PDA

View Full Version : Who is not the answer?



ndcoltsnpacers
04-23-2011, 02:37 AM
As we go into the offseason with an unprecedented amount of cap room, we're all thinking about potential free agents and trades we can make to better our roster. Meanwhile, we have a group of young players in our starting lineup that continue to develop. The question is, in the next year or two as we begin to position ourselves to be a contender, which of these young players do you think is the answer as the starter and main option at their given position? It seems that Hibbert/Hansbrough/Granger/George/Collison have begun to set themselves apart from their backups as our future. Who should management be looking to replace the most? Or maybe we should be building on all 5 and putting in solid pieces behind them? You can pick multiple players in this case.

KingGeorge
04-23-2011, 03:13 AM
As I have been saying all year, I like this team the way it is. I think the key target in free agency this off season is to acquire role players.

Some people on the board have been talking about J. Crawford and Jason Richardson at SG. I would like to sign one of these guys if they don't want too much.

I also think we take the chance with Greg Oden if Foster decides to leave. This is a high risk/high reward opportunity that I would be willing to take.

If we are willing to spend the money this year, I would like to see Carl Landry on the team. I think a Landry/Hansbrough combination would be pretty brutal.

And of course, if we have the money in 2012, we should go after Eric Gordon to compliment Danny Granger.

Kaufman
04-23-2011, 07:10 AM
too early to say. my first instinct was to click everyone save george because he's too too new.

CooperManning
04-23-2011, 07:51 AM
Confident: Paul George - I've been watching him since June and he's done absolutely nothing to make me think he won't be the best all-around player on this team in a few years. He might be the best defender already.

Optimistic: Roy and Darren - If I only had tape of their 15 best games from this year I'd say they were future all-stars. If I only saw their 15 worst games I'd wonder why they're in the league. Hopefully next season we'll see a lot more games like the former than the latter.

Skeptical: Tyler - I still believe his best role is as a 6th/7th man. If we plan to move on with Roy as our starting C, I think we need a better rebounder next to him. I don't wanna...it just gets so...I mean people say it all the ti-- okay, a Dale Davis type.

???: Granger - Even though we know what Danny's game is by now, I still think it's an impossible question to answer because it depends largely on PG. If PG can develop fully as a 2-guard and co-exist with Danny for 25+ minutes/game, I think Danny should stay. His game will age well and once there's less pressure on him to carry the scoring load he'll be even more effective. If Danny's presence doesn't allow Paul to flourish, I'd trade him for pieces to make our team Thunder-young. But ultimately I hope it works out with Granger and George. Unless we have an unforeseen superstar fall into our laps, we're going to need all the fringe-all-star talent we can get to compete with Miami, Chicago, and NYK over the next 5 years.

MagicRat
04-23-2011, 08:20 AM
Everyone except Allen Iverson?

The Jackson shimmy
04-23-2011, 08:26 AM
Tell me who else will be on the Pacers' roster in the 'long run' and
I'll give you an answer.

Without that info, if I had to name one guy, I'd say Collison.
He seems like a good kid and I'm sure he'll improve some. But,
to a certain extent, PGs are 'born, not made'. He simply lacks
innate instincts at the PG spot.

Can an NBA team win big with a scoring PG ? Sure, if he has an
'elite' scoring, skill-set ala an Iverson in his prime or a Rose.

Unfortunately, Collison is a scoring PG who is a pretty average
scorer.

OakMoses
04-23-2011, 08:29 AM
Confident: Danny Granger - He's good enough to be the long-term answer at the SF position, just not the Alpha Dog position.

Optimistic: Paul George, Tyler Hansbrough - I love the mental vibe I get from these two guys. Their heads are in the right place and I feel pretty confident that they'll work to get their games there also.

Skeptical: Collison - He'll always be too small and I don't think he'll ever be a consistently deadly jumpshooter or an adequate defender. At times he overcomes those deficiencies nicely, but I don't think he's ever going to be an above average starting PG.

Very Skeptical: Hibbert - The clock's running as far as extending Roy goes, and if I had to pull the trigger now I wouldn't do it unless he signed very cheaply. I don't think he's mentally tough enough. I don't think he ever will be.

Shade
04-23-2011, 08:34 AM
Some of these guys would probably better be served as back-ups, but I would like to keep all 5.

Larry Staverman
04-23-2011, 08:53 AM
Some people on the board have been talking about J. Crawford and Jason Richardson at SG. I would like to sign one of these guys if they don't want too much.

Yea, Richardson might be able to help as long as he didn't knock up any of the married players wives.

BringJackBack
04-23-2011, 11:03 AM
I'll go through about everyone in our future.

Very confident:

Danny Granger- He is an above average starting SF, and if we become a playoff contender he's going to turn more into a Paul Pierce than a Abdur-Rahim/Gerald Wallace. He's a very good player who is attracting ridiculous attention from Chicago. He's going to keep improving too.

Paul George- Already one of the best perimeter defenders in the league, and once he gets his jumper/handles down he'll be our best scorer at either the 2 or 3. He's going to add muscle and work on his jumpshot all summer.

Confident

Tyler Hansbrough- I have great faith in him as a 6th/7th man, which can be a very good thing. Years down the road he's going to win us games off the bench by himself when others aren't bringing energy. He can THRIVE off the bench.

Roy Hibbert- He'll probably always be inconsistent, but if we can get a very good backup 5 to play 20-24 minutes off the bench, than Roy will be great for us in the starting lineup. He's our anchor for us, and when he's on he's winning us games.

Dahntay Jones as our Tony Allen type guy- This dude can be the best fourth wing in the league come playoff time. He can guard 1s, 2s, and 3s, plays with great intensity, will sacrifice his PT for the good of the team, he is a vet and a leader, and he deserves a good 10-15 minutes off the bench in almost every playoff game as he just brings it. He's going to be here for a while fellas so I included him.

Optimistic

Darren Collison- He has greatly improved in this series alone, and he is just a second year guy which is very easy to forget. He can break down a defense and he will continue to get better over the next three years which is something to look forward to.

Skeptical

Josh McRoberts- I don't really want him back because I want Tyler to be our third big. He never ever boxes out and he's a poor rebounder. He is very creative on offense though which is good. If he leaves, I'll miss him a lot because he is a very good bench guy who can pass and brings energy.

Lance Stephenson- I still can't get over the talent and I want him to figure things out. Not going to comment more because I'm still pissed at him.

Too skeptical

Brandon Rush- Didn't change or improve and his defense isn't as good as before. He just doesn't bring it. I don't want his option picked up for next season.

AJ Price- Worst FG% in the league and seems to care about his numbers more than the team. I want a veteran backup point similar to Earl Watson next season. A guy who does what it takes to win and plays defense while distributing the ball to George and Hansbrough. I would actually LOVE Watson back for next year.

So that means we still have holes at starting 2 and 4 as well as backup 1, backup 3, and maybe backup 5 depending on Fosters health. We need a pure scoring four and a defensive four who brings energy and can score.

We are in good hands though, and it feels good to say that. Hopefully next year Roy and DC can emerge as above average starters with some upgrades at 2 and 4, and one of the best benches in the league to top it all off. The Goon Squad can return with George and Hansbrough and hopefully we can pick up a backup point to share the ball with them and a backup 3 who can glue it all together.

Trophy
04-23-2011, 11:07 AM
I'd say Tyler as the starting PF, but I wouldn't trade him.

He's best suited having a 6th man role.

Hicks
04-23-2011, 11:13 AM
Fully confident as starters: George, Granger

Confident-ish as a starter / Resigned to not getting an upgrade: Collison, Hibbert

Not confident as a starter: Hansbrough. But I love him as the first big off the bench.

pwee31
04-23-2011, 11:15 AM
I love Hibbert, just don't like his mental makeup if things are going bad for him.

Kegboy
04-23-2011, 11:23 AM
I'd say Tyler as the starting PF, but I wouldn't trade him.

He's best suited having a 6th man role.

This.

Oh, and :booprivatepoll:

idioteque
04-23-2011, 11:25 AM
Keep: Collison, George, Granger
Possible sixth man of the year in a couple of years: Hansbrough
Trade: Hibbert

I really like Hibbert, he's a great guy and has embraced this city for which I will forever be grateful, but I don't think he's the longterm answer. Smits was similarly soft, but Smits kept his emotions in check and was usually fairly clutch when it mattered. I also think Hibbert's value around the league right now is ridiculously inflated. You could probably trade him with our first round pick and get something really, really good back.

The only thing is Hibbert is the hardest of these players to replace. So they may hold onto him and try to improve at other positions.

Shade
04-23-2011, 11:33 AM
Keep: Collison, George, Granger
Possible sixth man of the year in a couple of years: Hansbrough
Trade: Hibbert

I really like Hibbert, he's a great guy and has embraced this city for which I will forever be grateful, but I don't think he's the longterm answer. Smits was similarly soft, but Smits kept his emotions in check and was usually fairly clutch when it mattered. I also think Hibbert's value around the league right now is ridiculously inflated. You could probably trade him with our first round pick and get something really, really good back.

The only thing is Hibbert is the hardest of these players to replace. So they may hold onto him and try to improve at other positions.

Smits didn't really start to put it together until Dale Davis came into town.

We need to find Roy his Dale Davis.

Shade
04-23-2011, 11:40 AM
I'll go through about everyone in our future.

Very confident:

Danny Granger- He is an above average starting SF, and if we become a playoff contender he's going to turn more into a Paul Pierce than a Abdur-Rahim/Gerald Wallace. He's a very good player who is attracting ridiculous attention from Chicago. He's going to keep improving too.

Paul George- Already one of the best perimeter defenders in the league, and once he gets his jumper/handles down he'll be our best scorer at either the 2 or 3. He's going to add muscle and work on his jumpshot all summer.

Confident

Tyler Hansbrough- I have great faith in him as a 6th/7th man, which can be a very good thing. Years down the road he's going to win us games off the bench by himself when others aren't bringing energy. He can THRIVE off the bench.

Roy Hibbert- He'll probably always be inconsistent, but if we can get a very good backup 5 to play 20-24 minutes off the bench, than Roy will be great for us in the starting lineup. He's our anchor for us, and when he's on he's winning us games.

Dahntay Jones as our Tony Allen type guy- This dude can be the best fourth wing in the league come playoff time. He can guard 1s, 2s, and 3s, plays with great intensity, will sacrifice his PT for the good of the team, he is a vet and a leader, and he deserves a good 10-15 minutes off the bench in almost every playoff game as he just brings it. He's going to be here for a while fellas so I included him.

Optimistic

Darren Collison- He has greatly improved in this series alone, and he is just a second year guy which is very easy to forget. He can break down a defense and he will continue to get better over the next three years which is something to look forward to.

Skeptical

Josh McRoberts- I don't really want him back because I want Tyler to be our third big. He never ever boxes out and he's a poor rebounder. He is very creative on offense though which is good. If he leaves, I'll miss him a lot because he is a very good bench guy who can pass and brings energy.

Lance Stephenson- I still can't get over the talent and I want him to figure things out. Not going to comment more because I'm still pissed at him.

Too skeptical

Brandon Rush- Didn't change or improve and his defense isn't as good as before. He just doesn't bring it. I don't want his option picked up for next season.

AJ Price- Worst FG% in the league and seems to care about his numbers more than the team. I want a veteran backup point similar to Earl Watson next season. A guy who does what it takes to win and plays defense while distributing the ball to George and Hansbrough. I would actually LOVE Watson back for next year.

So that means we still have holes at starting 2 and 4 as well as backup 1, backup 3, and maybe backup 5 depending on Fosters health. We need a pure scoring four and a defensive four who brings energy and can score.

We are in good hands though, and it feels good to say that. Hopefully next year Roy and DC can emerge as above average starters with some upgrades at 2 and 4, and one of the best benches in the league to top it all off. The Goon Squad can return with George and Hansbrough and hopefully we can pick up a backup point to share the ball with them and a backup 3 who can glue it all together.

I agree with much of this.

I'm sold on Collison as our long-term starter, as long as we back him up with a big PG who can play defense. AJ is not the answer.

In short, I'd like to see this:

C - Hibbert/new back-up
PF - new starter/Hansbrough
SF - Granger/George
SG - new starter/George/Jones
PG - Collison/new back-up

Trade/release: Solo, McBob, Posey, Rush, AJ, TJ, Lance

I like Lance as a player, but he's a time-bomb waiting to go off.

I expect Foster to retire very soon.

troyc11a
04-23-2011, 11:45 AM
Smits didn't really start to put it together until Dale Davis came into town.

We need to find Roy his Dale Davis.

Roy doesnt have Rik Smits offensive game. It's too bad because he seems to have his defensive/rebounding game.

Brad8888
04-23-2011, 12:43 PM
Immediately I selected Collison as not being the answer at pg. He is a scoring guard who can learn to distribute, and might get the job done on that front, but that doesn't seem to be his nature to me. I hope I am wrong about him because I am not really sure that old school point guards really exist anymore. If they don't exist, then Collison will likely be sufficient at the point because the point will have simply become a smaller wing with an additional duty of bringing the ball up the floor.

Then, after some thought, I also selected Granger and Hibbert, later de-selecting Granger.

So, for me, George and Hansbrough are the two that I feel are the most likely long term answers at their positions.

George is starting to really progress already, and should begin to see more of his shots fall soon and make even better decisions next season. He is plainly a high level defender who relishes playing defense (even moreso than Rush) who still needs to hone his offensive game. He has the offensive tools, he just needs time to fully develop them.

Hansbrough still has yet to play an entire season of NBA basketball, yet he makes an impact on the floor almost every time he is out there. He is driven not just to improve physically, but also wants to learn the mental aspects of the game as well in my opinion. That should only serve to solidify his performance as a true power forward for the team. Next to a physical center, Hansbrough brings a good balance of energy, scoring, and physicality that would provide a balanced interior presence in my opinion.

After additional thought, I de-selected Granger because I think with the anticipated development from George, and better point guard play from a future point guard, Granger can assume a role as a high level threat offensively without having to be the single focal point of opposing defenses. Players like Danny are not plentiful in the league in my view, and having him is important whether he is Batman or Robin.

That leaves Hibbert, and I ended up leaving him selected as not being an answer long term at the 5.

I would love nothing more than to be wrong, but it will take a significant change in approach both on the team's part (namely committing to hiring a big man coach to teach Roy how to actually play the low post and also reversing course and encouraging Roy to gain muscle mass in his legs and core to enable him to be physically capable of withstanding contact without degradation of play) and Roy's part (Roy needs to become agressive and impose his will in the low post). That is a large amount of needed change in my view, and seems unlikely to happen in its entirety.

So, in my view, Collison and Hibbert are least likely to be the long term answers at their positions, but they could be if everything goes right.

Regardless, in my opinion, things are brighter at this point for a sustainable long term future of the franchise than they have been since the mid 1990's. Congratulations to Bird and Morway for having the tenacity and perserverance required to get things back to this point!

imawhat
04-23-2011, 12:51 PM
I have to say I'm surprised by the results, mainly Tyler. There's one guy who's clearly not a starter in my opinion, but the rest of the guys are there now or have the potential to one day be good starters.

vnzla81
04-23-2011, 12:54 PM
Collison shouldn't be the starter next year, they need to find somebody else and if the Pacers can upgrade the Power forward position(Nene,Varejao,Okafor) then I wouldn't mind seeing Tyler coming off the bench.

Trophy
04-23-2011, 01:09 PM
DC had a solid Game 1.

I like him as our PG. He's done better of late, but the past 2 games, he's clearly not 100%.

BringJackBack
04-23-2011, 01:12 PM
I still like Collison. To other teams he's the guy who better not blow up and drop 20-25 on you.

JEM
04-23-2011, 01:19 PM
I think the starting 5 is good to go.. They are all pretty young and they are taking the Bulls down to the wire each game so far. Who knows what can happen in another season or 2.

They should get a chance next season to show if they can keep it going.

mattie
04-23-2011, 01:33 PM
You know with George showing he's going to be one of those guys who can defend anyone, do you think the Pacers could win with DC? I always have having in defensive liability in the starting lineup and that is the main reason why I thought in the long term DC wouldn't be able to help the Pacers win a championship. But, after watching PG D up the MVP, maybe it doesn't matter?

PacerPassion55
04-23-2011, 03:10 PM
imo, i think we have a good starting five to build around. i still have hope for collison, hes been through a number of coaches, and i think he will respond to vogel well. i dont think i need to say anything about george :). same with granger. as for hansbrough, i love what he brings. and i think he could either start or be a sixth man. hibbert will get there, i still believe in the big boy. i have never been this excited for a long time, and if we find the right pieces to support these guys, look out.

flox
04-23-2011, 03:13 PM
I voted everyone but George. George is the only known quality right now, he has elite defense with potentially elite offense.

Granger will most likely be too old and shooting more jumpshots soon. That with his leg injury history and I expect his explosiveness to drop and he will have to learn to change his game, something that I don't really want to live with seeing.

Collision is the one who is most likely to stay, since we traded for him and he hasn't been that terrible, but still, he is not exactly who you want to lead your team, with poor decisions at times as well as some poor skills. He's been good so far but I doubt he can sustain that type of production for an extended amount of time. I would love to be wrong.

Hansborough is a very good 6th man and can start at times in case of injury. He is much better than I thought and I was completely wrong about him. But i don't know what his upside is and I'm not sure if he is exactly who you want to start. But he, like Collision, is someone you can live with starting for a playoff team but not a championship team.

Hibbert: No.

speakout4
04-23-2011, 03:27 PM
I just don't like Tyler/Roy as the combo 4/5. Rebounding will always be a problem with those two as starters. Who is the weaker link?

troyc11a
04-23-2011, 03:27 PM
I voted everyone but George. George is the only known quality right now, he has elite defense with potentially elite offense.

Granger will most likely be too old and shooting more jumpshots soon. That with his leg injury history and I expect his explosiveness to drop and he will have to learn to change his game, something that I don't really want to live with seeing.

Collision is the one who is most likely to stay, since we traded for him and he hasn't been that terrible, but still, he is not exactly who you want to lead your team, with poor decisions at times as well as some poor skills. He's been good so far but I doubt he can sustain that type of production for an extended amount of time. I would love to be wrong.

Hansborough is a very good 6th man and can start at times in case of injury. He is much better than I thought and I was completely wrong about him. But i don't know what his upside is and I'm not sure if he is exactly who you want to start. But he, like Collision, is someone you can live with starting for a playoff team but not a championship team.

Hibbert: No.

Hans has put up over 15/6 since March 1st. He is the answer at PF. There is nobody out there who can remotely come in here at PF and make a difference. We can go out and pay 10mill+ for a player who will not produce much more than that. And to top it all off, Tyler is getting better while the other potential PF's mentioned are either at their peek or declining. He is the toughest guy on the team.

Granger - good point there. Hard to disagree with. But still want to keep him unless a good trade offer is made.

Hibbert - he is only in his 3rd year. As long as he is not the focus of the offense he can grow into a better player. My concern is that he is soft.

Collison - to small and cant shoot or play "D". Terrific back-up pg. But you are right - hard to trade for someone else when he was only brought in last year.

George - he is anything but a proven commodity. A player tends to grow the most between their first and second year. If he can become a bigger part of the offense next year, I dont even want to talk about Monta Ellis, OJ Mayo, or Eric Gordon. George is a big, athletic, and skille guy who can physically overmatch most SG's in this league.

troyc11a
04-23-2011, 03:30 PM
I just don't like Tyler/Roy as the combo 4/5. Rebounding will always be a problem with those two as starters. Who is the weaker link?

Roy is soft. Soft 7'0's are everywhere aren't they? He can develope more skill but can he get tougher? I am not sure. Usually that trait is either there or its not. Rik Smits got better, but he was always a softie.

One guy is in his 2nd year and the other his 3rd. I think it is to early to judge who the weakest link is. I want to see them next year before making any decisions. Dont you think that is fair?

Kaufman
04-23-2011, 03:30 PM
George is the only known quality right now

really?

i'd say he's the main unknown right now.

flox
04-23-2011, 03:54 PM
really?

i'd say he's the main unknown right now.

Bad choice of words. Known is in we know we can't give up him. Way too much potential there.

ilive4sports
04-23-2011, 03:57 PM
The only player I am 100% comfortable with moving forward is Danny Granger. Paul George, I'm like 99% sure he will be the answer and about 93% sure he will be a super star. Roy, Tyler and Collison all have to prove themselves still, but they are still very young. right now we don't know if they are the answer, but they very well could be.

troyc11a
04-23-2011, 04:03 PM
Bad choice of words. Known is in we know we can't give up him. Way too much potential there.

Hey, I agree 100% with that. Not only am I not wanting to give him up. I am not interested in signing any other shooting guard out there (unless for some reason they trade Granger - which I hope they dont).
Signing a backup is a different story!

Dece
04-23-2011, 05:09 PM
We'd be in pretty good shape if we could improve our starters at 4 and 5 and use those two as quality big man depth... especially needed as Foster is only getting older.

I think to be championship caliber we'll have to upgrade 1-4-5 and use those 3 + a wing... probably someone we don't have yet, to have a really good bench.

immortality
04-23-2011, 05:24 PM
After the 4th game, I really do not want to keep McRoberts, and it just highlights we really need a solid Power Forward.

Shade
04-23-2011, 05:53 PM
Roy doesnt have Rik Smits offensive game. It's too bad because he seems to have his defensive/rebounding game.

Roy is a much better defender than Smits was. And will likely be a better rebounder, as well.

troyc11a
04-23-2011, 06:26 PM
Roy is a much better defender than Smits was. And will likely be a better rebounder, as well.

Being much better than Rik on defense isnt saying much. He is still a terrible defensive Center. Rik may have been the worst I ever saw for a starter. Roy isnt that bad. But he is awful.
He might end up being a better rebounder like you said. But right now he is about the same.
I dont think my comment was to far off-based. Roy will never be the offensive weapon Smits was while being only marginally better at defense and rebounding.

ilive4sports
04-23-2011, 06:31 PM
After the 4th game, I really do not want to keep McRoberts, and it just highlights we really need a solid Power Forward.

strange time to say it considering McBob outplayed Hans today.

DemonHunter1105
04-23-2011, 06:46 PM
Yeah, I would like to upgrade every position but SF and SG (give Paul some time). But sometimes you have to milk what you got for all it is worth. What point guard head and shoulders above DC is going to come here for a reasonable deal? What center will give us more production, more heart, and more hustle for what we pay Roy? Ditto for Tyler.

I think we should be thankful for the talent we do have, and try to use our guys to all their strengths. If we can acquire someone better down the road, I'll be happy.

I am not going to give up on any of these guys after what they have shown they can do against "the best" team in basketball. I'm not waiting for that superstar to walk through the door.

ilive4sports
04-23-2011, 06:53 PM
Yeah, I would like to upgrade every position but SF and SG (give Paul some time). But sometimes you have to milk what you got for all it is worth. What point guard head and shoulders above DC is going to come here for a reasonable deal? What center will give us more production, more heart, and more hustle for what we pay Roy? Ditto for Tyler.

I think we should be thankful for the talent we do have, and try to use our guys to all their strengths. If we can acquire someone better down the road, I'll be happy.

I am not going to give up on any of these guys after what they have shown they can do against "the best" team in basketball. I'm not waiting for that superstar to walk through the door.

To add to this, DC, PG, Hans/McBob, and Hibbert are all still going to get better. They are all very young. They all have room to grow. If we play like we are in this series next year, no way are we the 8th seed.

troyc11a
04-23-2011, 06:53 PM
Yeah, I would like to upgrade every position but SF and SG (give Paul some time). But sometimes you have to milk what you got for all it is worth. What point guard head and shoulders above DC is going to come here for a reasonable deal? What center will give us more production, more heart, and more hustle for what we pay Roy? Ditto for Tyler.

I think we should be thankful for the talent we do have, and try to use our guys to all their strengths. If we can acquire someone better down the road, I'll be happy.

I am not going to give up on any of these guys after what they have shown they can do against "the best" team in basketball. I'm not waiting for that superstar to walk through the door.

Good points! I am all for upgrading any position but how do we know that the person we bring in will do any better than what we have now?

troyc11a
04-23-2011, 06:54 PM
strange time to say it considering McBob outplayed Hans today.

He actually outplayed Boozer to. When he got the opportunity!

vnzla81
04-23-2011, 06:57 PM
strange time to say it considering McBob outplayed Hans today.

To be fair if we had lost that game the blame was going to go on Mcbob and DC for shoking and turning the ball over.

ilive4sports
04-23-2011, 07:05 PM
To be fair if we had lost that game the blame was going to go on Mcbob and DC for shoking and turning the ball over.

But it wasn't even McBob's fault. No one came to help. Plus that one turnover isn't why they came back, the other 7 had something to do with it.

Eleazar
04-23-2011, 08:57 PM
Roy is soft. Soft 7'0's are everywhere aren't they? He can develope more skill but can he get tougher? I am not sure. Usually that trait is either there or its not. Rik Smits got better, but he was always a softie.

One guy is in his 2nd year and the other his 3rd. I think it is to early to judge who the weakest link is. I want to see them next year before making any decisions. Dont you think that is fair?

I don't think anyone is expecting Roy to become tough, they just want him to get to the point where he isn't easily pushed around like he is now.

troyc11a
04-23-2011, 09:02 PM
I don't think anyone is expecting Roy to become tough, they just want him to get to the point where he isn't easily pushed around like he is now.

Good luck with that. I would be happy if that was possible.

speakout4
04-23-2011, 09:11 PM
Roy will be lots better when he is paired with someone who complements his skills: who helps him when he is double -teamed, rebounds along side him, muscles opposing players, etc. Our 4/5 guys do not play together well. We need a 4 who can give us 10/10.

D-BONE
04-23-2011, 09:14 PM
Only ones I feel confident about are Granger and George. Hans I think is a 6th man. Too physically small to be long-term starter at 4.

Collison and Roy - my jury's still out, but I'm not optimistic. We need a point guard that knows how to get the ball up and run the offense in crunch time when the opponents's D is off the hook. I don't think he'll ever be adept at that. Roy has to show some consistency.

rm1369
04-23-2011, 09:34 PM
As starters I'm only sold on DG and PG.

I definitely don't like Tyler or DC as starters. I don't like either players game. DC is too small, lacks court vision, and is weak defensively. Tyler is a chucker and for all the talk of his physicalness and tenacity he's a weak rebounder. He's been horrible the last three games. Basically if his shots not falling the only thing he brings is energy. IMO, that's the definition of a bench player. I'd be fine with either DC or Tyler as backups, but I'd also be fine with McRoberts or Price as the backups.

I'm not sure about Hibbert. I can see him as a starter on a quality team, but I don't think he is good enough to dictate what players they put around him.

Basically, I think PG and DG are the only real "core" players that I would look to build around. The rest of the team are decent role players, but not guys that you would let dictate any future roster moves.

Mackey_Rose
04-23-2011, 09:40 PM
strange time to say it considering McBob outplayed Hans today.

He's outplayed him in the last three games.

Tyler had an amazing Game 1, but he's been a huge detriment since then. His lack of defense and rebounding puts tons of pressure on Roy, and when his shot isn't falling he really hurts the offense because he can't help in any other way.

We need him to get going on Tuesday if we're going to extend this series. Josh is really, really hurting. He could hardly walk towards the end of the game. If he can't play big minutes, Tyler has to pick it up.

BlueNGold
04-23-2011, 09:57 PM
The intent is to build a contender, correct? All of these players could function on a contender but most would be THE weak link. So, the real question is which of the 5 have the potential to be a strong link on a contender?

Collison is certainly not going to make it because he's not a good defender and has questionable PG skills. He simply isn't the guy most contenders would want driving the team.

George is clearly a player who has the potential to be a top 10 player in the league someday. At 20 years old, he's guarding the MVP of the league and clearly slowing him down. I could go on...

Granger is our best player and I wouldn't be terribly opposed to keeping him as a core piece for the future. However, he will be an older player in a few years and I think we'd be better off 5 years from now if we packaged him up for a younger asset. If he is to stay, he needs to check his ego at the door and step aside for Paul George. If no trade and they can co-exist, that's ok too.

Tyler is doing well, but let's face it. He is not the guy you want next to Hibbert. One of them MUST go for this team to really take off. I would prefer to have Hans come off the bench rather than trade him though. Anyway, next to Hibbert we need someone longer and more athletic. A defensive minded Dale Davis-like glass cleaner...because Hibbert is going to get better and better.

Hibbert is a hot commodity around the league because the experts know he's going to get better. Expect him to gain more and more confidence over the years as his body matures and he's able to leverage his excellent big man skills. He will eventually be unstoppable from the high post and will become a dominant post player as this team learns to move the ball and he gets enough strength to maintain balance in the post. More muscle is what Roy needs at this point and maybe something beyond that to help him with balance.

The bottom line is I see Hibbert and George as the only two pieces on this team 5 years from now in the starting lineup. Maybe Hans...but that would not be my choice.

ilive4sports
04-23-2011, 10:05 PM
He's outplayed him in the last three games.

Tyler had an amazing Game 1, but he's been a huge detriment since then. His lack of defense and rebounding puts tons of pressure on Roy, and when his shot isn't falling he really hurts the offense because he can't help in any other way.

We need him to get going on Tuesday if we're going to extend this series. Josh is really, really hurting. He could hardly walk towards the end of the game. If he can't play big minutes, Tyler has to pick it up.

agreed, but its not saying much as neither has played too well. McBob's defense and rebounding hasn't been much to write home about. We really need Tyler to be able to hit his jumpers if we want to win.

vnzla81
04-23-2011, 10:09 PM
He's outplayed him in the last three games.

He played better than Tyler today, let's not go crazy now saying that he outplayed him in the last three games.

BlueNGold
04-23-2011, 10:36 PM
It does make you wonder why Tyler has been inconsistent. I didn't think he would have that problem...typical of all rookies. He doesn't have a traditional game and I don't think he has any jitters.

rm1369
04-23-2011, 10:40 PM
He played better than Tyler today, let's not go crazy now saying that he outplayed him in the last three games.

I think McRoberts has outplayed Tyler by any measure in games 2, 3, and 4. That's not to say Josh has been great, but Tyler has been awful. Have you seen his shooting and rebounding numbers?

BlueNGold
04-23-2011, 10:41 PM
To answer the question, anyone except AI.

KnicksRGarbage
04-23-2011, 10:58 PM
You know what worries me? Ever since Hans got knocked in the head in chicago and roughed around his game has struggled, much like when he had his health issues.

But anyway, I don't know how anyone can say that collison isnt going to develop certain traits or do this or that when he's only started consistently for 1 season, and been around for 2. not to mention a portion of his 1 full season was playing for a retarded ape named jim. give the kid time. we arent going to find a magical cure for our basketball woes.

granger and george are fine options imo.

i agree hans would make a great 6th man.

i love big roy, but i too fear he is a bit too soft. hes an awesome dude and i love him, but where the hell is his fire, intensity, and passion right now?

Also, :censored: those bulls fans at the fieldhouse today.

pizza guy
04-23-2011, 11:27 PM
I voted for Danny. He may be the best player of the group right now, and perhaps George is the only one of them who has a higher ceiling, but I think the FO is trying to make Granger into the answer, but he's not that type of player. I think everyone else is perfectly suited, and to be honest Granger is too, to be a part of a very good team that surrounds a very good player. But I voted for Granger because as long as we rely on him to be the #1, we'll never be much better than 8th seed.

KnicksRGarbage
04-23-2011, 11:37 PM
I am starting to think we see how danny develops after the playoffs are over. I think this series could be good for him. Danny said in his postgame conference, in response to roy saying he wanted danny to have the ball 9/10 times with the game on the line, that he wanted the ball 10/10 times with the game on the line and he wants to do that sort of thing. This guy is still young too. The playoffs (I would imagine) can certainly change a man.

pizza guy
04-23-2011, 11:58 PM
I am starting to think we see how danny develops after the playoffs are over. I think this series could be good for him. Danny said in his postgame conference, in response to roy saying he wanted danny to have the ball 9/10 times with the game on the line, that he wanted the ball 10/10 times with the game on the line and he wants to do that sort of thing. This guy is still young too. The playoffs (I would imagine) can certainly change a man.

Maybe Danny can put in the work and get better, but I expect Danny to miss 9/10 in the last second.

Mackey_Rose
04-24-2011, 12:39 AM
He played better than Tyler today, let's not go crazy now saying that he outplayed him in the last three games.

I'm not going crazy at all. Josh hasn't even been playing great. He was great in game 3 although he didn't get nearly enough time, and he was very good for a stretch in game 4, but for the most part he has been relatively average. I admire his toughness in gutting it out when his team needs him, but it isn't like he is tearing it up out there.

Yet, there is no way you can say Josh hasn't out performed Tyler, in every facet of the game, since the first game of the series. He has been abysmal.

He needs to expand his game, because if teams take away his jumper, or it isn't falling, he doesn't just not help you, he does significant harm. Chicago adjusted. They aren't just leaving him wide open anymore.

Lots of people have made a big deal about him being in Boozer's head, but it looks like that is working both ways. Tyler may be in his head a bit, but likewise, Boozer is in Tyler's head. I hope in game 5 he gets back to playing his game, rather than trying to play the tough guy. We already know he's tough, I'd rather he helped us stay alive and help us host game 6.

Spirit
04-24-2011, 09:31 AM
I put Granger but I didn't really think about it. Now I wish I could change my choice to Collison.

D-BONE
04-24-2011, 11:00 AM
Roy is a much better defender than Smits was. And will likely be a better rebounder, as well.

Yeah, but that's not saying a whole lot. Especially given that I think Smit's offensive game was superior and will turn out to have been better over time.

Jury's out on rebounding. I think he could turn out to be notably better than Rik, but as of now, hasn't proven it by any stretch. No question on the D just in terms of shot blocking alone.

I like Roy, and like with Smits, I agree his development curve potentially goes up massively with a more physical presence at 4. How do we get that piece?

On the other hand, I am far from convinced even with that development. If you get a guy like Nene, your try them in the lineup together. If that doesn't work, at least you have a situation where you have two quality guys at 5, and you have the opportunity to move Roy to the backup 5, where I do feel confident he would be a major advantage for us. Or vice versa for Nene. Of course, this assumes one of them would be willing to accept that role.

I wonder, if Nene would accept it, if the combo of he and Tyler at 4 couldn't work in a semi-platoon fashion. In other words, Nene is the starter, but in very extreme cases of a smaller, pseudo-perimeter four, Tyler spot starts or perhaps ends up getting more minutes. Since Nene can definitely swing to 5, he'd probably end up getting enough time to, hopefully, make him content. I think Tyler actually could do a decent job defending this type of player. Athleticism isn't the issue for him. It's his lack of size/length against bigger, interior-oriented players.

Anyway, a guy of that nature would help. Not saying it has to be Nene, but I like his ruggedness, athleticism for his size, and his scoring. We'd lose in the shot blocking dept., but we'd have Roy for that.

BRushWithDeath
04-24-2011, 11:11 AM
He played better than Tyler today, let's not go crazy now saying that he outplayed him in the last three games.

Going crazy would be saying that hasn't happened.

And Josh hasn't even been good except for game 3 and the second quarter yesterday.

The difference is that when his shot is off he can still help you.

D-BONE
04-24-2011, 11:15 AM
I voted for Danny. He may be the best player of the group right now, and perhaps George is the only one of them who has a higher ceiling, but I think the FO is trying to make Granger into the answer, but he's not that type of player. I think everyone else is perfectly suited, and to be honest Granger is too, to be a part of a very good team that surrounds a very good player. But I voted for Granger because as long as we rely on him to be the #1, we'll never be much better than 8th seed.

If - big if - George can approach the ceiling in, say, two years, Granger may still be effective enough career-point wise, to be a highly productive player. That means George has to develop at least to around the level (offensively speaking) that DG was playing at a couple years ago.

In other words, if we can count on 20 + PPG from both guys, get some development/consistency from Roy and add a significant piece or two (most needed 4 & 1 IMO), I think that's the best-case scenario based on the current group. Again, plenty of ifs to go around, but that's what it would look like.

I think this scenario would include Tyler as the first big off the bench, hopefully filling a Foster-sort of energy niche, but with a lot more offense. Obviously, you'd have acquired in some manner the bigger, physical rebounding 4.

In terms of PG, I can't see both DC and Price playing out together here long-term. I think both have potential, but both are inexperienced and smallish. Ultimately, I think both are better suited as back ups. However, if the remainder of the ifs play out favorably, I could see one - more likely DC I think - get by as the starter with a more experienced, better defending, more traditional PG backup. Somebody a la Earl Watson even might suffice. Bring in a legit upgrade at starting PG and either of those guys makes a very nice backup.

Mackey_Rose
04-25-2011, 12:20 AM
I must say the result of this poll are pretty shocking to me.

Especially shocking that nearly 3/4's of all who voted think Collison is the answer at point guard, but also surprising that so many think we have our five to build around.

I wish I could say I see it, but unless George turns into Kobe, I don't.

ilive4sports
04-25-2011, 12:54 AM
I didn't even vote in the poll because I really dont know. The only two I feel comfortable with are Granger and George. The rest are still young and may be the answer. I'm willing to give them next year to develop still, unless we get a stupid good trade out of them.

D-BONE
04-25-2011, 06:27 AM
I must say the result of this poll are pretty shocking to me.

Especially shocking that nearly 3/4's of all who voted think Collison is the answer at point guard, but also surprising that so many think we have our five to build around.

I wish I could say I see it, but unless George turns into Kobe, I don't.

Agree. George has to turn out to be an excellent player or else we need two, probably three significant additions - not role players or one-dimensional types to round out a roster. If George pans out, Granger isn't too old, and one of DC or Roy really progresses, then we may be talking needing to acquire big pieces.

However, you're still talking one to two positions uncovered. At minimum PF will be a must find. There's very little way to make concrete assertion right now. You figure many of these guys will probably be around, but it's uncertain if they are a cornerstone/foundation piece, as opposed to a role player/specialist piece.

Reginald
04-25-2011, 07:42 AM
But it wasn't even McBob's fault. No one came to help. Plus that one turnover isn't why they came back, the other 7 had something to do with it.

The turnover was Coach Vogel's fault. The game is in its final minute, and your main objective is to protect the ball. At what point in this scenario does having your power forward bring the ball up the court make sense?

Trophy
04-25-2011, 08:45 AM
These are a good group of guys, but I'd of course keep all options open.

Paul, Danny, and Tyler are pretty solid at their positions. Maybe not now for Paul or Tyler as a starter, but they have a lot of potential.

Really?
04-25-2011, 10:13 AM
All of them are okay as Role Players, really just depends on which position we can get a superstar at.

ilive4sports
04-25-2011, 03:48 PM
The turnover was Coach Vogel's fault. The game is in its final minute, and your main objective is to protect the ball. At what point in this scenario does having your power forward bring the ball up the court make sense?

Well Josh is an excellent ball handler, one of the best on the team. Plus he came down to help the trap they set so Collison wouldn't get the inbounds pass. How is this on Vogel? Collison/Granger/Jones should have came up to help McBob as soon as he got in trouble, actually before he did.

BRushWithDeath
04-25-2011, 04:27 PM
Well Josh is an excellent ball handler, one of the best on the team. Plus he came down to help the trap they set so Collison wouldn't get the inbounds pass. How is this on Vogel? Collison/Granger/Jones should have came up to help McBob as soon as he got in trouble, actually before he did.

Josh is an excellent ball handler so having him bring the ball up against pressure isn't a bad thing. It actually makes a ton of sense in a lot cases because the player guarding him is usually not used to putting full court pressure on.

Josh just made a terrible play. Other players should have made an effort to come towards him once he was nearing the half court line but it's not on them either. That play is all on Josh. He should have picked the ball up as soon as the trap came instead of trying to keep his dribble alive eventually losing the handle.

If he brought the ball up 100 times in that situation I'd wager he wouldn't commit a turnover like that 99 of them. But he made a terrible mistake on that play and then compounded it with the clear path foul.

In hindsight there are bunch of ways the other players and Vogel could have helped avoid that turnover but that one is all on Josh. He should be smarter than that.

He played a great game before that play. Fortunately, it didn't cost us.

ilive4sports
04-25-2011, 04:53 PM
I think a big reason why he didn't pick up his dribble is because no one came to help. He's definitely at fault in it as he was the ball handler that turned it over, but I think if someone comes to help, Josh gets him the ball.

McKeyFan
04-25-2011, 08:02 PM
The turnover was Coach Vogel's fault. The game is in its final minute, and your main objective is to protect the ball. At what point in this scenario does having your power forward bring the ball up the court make sense?
I think there is some truth to this.

I am a Vogel fan, and I actually think this move was smart strategically in general. But not as an impromptu move in a playoff game with two minutes remaining. We haven't really done it before.

rm1369
04-25-2011, 08:51 PM
I think it's an indictment of our overall guard play that it's even an option for our PF to bring up the ball. That and the fact Josh is the best passer on the team.

QuickRelease
04-25-2011, 10:08 PM
I think it's Chicago's fault. They stole the ball.

Sookie
04-26-2011, 01:56 AM
Josh is an excellent ball handler so having him bring the ball up against pressure isn't a bad thing. It actually makes a ton of sense in a lot cases because the player guarding him is usually not used to putting full court pressure on.

Josh just made a terrible play. Other players should have made an effort to come towards him once he was nearing the half court line but it's not on them either. That play is all on Josh. He should have picked the ball up as soon as the trap came instead of trying to keep his dribble alive eventually losing the handle.

If he brought the ball up 100 times in that situation I'd wager he wouldn't commit a turnover like that 99 of them. But he made a terrible mistake on that play and then compounded it with the clear path foul.

In hindsight there are bunch of ways the other players and Vogel could have helped avoid that turnover but that one is all on Josh. He should be smarter than that.

He played a great game before that play. Fortunately, it didn't cost us.

Also, and I love Josh, but he does this on occasion..

Josh started getting fancy with the dribbling, which made it easy for Rose to get a handle on. He should have picked the ball up.

But our PG shouldn't have been staring at him from across the court.

Josh is a great ball handler, for a power forward. Not a guard. He gets it stolen from him plenty. Especially when he gets doubled.

Have him dribble the ball up the court against the other team's 4. Yea, okay, although it wasn't necessary. (and I'm not sure Vogel planned it. Quite frankly, Josh likes to bring the ball up the court. :laugh:) But the second he gets any more pressure he needs to give it up.

Eleazar
04-26-2011, 03:31 AM
McRoberts is good at bringing the ball up on a fast break, not in a half court set.

Anyways, I don't really think anyone can answer this question for sure about any of our players except for Danny. A lot of them are just at that point in their career where they are about to either take off or bust. We will know for sure next year.

judicata
04-26-2011, 06:35 AM
The only lesson here is that people who have staked their position on players during the regular season are not going to change it during the playoffs.

Saying that Josh has outplayed Tyler, or the inverse, is a pointless discussion. They both have been B level players that have been silent, absent game 1. There are subtleties to evaluating their performances, but not the kind that provide new light on this debate or that supply the key to this series.

If either of them want to start on a contender they need to refine their game. Which, I thought, was the point of this whole 8th seed playoff experience. I think both of them have learned a few things and have been forced to abandon some familiar and comforting tactics that have run dry during the heightened atmosphere of the playoffs.

If one of them would make a statement then this whole conversation would go a lot smoother. Alas, both are mired in the kind of mediocrity that young players find themselves in when they have to face superior and motivated enemies. But while they both learn and fail to impress, the PD show goes on.

Personally, I find their playoff performances entirely consistent with their profiles: Tyler can provide the occasional lightning rod performance that changes the dynamic of the game. He also appears to be easily taken out of his game. Josh, on the other hand, while effervescent, manages to provide a slightly higher average level of irrelevance, but never inspires the other team to actually guard him or change their defensive scheme.

You folks can keep your tabulations and statistical validation: I see the opportunity for both of these gentlemen to hone in on their failures and come out of this summer with new focus, hunger, and skill. While you hope to win this debate I hope for an entirely new debate next season.

daschysta
04-26-2011, 06:47 AM
Only george and granger have really made cases to raise their stock based solely on this series. It's pretty normal for the youngsters to struggle in their first playoff series (although I think collison would have been much, much better if he didn't get hurt).

DgR
04-26-2011, 07:02 AM
I think Hans could become a good starter in the league. He's not one yet, but give him some time. This was basically a rookie season for him. Out of all our players, he's the one I'm most certain will reach his ceiling. It may not be the highest ceiling of the bunch, but I think it's high enough. His motivation and drive are crazy.

Regarding Roy, he has the potential to be a good starting C. I definitely think he'll be better for us than Rik was. He's got a better mentality, he wants to improve himself and is constantly developing, he takes responsibility, loves Indy and is one of the most likable guys on the team (good chemistry IS a big deal).
Besides, we're not in the 90's anymore and Roy doesn't have to face Shaq, Hakim or Ewing in their prime. There isn't a multitude of great bruising centers around.
If Divac was effective for the kings 10 years ago, and they were a great team, there's no reason for us to replace Roy just yet.

None of our guys except Danny are proven starting material, but none of them except Danny are finished products either, far from it.

SkipperZ
04-26-2011, 07:05 AM
To the people who vote that we should build around this 5... what is yoru definition of success?

i believe the 5 we have now, if everyone reaches their full potential, can be competitive around the level that Atlanta has been at for awhile now.

I don't believe that the 5 we have now, even if everyone reaches their full potential (which to me includes Paul George becoming an absolute star) will ever win a championship as is, no matter how well we develop a bench to support them (limited, by logic, to how good these 5 are - as in you can't say just bring in dwight howard off the bench to try to argue that these starters could win a championship since dwight howard would never come off the bench for hibbert or hansbrough).

are the people voting to leave this 5 saying they think those 5 as starters could ever win a championship? Because if so I really don't see how that 5 will ever be even close to what Chicago, OKC, Miami, and possibly the knicks if they get another star are projecting to bring for the next 5+ years.

im not saying these 5 arent all potentially starting caliber players. (Although I have reservations about Tyler). I'm saying that lots of NBA teams have 5 starting caliber players who will never win a championship as is, and if thats teh case you could argue that they shouldn't build around those 5 players.