounding substantially when he was egregiously utilized as a "stretch 4" :puke:

That said, it is still tough to look ahead and choose one over the other. For consistency and reliability, I believe that McRoberts will be better than Hansbrough as they both mature. I think Hansbrough will, as has been pointed out earlier, have a larger overall impact in any given game due to his physicality and agressiveness, and that the impact will be positive more often than not. I think it is likely that the phrase "As Hansbrough goes, so go the Pacers" will apply for the most part due to his potential for being one of the team leaders due to his fire.

Combined into one player, the two could be a devastating force in the league. Hopefully, their presence on the same roster (assuming that ends up the case) will see some of the good parts of each other's games rubbing off on the other.

But, asked to choose, I still would choose McRoberts because I believe his overall basketball IQ will enable him to adapt as the team evolves, and he will be able to improve the overall performance of the team more consistently due to having a somewhat better sense for the flow of the game and what is required at a given point, where Hansbrough is likely to just bull ahead and not let the game come to him.

I like both, though, and I hope the Pacers keep both.

BRushWithDeath
03-08-2011, 10:03 AM
I think we need to keep in mind how O'Sideburns used Josh (and Hansbrough during his limited time available) and what statistical and visual performance impact that had on each.

In my opinion, McRoberts suffered quite a bit due to being out of position, particularly on the offensive end, both developmentally and statistically, though his overall True Shooting % increased a lot due to shooting well from the arc, and he may have gotten a bump in his number of assists this year due to being a frequent passer from the high post. That did decrease his offensive rebounding substantially when he was egregiously utilized as a "stretch 4" :puke:

That said, it is still tough to look ahead and choose one over the other. For consistency and reliability, I believe that McRoberts will be better than Hansbrough as they both mature. I think Hansbrough will, as has been pointed out earlier, have a larger overall impact in any given game due to his physicality and agressiveness, and that the impact will be positive more often than not. I think it is likely that the phrase "As Hansbrough goes, so go the Pacers" will apply for the most part due to his potential for being one of the team leaders due to his fire.

Combined into one player, the two could be a devastating force in the league. Hopefully, their presence on the same roster (assuming that ends up the case) will see some of the good parts of each other's games rubbing off on the other.

But, asked to choose, I still would choose McRoberts because I believe his overall basketball IQ will enable him to adapt as the team evolves, and he will be able to improve the overall performance of the team more consistently due to having a somewhat better sense for the flow of the game and what is required at a given point, where Hansbrough is likely to just bull ahead and not let the game come to him.

I like both, though, and I hope the Pacers keep both.

Quoted for truth. I don't think there is one thing in here that I disagree with. Particularly the last line. But I don't see that happening unfortunately.

Pacerized
03-08-2011, 10:42 AM
I think Tyler is better now and I think he'll but much better then Josh 18 months from now. Tyler is a little older but I think you need to keep in mind that he really didn't play last year so I almost look at this like it's Tyler's rookie year. This is the 4th. season for Josh and I just don't see his ceiling as being that high. I'll be surprised if Josh is a starter 18 months from now, he wouldn't be on any other team now. I think Tyler will either be a starter or at least splitting starters minutes on a good team, hopefully ours.

MyFavMartin
03-08-2011, 10:43 AM
I like that the team tends to flow better with Josh, but Tyler is getting better. Josh is the better passer and shot blocker, but I tend to think Tyler will be slightly better down the road....

However, I see both as being the first front court player off the bench on a good team, at best. Neither I see as starting material unless surrounded by much better talent (ie Miami, Orlando, Boston, etc.).

xIndyFan
03-08-2011, 11:05 AM
interesting question. good job BWD. :dance:
if i had to pick a guy right now to play a must-win game, it would be josh. he is smarter [BB wise] and more trustworthy in what he does. the things he does not do well, can be compensated for in the game plan. for example, he cannot score except on dunks. so don't give him the ball and expect him to score except on backdoor type plays.

my only real problem with josh in 18 months is he will still not have the size and strength to do any of the things he doesn't do now. in 18 months, josh will be a bigger better PG, not a bigger better PF. the main improvement is i foresee is a better mid-range game. josh will still be a bizzaro PG/SF combination in a PF body.

tyler is undersized and not defensively reliable. nothing can be done about the former. in time, he should get used to where he is supposed to be on defense. the same thing is true about his passing. right now, he is a black hole, but has shown the willingness to pass, just not the ability to see where to pass. that should come with time and experience. tyler will never be a great defender, he is too short and no hops.

both of these guys have holes in their games that will probably never be fixed. right now, josh is the better player. but 18 months from now, i think it will be tyler. not just a little better, but a lot better.

Pacer Fan
03-08-2011, 11:45 AM
Good question and I voted Tyler.

I think it depends on the teams they are on in the future tho.

I think Josh could excel for the suns cause they spread the floor so much and he's quick on his feet with good passing skills and is graceful for a PF, He'd just fit right into their flow.

Tyler could never fit that same roll, He'd fall over his feet trying (sort-of-speak). However, Tyler is a banger PF that has a good mid jump shot and could fit in with most teams.

pacergod2
03-08-2011, 11:55 AM
I think it will be Josh.

- He has more potential even to this point, because of his superior athleticism and because he probably hasn't played as much basketball (lifetime minutes) as Tyler.

- As Josh improves his offensive game, his overall game will look much improved to many on here. Yes that was a backhanded swipe.

- Josh needs to work on his post moves and looking to score. He does so much when he is on the court, he just like the other young guys is getting his first real dose of minutes and is showing improvement.

- Josh is the better defender. His ceiling for being a better defender is much higher than Tyler.

- Josh is a much better passer, which will become more evident when his offensive game improves. It will force teams to check him and his passing will benefit from the attention.

- Josh needs to add some strength this off-season. He needs to get in the weight room with Tyler. It will help his rebounding numbers immensely. He is still young and growing into his body.

- Josh gets steals and blocks. He uses his athleticism, but Tyler makes the most of his athleticism already.

- Tyler is an integral piece to what we are doing here. I hope and pray that he becomes sixth man of the year soon.

- Tyler is a tougher player, which I love. That is no knock on Josh though, but Tyler brings "plus" toughness.

-I really love the combination of the two. They are good compliments because what one struggles with, it is a strength to the other. I love Tyler's marketability to the Indiana market as well. Josh has that in that he is a hometown boy.

I really like both of these kids. They are both getting their first dose of NBA minutes. I think it is too early for either to be judged, but you can see what they will give us as they improve their overall skill level. I think Josh has more upside to his game than Tyler. I just hope that Josh can work as hard as Tyler to make the most of it.

I hope we keep both of these guys around for the long-term. They will make others around them better because of the people they are and the skill sets they already have. I am just looking for continued refinement in their deficient areas.

Volginator
03-08-2011, 12:15 PM
Tyler, this is really his rookie season and the 1st game he started this year (yes I know he did start last season) he had 23 pts. 12 rebounds against the Spurs. The kid can play. He needs to really work on the defensive end to really be considered a starting 4. Josh did have a 20 pt. 8 reb. game against the Bulls this year, and is a better defender & passer (for now), but I believe the ceiling is higher for Tyler.

Peck
03-08-2011, 12:41 PM
I'm not voting, just like I didn't in the first one, because the answer I would choose is not there. (Understand BWD's use of the same questions though)

My gut feeling is this.

Tyler will continue to have higher high's. In other words all by himself have games where he make the difference and Josh will continue to be more consistant.

At the end it equals out.

Saying who will be better is very hard to define because it would greatly depend on the role they are asked to play on what team.

Sadly with the trade that almost occured it would appear Josh will not be here in the future (I hope I'm wrong) but I'm not sure the min. he will get on a new team. (totally depends on where he goes)

As always I advocate playing both of them together on the floor as I feel the compliment each others game, but that's just me.

Mackey_Rose
03-08-2011, 01:28 PM
As always I advocate playing both of them together on the floor as I feel the compliment each others game, but that's just me.

I agree with every point you made, but wanted to highlight this one.

It's not just you. I think they are perfect complements to each other.

ksuttonjr76
03-08-2011, 01:49 PM
It really depends on the offense and game.

Personally, I like both of them since they bring different, unique skills to the team. I LOVE having the option of putting either the "banger" or "highlight" in the game. Power Forward by committee is NOT a bad thing. The Chicago Bulls won six championships with their Center by committee approach.

BPump33
03-08-2011, 01:54 PM
I agree with every point you made, but wanted to highlight this one.

It's not just you. I think they are perfect complements to each other.

I agree.

Mackey, can you use your contact with Josh to get to start boxing out more? I really think he could dominate the boards if he could just use his body better/more. He's got the athleticism, I just don't see him put his body into someone often enough.

Edit: I don't really think you telling him would change anything, but I do think he needs to box out more.

pacer4ever
03-08-2011, 02:02 PM
I agree.

Mackey, can you use your contact with Josh to get to start boxing out more? I really think he could dominate the boards if he could just use his body better/more. He's got the athleticism, I just don't see him put his body into someone often enough.

Edit: I don't really think you telling him would change anything, but I do think he needs to box out more.

and tell the 11 others also

Mackey_Rose
03-08-2011, 02:05 PM
I agree.

Mackey, can you use your contact with Josh to get to start boxing out more? I really think he could dominate the boards if he could just use his body better/more. He's got the athleticism, I just don't see him put his body into someone often enough.

You're right, I will see what I can do, but if it's being noticed here you can bet your *** it's being mentioned to him already in practice and film study.

I think a majority of the problem is that he waits too long to get position. It was most noticing to me in the Utah game.

I paid particular attention to Paul Millsap at that game. What really showed up to me was how early he started getting himself in position to rebound. Often times Millsap would start positioning himself inside our big men before the shot even went up. He would see it coming, and he would plant his butt into the nearest guy.

There is a reason that Millsap is such a great rebounder at his size. When it comes to rebounding, Millsap is a freaking natural. The guy led the NCAA all three years in rebounding that he was at LA Tech. That didn't happen by accident. Josh isn't naturally gifted with those kind of instincts for rebounding. Few people are, but with more experience I think he will figure that kind of thing out.

Several people are mentioning that this is essentially Tyler's first year in the NBA, but not as many have mentioned that this is also essentially Josh's first year in the NBA as well. I believe as he gets more game time under his belt, these problems will work themselves out.

Edit: If you look at the numbers that BWD posted, it would appear that Josh is still a better defensive rebounder than Tyler, by any measure.

MrHale
03-08-2011, 02:09 PM
def not a mcroberts fan, tyler is better now and will be better in the future

Sookie
03-08-2011, 02:12 PM
Do you think it is fair to say, that in about every other game he also has the bigger negative impact?

It seems like he's either good, or really bad.

No, because he's a bench player. So Vogel doesn't give him the chance too.

To me, this is a potential question. Josh has more potential, no question.

However, in such a short time period, Hans will be able to fix his flaws (if he wants too) easier than Josh will be able to grow. So I suspect the debates will still be on going.

..If Josh is here :( :(

Mackey_Rose
03-08-2011, 02:23 PM
No, because he's a bench player. So Vogel doesn't give him the chance too.

To me, this is a potential question. Josh has more potential, no question.

However, in such a short time period, Hans will be able to fix his flaws (if he wants too) easier than Josh will be able to grow. So I suspect the debates will still be on going.

..If Josh is here :( :(

But Josh is only playing 1.9 more minutes per game since Vogel took over.

Josh: 25.6 minutes per game
Tyler: 23.7 minutes per game

I don't see how that's unfair when there is only a 2 minute differential between a starter and a backup. When it's that close, I don't see any value in making a distinction between either role. It's a position by committee. I think a direct relationship between the two is more than fair.

Sookie
03-08-2011, 02:29 PM
But Josh is only playing 1.9 more minutes per game since Vogel took over.

Josh: 25.6 minutes per game
Tyler: 23.7 minutes per game

I don't see how that's unfair when there is only a 2 minute differential between a starter and a backup. When it's that close, I don't see any value in making a distinction between either role. It's a position by committee. I think a direct relationship between the two is more than fair.

Josh more than often closes the games, however.

That said, there's a bigger range of how Tyler is helping/not helping the team on any given night. However, if he's playing poorly Vogel doesn't play him as much, so his impact on the team isn't necessarily greater.

Meanwhile, if Josh isn't playing well, he may still get to finish the games (Particularly if both guys are not doing so well). So in terms of impact, I think simply because Josh is the starter, how he plays impacts the team (usually) more so than Tyler.

However, with the exception of DC/Granger Vogel tends to just play whoever is playing well.

That said, the PF position hasn't been a problem. We know what we are going to get from those two. Usually one of them will show up in a game and Vogel does a good job playing both of them at the right times. I can't really think of a game when either had a huge negative impact.

cdash
03-08-2011, 03:27 PM
I agree with every point you made, but wanted to highlight this one.

It's not just you. I think they are perfect complements to each other.

Yep, I think so too. The problem there is McRoberts isn't really a great fit at the center position. He gets pushed around too easily at power forward as it is.

BillS
03-08-2011, 03:46 PM
Yep, I think so too. The problem there is McRoberts isn't really a great fit at the center position. He gets pushed around too easily at power forward as it is.

This. It is why even though Josh and Tyler complement each other (that's <i>e</i>, not <i>i</i>, though they do probably say "nice shot" to one another occasionally :D), I don't see that as anything more than a situational use of them in the lineup.

aaronb
03-08-2011, 03:48 PM
If either guy is playing more than 15 mpg in 18 months we are in trouble. The 4 and the 2 are the most glaring holes in this roster.

imbtyler
03-08-2011, 03:54 PM
I voted for Tyler, due mostly to his success in college, his still-newness to the league, and the fact that his potential is supposed* to be higher. Josh is younger, and though I still hope that he gets better and surpasses Tyler, I think Tyler has the potential to mold his game to be a better player.

This is mostly to convince myself that Hans will be worth having over Josh, since we're willing to trade him away. They both have high athleticism and passion, but Hans seems more willing to hustle in times where Josh just runs out of gas.

Mackey_Rose
03-08-2011, 04:32 PM
Yep, I think so too. The problem there is McRoberts isn't really a great fit at the center position. He gets pushed around too easily at power forward as it is.

I'd still like to see us go huge for a few minutes here and there and play McRoberts at the 3 with both Tyler and Roy.

I think Josh can guard a lot of SF's, or you could also play a 2-3 zone with a monster back line.

BPump33
03-08-2011, 04:33 PM
I'd still like to see us go huge for a few minutes here and there and play McRoberts at the 3 with both Tyler and Roy.

I think Josh can guard a lot of SF's, or you could also play a 2-3 zone with a monster back line.

With Lance at point and Paul at 2. Tallest/Biggest lineup ever.

cdash
03-08-2011, 04:34 PM
I'd still like to see us go huge for a few minutes here and there and play McRoberts at the 3 with both Tyler and Roy.

I think Josh can guard a lot of SF's, or you could also play a 2-3 zone with a monster back line.

Ahhh, that's thinking outside the box a little bit. I didn't even consider that. Actually, I think for a few short bursts that could be an interesting lineup. I wouldn't mind seeing that at all. I don't think Josh would have a great deal of trouble guarding small forwards actually.

pacergod2
03-08-2011, 05:45 PM
Ahhh, that's thinking outside the box a little bit. I didn't even consider that. Actually, I think for a few short bursts that could be an interesting lineup. I wouldn't mind seeing that at all. I don't think Josh would have a great deal of trouble guarding small forwards actually.

I said that in a thread a while back and got murdered for comparing McRoberts to Odom's usage in LA. I obviously concur.

Mackey_Rose
03-08-2011, 05:55 PM
I said that in a thread a while back and got murdered for comparing McRoberts to Odom's usage in LA. I obviously concur.

Whatever you do... do not ever compare Josh McRoberts to Lamar Odom.

Brad8888
03-08-2011, 07:59 PM
I'd still like to see us go huge for a few minutes here and there and play McRoberts at the 3 with both Tyler and Roy.

I think Josh can guard a lot of SF's, or you could also play a 2-3 zone with a monster back line.

And, I would even possibly add Granger at the 2, with whichever point guard (I would choose Price for better defense), because at that point it really wouldn't matter who brings the ball up. Yes, Granger would be really vulnerable defensively, but with the other guys defending against penetration behind him it might not matter very much.

Intriguing line of thought Mackey_Rose!

Pacersalltheway10
03-08-2011, 08:04 PM
Theyre not easy to compare. Both play a different style. But both styles are need on a good IMO. Josh is the athletic dunking passing PF and Tyler is the bruiser and rebounder. Josh uses his athleticism to get rebounds while Tyler muscle his way and hustles a lot for rebounds. it's like comparing a point guard to a center. Josh plays more a like a point guard and Tyler plays like more a of a big guy.

Ozwalt72
03-09-2011, 01:11 PM
Hansbrough's Last 5 Games

MPG:27.4
PPG:16.6
FG:46.5%
RB:7.2
Assists:0.2
Blocks:0.2
Steals:1.0

McRobert's Last 5 Games

MPG:23.6
PPG:8
FG:48.5
RB: 5.8
Assists:2.6
Blocks: 0.4
Steals: 1.2

An interesting look at the past 5 games, if nothing else.

cdash
03-09-2011, 03:24 PM
Whatever you do... do not ever compare Josh McRoberts to Lamar Odom.

Compare their games all you want, just not their impact on the game. There is a massive difference there and you know it. But your personal relationship with Josh muddies the water.

Mackey_Rose
03-09-2011, 04:02 PM
Compare their games all you want, just not their impact on the game. There is a massive difference there and you know it. But your personal relationship with Josh muddies the water.

And if you remembered correctly, you'd remember that's all I ever did. To which you responded with a smilie expressing your shock, and then immediately flipped to agreement later in the thread.

Trophy
03-09-2011, 04:06 PM
Josh is a better teammate I feel like. He passes the ball around.

I feel like Tyler is still adjusting and he's probably going to be with this team moving forward.

I was confident Josh was going to re-sign, but after that near deal, it's up in the air.

cdash
03-09-2011, 04:10 PM
And if you remembered correctly, you'd remember that's all I ever did. To which you responded with a smilie expressing your shock, and then immediately flipped to agreement later in the thread.

You said his ceiling is Lamar Odom. To me, that means you think he can realistically be as good as Lamar Odom is. Correct me if I'm wrong there. I thought that was outlandish (still do). Then as people were comparing their games, I did agree to that, because in a vaccuum, they do have similar skill sets for their size. I went on to say that while they may have similar skill sets, Lamar Odom's impact on the game is vastly superior to Josh's and it always will be. Point of the exercise: You can compare two players' games without saying they are equals on the court.

Mackey_Rose
03-09-2011, 04:20 PM
You said his ceiling is Lamar Odom. To me, that means you think he can realistically be as good as Lamar Odom is. Correct me if I'm wrong there. I thought that was outlandish (still do). Then as people were comparing their games, I did agree to that, because in a vaccuum, they do have similar skill sets for their size. I went on to say that while they may have similar skill sets, Lamar Odom's impact on the game is vastly superior to Josh's and it always will be. Point of the exercise: You can compare two players' games without saying they are equals on the court.

http://www.pacersdigest.com/showpost.php?p=1163556&postcount=188


Okay, I'll go with Lamar Odom as his ceiling. If he works his *** off during the summer, treats his body as a temple a la Steve Nash, gets in an absolutely perfect situation, surrounded by the right players with the right coach, I think he could approach Lamar Odom's numbers. I realize I asked for ceilings, but I give Josh about a 3% chance of ever being a top 3 player on a title winning team (as Odom has been the past two years).

The lessons from JOB in elementary contradiction really were effective.

cdash
03-09-2011, 04:21 PM
http://www.pacersdigest.com/showpost.php?p=1163556&postcount=188



The lessons from JOB in elementary contradiction really were effective.

:laugh:

Did you not notice the sarcastic nature of that post? I was being very facetious.

Mackey_Rose
03-09-2011, 04:27 PM
:laugh:

Did you not notice the sarcastic nature of that post? I was being very facetious.

I did not notice sarcasm there. It was poorly done if that was the case. To me you just described what a player's ceiling means. What the hell do you think the definition of a ceiling for a player is?

I believe it's the absolute highest level the player could possibly reach, if every piece falls perfectly into place.

cdash
03-09-2011, 04:31 PM
I did not notice sarcasm there. It was poorly done if that was the case. To me you just described what a player's ceiling means. What the hell do you think the definition of a ceiling for a player is?

I believe it's the absolute highest level the player could possibly reach, if every piece falls perfectly into place.

Okay, then you could say that Ronnie Brewer's ceiling is Kobe Bryant. He has the physical tools to be on that level, so why can't be he Kobe in a perfect world? Obviously that's an extreme example, but you can play skill set/ceiling games all day with players. Let's just agree to disagree so we don't derail the thread anymore than we already have. We have bickered enough about trivial crap in other threads.

PacersPride
03-12-2011, 07:57 PM
i think tyler has a chance to be a poor mans Carlos Boozer. i like Josh alot, but he needs to work on his 10-15 jumper this offseason.

Hansbrough, no offense to McBob but he seems like the harder worker, at least weight room wise. McBob needs to add some muscle.

i like both players, but Hansbroughs ceiling is higher at this point in time.