PDA

View Full Version : Anyone worried about Hansbrough?



pwee31
04-24-2011, 06:00 PM
I may be overreacting, but I'm a little concerned about Tyler.

Of course he could just be missing jump shots, but it reminds me of his vertigo issues last year. I know he came back made shots in Game 1 after the elbow scare, but he's been off since then.

It just worries me as it was similar to last year. He got hit in the Boston game, and played a couple games afterwards and his shot just seemed unusually off during that stretch before they sat him the rest of the season.

I really hope it's not the case, and he's just missing shots, but I'm curious

Heisenberg
04-24-2011, 06:04 PM
Not sure, but pretty sure I noticed something (cotton?) stuffed in his left ear last game.

Anthem
04-24-2011, 06:04 PM
He hasn't seemed shaky to me, his shots have just missed. Last time he really seemed "off."

We'll find out soon, I guess.

Day-V
04-24-2011, 06:06 PM
I'm not worried, but that only means the rest of the coo-coos who post on here are.

Unclebuck
04-24-2011, 06:07 PM
Bulls have adjusted and completely taken away the pcik and pop play with Darren and Tyler. You have to expect that. What I don't like is he holds the ball too long. If he cannot shoot he needs to either drive or pass it

vnzla81
04-24-2011, 06:09 PM
I've noticed that his left ear is black, the hit was hard.

ksuttonjr76
04-24-2011, 06:28 PM
I'm more mad that he keeps letting Boozer push/elbow him during FT attempts. Watch the replays, and you'll see what I mean.

jeffg-body
04-24-2011, 06:29 PM
I'm not worried myself. It just seems like his shots aren't falling.

Haywoode Workman
04-24-2011, 06:35 PM
he'll probably get some cauliflower ear. thats the mark of a true contender in my eyes. anybody else in nba history have cauliflower ear?

croz24
04-24-2011, 06:37 PM
this is just who he is and why he should be the first big off the bench, and not the starter.

Hoop
04-24-2011, 06:40 PM
I'm a little worried about the vertigo issue, he took an extremely hard hit to the head in the first game. And another hit to the head in game 3.

On the bright side, if vertigo is not an issue this time, it probably bodes well for not being a long term issue to worry about.

If he's just missing shots, with experience and more practice he'll do much better. We know he has a nice jump shot, hopefully consistency will come.

itscaleb
04-24-2011, 06:45 PM
He's definitely been off, in game 1 he would pick and pop without hesitation, now he gets the ball and holds it and hesitates as if hes not sure what to do. Maybe its because the bulls are playing better D, but he needs to be more decisive with what he wants to do.

KingGeorge
04-24-2011, 06:47 PM
I don't think this has anything to do with Hansbrough's health. He has just been taking bad shots, and has been missing the open jumpers he usually hits.

We should also give the Bulls defense some credit.

xIndyFan
04-24-2011, 07:09 PM
. . . What I don't like is he holds the ball too long. If he cannot shoot he needs to either drive or pass it

i noticed this too. but in one sense, this is a big improvement this year. at the beginning of the year, he was the blackest of black holes. i remember someone posting that he shot the ball like he'd never get another chance. thought that was a nice accurate description. now he is catching and looking for an alternative to taking the shot. that is a huge improvement this year.

but tyler does let the ball stick to his fingers. pacers still have too many ball stoppers, but it seems they are generally doing better. ah, the joys of rooting for young players

pwee31
04-24-2011, 07:09 PM
I know the Bulls have stepped on the defense, and play that pick and pop better, but he is still getting pretty good looks, and hasn't been close on some.

I hope it's just him missing shots, and being back in Chicago brings his stroke back. He and Hibbert are keys on putting pressure on Boozer and Noah.

I just remembered his jumper being off leading up the the Vertigo finding. I knew he was dizzy Game 1 after the shot to the ear, and was curious what others thought

speakout4
04-24-2011, 07:18 PM
I'm a little worried about the vertigo issue, he took an extremely hard hit to the head in the first game. And another hit to the head in game 3.

On the bright side, if vertigo is not an issue this time, it probably bodes well for not being a long term issue to worry about.

If he's just missing shots, with experience and more practice he'll do much better. We know he has a nice jump shot, hopefully consistency will come.
If vertigo were an issue he wouldn't even be able to run from one end of the court to the other.

pwee31
04-24-2011, 07:25 PM
If vertigo were an issue he wouldn't even be able to run from one end of the court to the other.

I'll add again that he did play a couple of games last year, after he took the hit against Boston.

1984
04-24-2011, 08:17 PM
He hasn't seemed shaky to me, his shots have just missed. Last time he really seemed "off."

We'll find out soon, I guess.

Do you really expect Tyler Hansbrough to hit jump shots with the consistancy of Karl Malone in his second (hybrid-first) season? I don't think Hansbrough has been "off" as much as he hasn't been, "on." Hansbrough has played aggressive around the basket on both ends of the court. Meanwhile, the Bulls are closing on his jump shot quickly. He has passed up a few jumpers, though it should be said, for a pass to the interior.

Why worry about Hansbrough? He has been among the reasons the Pacers have achieved success in this serious. THAT, and, the fact that Vogel has outcoached Chicago for 192 minutes.

IndyHoya
04-24-2011, 09:23 PM
All I know is that if Tyler has a repeat of Game 1, Game 5 should be very, very interesting. We'll see, I guess. My fingers are crossed.

dal9
04-24-2011, 09:37 PM
I don't think Hansbrough has been "off" as much as he hasn't been, "on."

:highfive:

LA_Confidential
04-24-2011, 09:41 PM
Im not too worried about Tyler. I just wish we had the luxury of bringing him off the bench.

PR07
04-24-2011, 10:13 PM
His midrange shot has just been off. Otherwise, he's looked okay. I seem to remember him making a nice move in the paint to score in Game 4.

Anthem
04-24-2011, 10:18 PM
Do you really expect Tyler Hansbrough to hit jump shots with the consistancy of Karl Malone in his second (hybrid-first) season?
Absolutely not.


I don't think Hansbrough has been "off" as much as he hasn't been, "on."
We've always been at war with Eurasia.

I think you misunderstood. By "last time" I meant "last time he had a head injury."

Whiskeyjim
04-25-2011, 12:05 AM
Well, it is more than just that he is 'not on.'

He has obviously lost confidence in his shot. I have watched him since he was a freshman in college and I have never seen him play with such indecision. His drive on the base line (he lost it out of bounds) after having he recovered his own blocked jumper is not Tyler Hansbrough.

He no longer crashes the offensive boards. In fact he gets out and allows Boozer his space.

His effectiveness in general has been negated since Game 1.

Yes, his ear looks nasty. One way or another, something is going on inside his head. I noticed Vogel sat him for quite a spell in the second half. If he is not going to score, I would give more minutes to Foster. The man has been a machine out there against Chicago; 7 offensive boards in Game 4 alone.

And that is not a knock against Hans. But the team needs him to step up right now, or use his minutes.

dal9
04-25-2011, 12:22 AM
We've always been at war with Eurasia.



lol i completely missed that the poster's name was "1984"...

Sookie
04-25-2011, 12:26 AM
Bulls have adjusted and completely taken away the pcik and pop play with Darren and Tyler. You have to expect that. What I don't like is he holds the ball too long. If he cannot shoot he needs to either drive or pass it

Right, Pacer's adjusted a bit by moving it farther back, but Hans struggles to hit that.

spazzxb
04-25-2011, 02:12 AM
Rose has also been camping on the pass and when he hasn't deflected, the pass still is missing some accuracy. Tyler isn't getting to catch and shoot smoothly and the defense has more time to close on him. As I have said before in an earlier discussion about Tyler's health it isn't the only factor in his scoring struggles but his best shot has been almost completely taken away, in fact the Pick and pop With Collison and Tyler has become somewhat risky. I have been wondering for a few days if there is anyway to take advantage of Rose camping on that pass, maybe a fake pass with a Collision pull up jumper..

15th parallel
04-25-2011, 02:47 AM
I think the defense is what causes Tyler to miss his jumpshots. I just wish Vogel would try to reduce the pick and pop play and instead let him work inside more. Both his field goals in game 4 are inside shots, and that is his most effective play. Maybe they can devise some backdoor plays for him, wherein he'll slide from the baseline and receive the pass when he's under the basket.

JEM
04-25-2011, 10:37 AM
I think he is ok health wise.

But I also think he is probably a little tired. He has played more this season than he has at any point in his basketball career. Looking at his misses and you will see that most of them are short but on line.

If something were wrong he wouldnt be able to play defense either but he has been bringing it on that side of the floor this series.

The Bulls have been fronting Hansbrough in the post since Game 2.. I dont know why they dont pull Hibbert out and try to hit a pass over the top to Hansbrough because the Bulls really arent covering it.

Kid Minneapolis
04-25-2011, 11:11 AM
I'm a recurring vertigo sufferer, and honestly, I'm not sure getting "hit in the head" has anything to do with it. I could try to summarize it, but easier to just paste it. This information is common all over the 'net; it seems it's mostly, usually an inner-ear thing:



"Although your ears are hearing organs, they are also the body’s primary organ of balance. We all have three balance systems, – the vestibular system is located in your inner ears and it senses gravity or weight, curved and straight movements. It has thousands of miniscule hair cells that send balance signals for your brain to interpret where you are in relation to other physical things. <SNIP>

The vestibular system in your ears is the main balance system and if that’s not working then the strain is immense... <SNIP>

...more likely that your vestibular system is damaged. When this occurs it still sends signals to the brain. Unfortunately the brain can’t realise that these are inaccurate signals and it still acts on them which is why human beings suffer from vertigo, dizziness or nausea, your body is not where your balance system thinks it is. As age goes on the brain realizes that the vestibular system is not in tandem with the other two balance systems and it relies more on ocular and proprioceptive inputs which method that the symptoms can improve."


I had a ton of vertigo/balances issues that I woke up with one day about 10 years ago and made a lot of subsequent doctor's visits, in which they checked for anything and everything, and determined that it was likely damage to my inner ear, caused by an viral inner ear infection. The doctor told me that my ears were literally damaged for good; that they can't really fix themselvse, and that my other balance systems (mainly vision and muscles) would have to work with my brain to "re-learn" how to balance. And that takes time... and it can also recur.

I get recurring vertigo about once a year, and it's usually triggered by nothing in general. I just wake up and bam --- can't stand up. Usually takes a day or two for me to get back to normal.

So I'm not entirely thinking that Tyler getting hit in the head would automatically cause him to have vertigo... I spose it could... but if I had to guess, the dude had an viral inner ear infection that just did damage to his inner ear and it took him awhile to recover. When I first got vertigo 10 years ago, it took me about four months to get back to normal. The recurrences are usually no more than a few days.

Lou Bega
04-25-2011, 12:23 PM
Hansbrough will score 20 points Game 4.

Hicks
04-25-2011, 12:30 PM
Hansbrough will score 20 points Game 4.

I promise you he will not. :)

BRushWithDeath
04-25-2011, 12:31 PM
During the regular season he had 8 stretches of 3 or more consecutive games shooting sub 50% in all three games. So it's not like this completely out of nowhere.

If you weren't worried before there is no reason to be worried now.

Let's hope he hits his first shot or two on Tuesday and his extreme hot/cold tendency works in our favor.

Let's also hope that in the future he can find ways to positively impact the game without scoring to help negate some of those cold streaks.

BRushWithDeath
04-25-2011, 12:33 PM
I promise you he will not. :)

Clearly the game 4 train has come and gone.

He is due for a good game 5 though. His tendecy says to expect 1 good game for every 3-4 bad ones. I expect 16+ for him Tuesday on better than 50% shooting.

CableKC
04-25-2011, 12:41 PM
Hansbrough will score 20 points Game 4.


I promise you he will not. :)
Hansbrough scoring in double-digits is one of many things that MUST happen in order for us to hold off being eliminated.....but it is not the only thing. Hibbert has to step up like he did in game 4, Foster has to play a good # of minutes as the Enforcer and MOST OF ALL....DC and Granger have to play SMART and not just go one-on-one against the Bulls.

BRushWithDeath
04-25-2011, 12:57 PM
Hansbrough scoring in double-digits is one of many things that MUST happen in order for us to hold off being eliminated...

We're 18-18 in this year in games (counting the playoffs) that Hansbrough has played in and scored in single digits.

What's important, is that if he does appear to be off on his shot that his minutes be limited. Another 2-12 in 40 minutes (game 2) would be a killer but if he's 2-8 in 24 minutes (game 4) we'd still have a shot.

Sookie
04-25-2011, 01:15 PM
We're 18-18 in this year in games (counting the playoffs) that Hansbrough has played in and scored in single digits.

What's important, is that if he does appear to be off on his shot that his minutes be limited. Another 2-12 in 40 minutes (game 2) would be a killer but if he's 2-8 in 24 minutes (game 4) we'd still have a shot.

Well, what's important is that one of our two PFs play well, and Vogel plays the one that is playing well.

If Hans goes 2-12, but is still playing better than Josh, then he needs to play those minutes, but we'll probably lose.

Typically with Josh and Hans though, one of the two show up.

Hicks
04-25-2011, 01:28 PM
Josh just hasn't done as much as I thought he would. But it seems obvious that he's hurt, so I understand that. It's a shame; we needed everything we could get from those two, and one's gimpy and the other one has had one good game out of four. Rough.

Rogco
04-25-2011, 01:46 PM
I think he's just started thinking to much. I noticed in game three he had a couple wide open jump shots in his zone to start the game, but he didn't take them. That seemed to put him out of his flow. With Hans at the beginning of games he should have a green light if the shot is open to try and get into the flow of the game.

He's still come up with some big plays, and regardless of our worries about Hans, I can guarantee that Bulls fans are more worried by the play of Boozer, which says something about Hans and McRoberts on the defensive end.

CableKC
04-25-2011, 02:05 PM
We're 18-18 in this year in games (counting the playoffs) that Hansbrough has played in and scored in single digits.

What's important, is that if he does appear to be off on his shot that his minutes be limited. Another 2-12 in 40 minutes (game 2) would be a killer but if he's 2-8 in 24 minutes (game 4) we'd still have a shot.
I don't think that his minutes will be limited even if his shot is off.....him and Foster are the only ones that are strong enough to defend Boozer inside the paint.

Boozer may be doing okay on the offensive end where he is killing us on the boards.......but I can tell you that he's had to earn his points when Hansbrough has been defending him. I recall a play in the last game where Boozer was trying to back Hansbrough into the paint....Boozer was backing into Hansbrough a few times with his butt...but Hansbrough was pushing back and actually forced ( if not pushed ) Boozer back a bit...forcing to take a jumpshot further away from the basket.

McBob isn't strong enough to defend Boozer for the majority of the game.

JEM
04-25-2011, 03:31 PM
We're 18-18 in this year in games (counting the playoffs) that Hansbrough has played in and scored in single digits.

What's important, is that if he does appear to be off on his shot that his minutes be limited. Another 2-12 in 40 minutes (game 2) would be a killer but if he's 2-8 in 24 minutes (game 4) we'd still have a shot.

Except his defense warrants him being on the floor for 30+ minutes this series and its more than balancing out his struggles on offense. If he has another game like he did in game 1 the Pacers win by double digits IMO ( that is if everything continues as it has been defensively for the Pacers ).

Lou Bega
04-25-2011, 03:32 PM
I promise you he will not. :)

You are right. I meant game 5.

BRushWithDeath
04-25-2011, 04:15 PM
Except his defense warrants him being on the floor for 30+ minutes this series and its more than balancing out his struggles on offense. If he has another game like he did in game 1 the Pacers win by double digits IMO ( that is if everything continues as it has been defensively for the Pacers ).

I'm not sure how you quantify that.

In my view we've been an equal defensive team with either Hansbrough or McRoberts in the playoffs but there's no data to base that opinion on. And even if there was data one way or the other I'd wager it'd be very close on that end. Hansbrough's defense has been quite a bit better in the playoffs than it was in the regular season but there is data from the regular season which says we were a significantly worse defensive team with Hansbrough on the floor than with McRoberts. I can't imagine there's been enough of a change to make up that difference.

The only playoff data I can find which could attempt to quantify this asserition is +/-. Individual game +/- is generally useless. A 4 game +/- only slightly less so but it's the only thing available.

The PF +/- in this series is:

Boozer: +26
McRoberts: +7
Gibson: +4
Hansbrough: -17

When Hansbrough is scoring like he did in the second half of game one, he's undeniably effective. But I haven't seen much to indicate he's effective when he's not.

But as I said earlier, his season long pattern would indicate he's due to shoot effectively in game 5. But if he's not, playing 30+ minutes would be a mistake just as it was in games 2 & 3.

PacerHound
04-25-2011, 04:56 PM
I think the defense is what causes Tyler to miss his jumpshots. I just wish Vogel would try to reduce the pick and pop play and instead let him work inside more. Both his field goals in game 4 are inside shots, and that is his most effective play. Maybe they can devise some backdoor plays for him, wherein he'll slide from the baseline and receive the pass when he's under the basket.

I love Tyler and would not be a Pacer fan without him on the team (not that I would be a fan of any other NBA team). That said he has a lot of work to do to become the player he can be. He needs to develop a sense of when to cut to the basket more in line with Dunleavy and McRoberts for easy shots. He needs to get position inside for offensive rebounding and develop more McHale type moves down low. He needs thousands of repetitions in practise over the summer on that jump shot until it is automatic (as it was for awhile) and he doesn't have to think about it.

That said I agree 100% he needs to be posted up in the low post like they do for Hibbert. He has a great jump hook when he gets down low and can move with the ball but he only got that set up once last game. They do not make a lot of effort to set him up for it but also he has some obligation to get himself open to where they can get the pass to him. It is a two way street. Collison is bad about not getting him the pass in that location when he is open but perhaps it is because he has trouble making that pass.

rm1369
04-25-2011, 05:33 PM
I see a lot of reasons given for his shooting, but what's the excuse for his lack of rebounding? That's what concerns me. I've known that he is a chucker offensively, so that doesnt surprise me.

BRushWithDeath
04-25-2011, 05:42 PM
I see a lot of reasons given for his shooting, but what's the excuse for his lack of rebounding? That's what concerns me. I've known that he is a chucker offensively, so that doesnt surprise me.

He's only getting one fewer board per game in the playoffs.

Granted, his minutes have been considerably up but his rebounding hasn't been that far below expectations.

And the Bulls are a great rebounding team.

Mackey_Rose
04-25-2011, 05:55 PM
Except his defense warrants him being on the floor for 30+ minutes this series and its more than balancing out his struggles on offense. If he has another game like he did in game 1 the Pacers win by double digits IMO ( that is if everything continues as it has been defensively for the Pacers ).

This site is a lot of fun, and make sure you have a whole lot of free time before you go to it. You'll get sucked in quickly.

Please explain to me how his defense (or offense for that matter) indicate that his play has warranted him getting 30+ minutes per game. Keep in mind, these numbers include his terrific offense in game 1. Josh has not been playing well, and we are still a significantly better team with him on that court than we have been with Tyler.

I'll start with defense, since that's what you think indicates he needs to be getting such extended time:

http://www.nba.com/statscube/team-vs-player.html#Bulls-vs-Tyler-Hansbrough|1610612741,201946;season=p

In this series, the Bulls are averaging 96.4 points per 48 minutes when Hansbrough is on the court. They have an offensive rebounding rate 43.7%. He has played 132 total minutes thus far.

When Hansbrough is off the court, the Bulls are averaging 85.6 points per 48, with an offensvie rebounding rate of 28.6%. He has been on the bench for 60 minutes.

Per 100 possessions, the Bulls are outscoring us by 8.59 points when he is on the court. When he is on the bench, we are outscoring them by 9.70 points per 100 possessions.

http://www.nba.com/statscube/team-vs-player.html#Bulls-vs-Josh-McRoberts|1610612741,201177;season=p

In this series, the Bulls are averaging 90.4 points per 48 minutes when McRoberts is on the court. They have an offensive rebounding rate 29.7%. He has played just 69 total minutes thus far.

When McRoberts is off the court, the Bulls are averaging 94.4 points per 48, with an offensvie rebounding rate of 44.2%. He has been on the bench for 123 minutes.

Per 100 possessions, we are outscoring the Bulls by 7.57 points when he is on the court. When he is on the bench, we are being outscored by 8.80 points per 100 possessions.

Now for the Pacers' offense, which again this includes Tyler's great game 1:

http://www.nba.com/statscube/team-vs-player.html#Indiana-Pacers-vs-Tyler-Hansbrough|1610612754,201946;season=p

With Hansbrough on the court, the Pacers are averaging 90.2 points per 48. With him on the bench, the Pacers are averaging 91.2 points per 48.

They are also collecting 27.5% of available offensive rebounds, and 56.3% of available defensive rebounds with Hansbrough on the court. With him on the bench, the Pacers are collecting 31.7% of available offensive rebounds, and 71.4% of available defensive rebounds.

http://www.nba.com/statscube/team-vs-player.html#Pacers-vs-Josh-McRoberts|1610612754,201177;season=p

With McRoberts on the court, the Pacers are averaging 95.3 points per 48. With him on the bench, the Pacers are averaging 87.8 points per 48.

They are also collecting 29.9% of available offensive rebounds, and 70.9% of available defensive rebounds with McRoberts on the court. With him on the bench, the Pacers are collecting 28.3% of available offensive rebounds, and 55.8% of available defensive rebounds.

BRushWithDeath
04-25-2011, 06:07 PM
I've never seen that before but that's an awesome site. Bravo NBA.com.

I thought we were better but I'm surprised the disparity is that large because I thought Josh was horrible in game 1 and pretty bad for a lot of game 2.

I assume the minutes difference is due to injury. At least that is the only logical reason.

rm1369
04-25-2011, 06:18 PM
He's only getting one fewer board per game in the playoffs.

Granted, his minutes have been considerably up but his rebounding hasn't been that far below expectations.

And the Bulls are a great rebounding team.

If 4 rebounds in 33 mins for a starting PF isn't below expectations then I don't know how anyone can tout Tyler as anything more than a backup PF. Especially when also shooting 33%. I'm not suggesting you see him as the answer, but many do.

How nice would it be to have Jrue Holiday to pair with Paul George in the backcourt?

Sookie
04-25-2011, 06:40 PM
Hans is going up against the best rebounding team in the league, and he doesn't do fundamental things like box out. (And to be fair, no post player on this team consistently boxes out)

JEM
04-25-2011, 07:03 PM
This site is a lot of fun, and make sure you have a whole lot of free time before you go to it. You'll get sucked in quickly.

Please explain to me how his defense (or offense for that matter) indicate that his play has warranted him getting 30+ minutes per game. Keep in mind, these numbers include his terrific offense in game 1. Josh has not been playing well, and we are still a significantly better team with him on that court than we have been with Tyler.

I'll start with defense, since that's what you think indicates he needs to be getting such extended time:

http://www.nba.com/statscube/team-vs-player.html#Bulls-vs-Tyler-Hansbrough|1610612741,201946;season=p

In this series, the Bulls are averaging 96.4 points per 48 minutes when Hansbrough is on the court. They have an offensive rebounding rate 43.7%. He has played 132 total minutes thus far.

When Hansbrough is off the court, the Bulls are averaging 85.6 points per 48, with an offensvie rebounding rate of 28.6%. He has been on the bench for 60 minutes.

Per 100 possessions, the Bulls are outscoring us by 8.59 points when he is on the court. When he is on the bench, we are outscoring them by 9.70 points per 100 possessions.

http://www.nba.com/statscube/team-vs-player.html#Bulls-vs-Josh-McRoberts|1610612741,201177;season=p

In this series, the Bulls are averaging 90.4 points per 48 minutes when McRoberts is on the court. They have an offensive rebounding rate 29.7%. He has played just 69 total minutes thus far.

When McRoberts is off the court, the Bulls are averaging 94.4 points per 48, with an offensvie rebounding rate of 44.2%. He has been on the bench for 123 minutes.

Per 100 possessions, we are outscoring the Bulls by 7.57 points when he is on the court. When he is on the bench, we are being outscored by 8.80 points per 100 possessions.

Now for the Pacers' offense, which again this includes Tyler's great game 1:

http://www.nba.com/statscube/team-vs-player.html#Indiana-Pacers-vs-Tyler-Hansbrough|1610612754,201946;season=p

With Hansbrough on the court, the Pacers are averaging 90.2 points per 48. With him on the bench, the Pacers are averaging 91.2 points per 48.

They are also collecting 27.5% of available offensive rebounds, and 56.3% of available defensive rebounds with Hansbrough on the court. With him on the bench, the Pacers are collecting 31.7% of available offensive rebounds, and 71.4% of available defensive rebounds.

http://www.nba.com/statscube/team-vs-player.html#Pacers-vs-Josh-McRoberts|1610612754,201177;season=p

With McRoberts on the court, the Pacers are averaging 95.3 points per 48. With him on the bench, the Pacers are averaging 87.8 points per 48.

They are also collecting 29.9% of available offensive rebounds, and 70.9% of available defensive rebounds with McRoberts on the court. With him on the bench, the Pacers are collecting 28.3% of available offensive rebounds, and 55.8% of available defensive rebounds.

Except Boozer has scored on McRoberts and he hasnt on Hansbrough.

You also glossing over the fact that McRoberts is on the floor with and against other players the majority of the game.

Its a no contest who is making a larger contribution to winning basketball and thats the guy going against the other teams starter and making really tough on him ( including Noah ). Even looking at Game 2 where Boozer had 17 or so points... He had most of those off of Foster and McRoberts.

JEM
04-25-2011, 07:06 PM
Hans is going up against the best rebounding team in the league, and he doesn't do fundamental things like box out. (And to be fair, no post player on this team consistently boxes out)

He is boxing out. Except he has to act like an offensive lineman to combat Boozer and his shoving.

BRushWithDeath
04-25-2011, 07:28 PM
Except Boozer has scored on McRoberts and he hasnt on Hansbrough.

You also glossing over the fact that McRoberts is on the floor with and against other players the majority of the game.

Its a no contest who is making a larger contribution to winning basketball and thats the guy going against the other teams starter and making really tough on him ( including Noah ). Even looking at Game 2 where Boozer had 17 or so points... He had most of those off of Foster and McRoberts.

This is actually not true.

A simple calculator indicates that Boozer has scored 35 points with Hansbrough on the floor and 13 with him off it. Not exactly most.

http://www.nba.com/statscube/player-vs-player.html#Carlos-Boozer-vs-Tyler-Hansbrough|2430,201946;season=p

Hansbrough has done a good job on Boozer. Boozer is averaging 12.7 points per 36 in this series but only 12.5 with Hansbrough on the court. .2 less.

Boozer has only played 35 minutes in the entire series without Hansbrough on the floor. And his numbers are slightly elevated. He's at 13.4 per 36 over that 35 minute period. A .9 uptick.

But the team defense (and offense oddly enough) is far worse.

And that is indisputable.

If you are going to post something as fact make sure it is actually a fact.

Mackey_Rose
04-25-2011, 09:22 PM
Except Boozer has scored on McRoberts and he hasnt on Hansbrough.

You also glossing over the fact that McRoberts is on the floor with and against other players the majority of the game.

Its a no contest who is making a larger contribution to winning basketball and thats the guy going against the other teams starter and making really tough on him ( including Noah ). Even looking at Game 2 where Boozer had 17 or so points... He had most of those off of Foster and McRoberts.

I'm not glossing over anything. Unfortunately for us, this series is not a best of seven series of one-on-one matches between Boozer and Hansbrough. It is a team game.

Indisputably, Josh plays better team basketball than Tyler, on both ends. The Pacers play better with McRoberts on the floor than they do with Hansbrough, and their opponents play worse. This is not a new phenomenon of small sample size in the playoffs. It was the same way during the season.

What constitutes "winning basketball" to you? I always thought that the best way to win was to score points while limiting the other team to fewer points. Call me old fashioned that way.

Hansbrough was great in game 1, but he has not even been mediocre since then. He's been awful. I'm expecting him to come out of this slump and redeem himself tomorrow night. I think he's due for another big offensive game. However, if he doesn't, I hope Vogel doesn't wrongly ride him for heavy minutes like he did in game 3, because he doesn't help at all when his shot isn't falling.

dal9
04-25-2011, 09:41 PM
I'm not glossing over anything. Unfortunately for us, this series is not a best of seven series of one-on-one matches between Boozer and Hansbrough. It is a team game.

Indisputably, Josh plays better team basketball than Tyler, on both ends. The Pacers play better with McRoberts on the floor than they do with Hansbrough, and their opponents play worse. This is not a new phenomenon of small sample size in the playoffs. It was the same way during the season.

What constitutes "winning basketball" to you? I always thought that the best way to win was to score points while limiting the other team to fewer points. Call me old fashioned that way.

Hansbrough was great in game 1, but he has not even been mediocre since then. He's been awful. I'm expecting him to come out of this slump and redeem himself tomorrow night. I think he's due for another big offensive game. However, if he doesn't, I hope Vogel doesn't wrongly ride him for heavy minutes like he did in game 3, because he doesn't help at all when his shot isn't falling.

LEAVE BRITNEY ALONE!!!!!

Whiskeyjim
04-25-2011, 10:23 PM
This is actually not true.

A simple calculator indicates that Boozer has scored 35 points with Hansbrough on the floor and 13 with him off it. Not exactly most.

http://www.nba.com/statscube/player-vs-player.html#Carlos-Boozer-vs-Tyler-Hansbrough|2430,201946;season=p

Hansbrough has done a good job on Boozer. Boozer is averaging 12.7 points per 36 in this series but only 12.5 with Hansbrough on the court. .2 less.

Boozer has only played 35 minutes in the entire series without Hansbrough on the floor. And his numbers are slightly elevated. He's at 13.4 per 36 over that 35 minute period. A .9 uptick.

But the team defense (and offense oddly enough) is far worse.

And that is indisputable.

If you are going to post something as fact make sure it is actually a fact.The supporting webpage (thanks for that) tell us quite a bit more than what you glean from it.

With Hansbrough on the bench, Boozer gets almost double the rebounds, and is plus/minus 13.4 as opposed to 4.6 when Hansbrough is covering him. Since we can not control for who the other players are on the court when either Hansbrough or Boozer are on the court, I submit this is a huge stat.

Is Hans struggling? NO doubt. Are the 3-12 shooting nights hurting us? OMG. Is Hans tired? Maybe. But I humbly suggest he is contributing more than you seem to imply.

Whiskeyjim
04-25-2011, 10:31 PM
This site is a lot of fun, and make sure you have a whole lot of free time before you go to it. You'll get sucked in quickly.

Please explain to me how his defense (or offense for that matter) indicate that his play has warranted him getting 30+ minutes per game. Keep in mind, these numbers include his terrific offense in game 1. Josh has not been playing well, and we are still a significantly better team with him on that court than we have been with Tyler.

I'll start with defense, since that's what you think indicates he needs to be getting such extended time:

http://www.nba.com/statscube/team-vs-player.html#Bulls-vs-Tyler-Hansbrough|1610612741,201946;season=p

In this series, the Bulls are averaging 96.4 points per 48 minutes when Hansbrough is on the court. They have an offensive rebounding rate 43.7%. He has played 132 total minutes thus far.

When Hansbrough is off the court, the Bulls are averaging 85.6 points per 48, with an offensvie rebounding rate of 28.6%. He has been on the bench for 60 minutes.

Per 100 possessions, the Bulls are outscoring us by 8.59 points when he is on the court. When he is on the bench, we are outscoring them by 9.70 points per 100 possessions.

http://www.nba.com/statscube/team-vs-player.html#Bulls-vs-Josh-McRoberts|1610612741,201177;season=p

In this series, the Bulls are averaging 90.4 points per 48 minutes when McRoberts is on the court. They have an offensive rebounding rate 29.7%. He has played just 69 total minutes thus far.

When McRoberts is off the court, the Bulls are averaging 94.4 points per 48, with an offensvie rebounding rate of 44.2%. He has been on the bench for 123 minutes.

Per 100 possessions, we are outscoring the Bulls by 7.57 points when he is on the court. When he is on the bench, we are being outscored by 8.80 points per 100 possessions.

Now for the Pacers' offense, which again this includes Tyler's great game 1:

http://www.nba.com/statscube/team-vs-player.html#Indiana-Pacers-vs-Tyler-Hansbrough|1610612754,201946;season=p

With Hansbrough on the court, the Pacers are averaging 90.2 points per 48. With him on the bench, the Pacers are averaging 91.2 points per 48.

They are also collecting 27.5% of available offensive rebounds, and 56.3% of available defensive rebounds with Hansbrough on the court. With him on the bench, the Pacers are collecting 31.7% of available offensive rebounds, and 71.4% of available defensive rebounds.

http://www.nba.com/statscube/team-vs-player.html#Pacers-vs-Josh-McRoberts|1610612754,201177;season=p

With McRoberts on the court, the Pacers are averaging 95.3 points per 48. With him on the bench, the Pacers are averaging 87.8 points per 48.

They are also collecting 29.9% of available offensive rebounds, and 70.9% of available defensive rebounds with McRoberts on the court. With him on the bench, the Pacers are collecting 28.3% of available offensive rebounds, and 55.8% of available defensive rebounds.Neither would I get real excited about these stats either.

First, the difference is hardly enough to be significant given the limited number of games. But it is not just the 4 games which leave variability wide open.

It is who they are on the court with. In fact the bench players are in general played on purpose to line up against each other. To the extent their playing time is manufactured, the stats you cite are comparing two different teams playing each other. This is of course not strictly true, but hopefully you get my point.

vnzla81
04-25-2011, 10:35 PM
You guys really need to let it go, there is not stat that is going to show that Mcbob is better than Tyler, is not even close, I remember the previous stats you guys showed us before telling us that starting Dun and Mcbob was the most amazing team for the whole season, but guess what? starting PG and Tyler has been the best decision Vogel has made during the playoffs, there is no way he could have been this close in all four games if it wasn't for those guys.

Again, only a delusional person, Mcbob's agent or friend would think he is as good as Tyler, there is a reason why every national show is talking about him when they talk about the Pacers and please don't tell me that is because the NC connections.

BRushWithDeath
04-25-2011, 10:50 PM
You guys really need to let it go, there is not stat that is going to show that Mcbob is better than Tyler, is not even close, I remember the previous stats you guys showed us before telling us that starting Dun and Mcbob was the most amazing team for the whole season, but guess what? starting PG and Tyler has been the best decision Vogel has made during the playoffs, there is no way he could have been this close in all four games if it wasn't for those guys.

Again, only a delusional person, Mcbob's agent or friend would think he is as good as Tyler, there is a reason why every national show is talking about him when they talk about the Pacers and please don't tell me that is because the NC connections.

Nobody said Josh was better than Tyler. Individually, Tyler scores more. So he must be better.

But the team scores less and gives up more with Tyler than with Josh. That was true during the regular season. It is true in the postseason.

Josh has not played particularly well this series. But he's been much better than Tyler.

The point of this thread is that people are worried about Tyler because he's had a bad series.

But this series is a perfect microcosm of his season. 1 good game. 3 bad ones. And we've been better both offensively and defensively with Josh in his place.

So if you weren't worried during the year, you shouldn't be worried now. Because this is far from uncharted territory.

vnzla81
04-25-2011, 11:02 PM
1 good game three bad games sounds more like Josh than Tyler.

rm1369
04-25-2011, 11:13 PM
1 good game three bad games sounds more like Josh than Tyler.

Your starting PF is averaging 4 rebounds a game in 33 mins. He's also shooting 33% from the field. If your happy with that and think Tyler has had a good series then we just have a different idea of what we want from the position.....or you're enamored with the guys name and aren't being objective.

vnzla81
04-25-2011, 11:19 PM
Your starting PF is averaging 4 rebounds a game in 33 mins. He's also shooting 33% from the field. If your happy with that and think Tyler has had a good series then we just have a different idea of what we want from the position.....or you're enamored with the guys name and aren't being objective.

None of the bigs in either team are having a great series, have you seen Boozer numbers? Or Noah's numbers? by the way Rose is shooting close to 34% if I'm not mistaken, should the bulls think about trading Rose because his shooting percentage is low? I don't think so.

I forgot who already said this but this series reminds me of the Butler/Uconn game, the defense is so good in both sides that nobody is really having a good series regarding shooting porcentage.

cdash
04-25-2011, 11:32 PM
I hadn't really looked at this thread because I thought it was going to turn into another Hansbrough/McBob fans pissing contest, and I see it has lived up to that. Who cares?

Whiskeyjim
04-25-2011, 11:53 PM
Nobody said Josh was better than Tyler. Individually, Tyler scores more. So he must be better.

But the team scores less and gives up more with Tyler than with Josh. That was true during the regular season. It is true in the postseason.

Josh has not played particularly well this series. But he's been much better than Tyler.

The point of this thread is that people are worried about Tyler because he's had a bad series.

But this series is a perfect microcosm of his season. 1 good game. 3 bad ones. And we've been better both offensively and defensively with Josh in his place.

So if you weren't worried during the year, you shouldn't be worried now. Because this is far from uncharted territory.Actually the stats pages quoted on this very thread show this statement NOT TRUE.

Sookie
04-25-2011, 11:59 PM
Really guys, neither one of them has been good. They've both had their moments, and they are both playing really hard, so it's not anything to fight about. But neither are lighting the world on fire, and quite frankly, neither helps the team more than the other. They do different things for the team, but it's really about equal.

BRushWithDeath
04-26-2011, 12:37 AM
Actually the stats pages quoted on this very thread show this statement NOT TRUE.

Based on what?

rm1369
04-26-2011, 06:16 AM
None of the bigs in either team are having a great series, have you seen Boozer numbers? Or Noah's numbers? by the way Rose is shooting close to 34% if I'm not mistaken, should the bulls think about trading Rose because his shooting percentage is low? I don't think so.

I forgot who already said this but this series reminds me of the Butler/Uconn game, the defense is so good in both sides that nobody is really having a good series regarding shooting porcentage.

Boozer is shooting poorly, but he is averaging 11.5 boards a game. I think Noah has played very well - he's been the best big man in this series - 11.3 boards and 2 blocks a game. He's still shooting relatively poorly, but not nearly as bad as the other guys. Both are having a much better series than Tyler. He is shooting atrociously and he is averging 4 boards a game! That is what some of us are complaining about - if he's not scoring he's not helping. Certainly not enough to get 33 mins a game. Josh hasn't played great either, but by nearly every measure he has outplayed Tyler - except for the second half of game 1.

BringJackBack
04-26-2011, 06:22 AM
These Josh/Tyler arguments are so dumb.

daschysta
04-26-2011, 06:44 AM
I'm less worried than irritated, dude's bricking wide open jumpers. He's great when he's on, but the hustle alone doesn't cut it as a starter. He's almost a prototypical bench player, and could be an awesome one at that. Ride him when he's hot, but he'll continue to shoot, shoot shoot whether he's hitting them or not. If he was able to nail just one or two of the open jumpers he's had since game one we could be at least tied.

Mackey_Rose
04-26-2011, 08:03 AM
Neither would I get real excited about these stats either.

First, the difference is hardly enough to be significant given the limited number of games. But it is not just the 4 games which leave variability wide open.

It is who they are on the court with. In fact the bench players are in general played on purpose to line up against each other. To the extent their playing time is manufactured, the stats you cite are comparing two different teams playing each other. This is of course not strictly true, but hopefully you get my point.

Of course there is variability in any stat. However, like I said, this is not some new phenomenon of small sample size. Look at the regular season numbers. What is happening in the playoffs is consistent with what happened in the regular season.

Josh started 51 games, and Tyler started 29, but they played nearly the same number of minutes. Again, obviously there will be variability in these stats as well, because every situation is not identical. No need to point that out. The sample size is much larger though, and shows the same thing.

http://www.nba.com/statscube/team-vs-player.html#Pacers-vs-Tyler-Hansbrough|1610612754,201946;season=r

With Hansbrough on the court, the Pacers scored 101.06 points per 48 and gave up 105.98. With him on the bench, the Pacers scored 102.43 points per 48 and gave up 101.80. We did rebound about 1.4% better with him on the court than on the bench.

http://www.nba.com/statscube/team-vs-player.html#Pacers-vs-Josh-McRoberts|1610612754,201177;season=r

With McRoberts on the court, the Pacers scored 104.96 points per 48 and gave up 102.49. With him on the bench, the Pacers scored 99.81 points per 48 an gave up 104.05. We rebounded only 0.6% better with him on the court than on the bench.


You guys really need to let it go, there is not stat that is going to show that Mcbob is better than Tyler, is not even close, I remember the previous stats you guys showed us before telling us that starting Dun and Mcbob was the most amazing team for the whole season, but guess what? starting PG and Tyler has been the best decision Vogel has made during the playoffs, there is no way he could have been this close in all four games if it wasn't for those guys.

I'm going to say this again, and this time I'm going to yell it, because you must have ignored it before. None of us are trying to prove that Josh is better than Tyler. That's not what this is about. It's about how the team is playing, and how that is helping us in this series. THIS IS NOT A ONE-ON-ONE GAME!! As long as there are four other guys out there, it helps to look at more than just individual stats to evaluate players.

More importantly, however, it is imperative that you watch the games and judge for yourself. During the season, starting Dunleavy and McRoberts with Collison, Granger, and Hibbert was by far the best lineup. That hasn't been changed by what has happened in these playoffs. Paul George has been great. There is no doubt about it. He has been far better during this series, than he had been all season. That was a great call by Vogel.

Trying to latch George and Hansbrough together does not make sense. They have not played the same way. Hansbrough was great in the 2nd half of the first game, but he hasn't been since then. He was much better than McRoberts in that game. In the other 3 games, it has been reversed. Was that really Vogel's best decision of the playoffs?

What are you seeing out there that makes you see it differently? I'd like to hear your argument, because the one you have been making so far hasn't been very convincing.

JEM
04-26-2011, 09:48 AM
Lets ignore the facts and just go with hollow numbers! Thats the best way to go when ignoring whats happening on the court. Its the only way really.

Lets ignore the fact that Hansbrough has made it really tough on Boozer. A matchup where many thought Boozer would walk over Tyler. It hasnt happened. Or how about Tylers other defensive efforts? Like charging out on Korver forcing an airball? Or how about effective half court double teams of Rose? Lets ignore all of it because it makes the 10th man look like he doing something other than taking up space ( who is also shooting just 34% ).

Lets ignore the fact that the Bulls have been focused on Hansbrough defensively. ( Need to try and get the ball to Hansbrough deeper in the post. If you want him to get it 15 feet out then dont even post him up just run him off a screen )

Lets ignore the fact that just like the regular season teams pay no attention to McRoberts and he still struggles ( as usual ).

Lets ignore the fact that Hibbert has been in foul trouble most of the series and struggling a bit when on the floor.

Lets ignore the fact that Paul George is playing worse than anyone else on the team. Yea he had nice game defensively in game 2 and can contest Rose on his jumpers but Rose also has been driving right by him. What is he shooting? Last I looked it was 32%.

Lets then ignore the fact that the Pacers bench is going against guys like Kurt Thomas , Taj Gibson , CJ Watson ( decent defender )..ect. The Pacers bench have a favorable matchup but yet still cant take advantage.

Lets then ignore the fact that the Pacers starters are playing even if not slightly better as a team than the Chicago Bulls. Thats the reason PG and Hansbrough were put into the stating lineup in the first place.. So the starters can actually compete with the other teams starters. Dont you remember when Dunleavy and McRoberts were starting and everytime the starters left the court the Pacers were down double digits? If your starters cant compete with the other teams starters then its going to be a struggle to win games especially in the playoffs.

I will ignore the +/- and per 48 stats thrown out because they do not take into account what is happening on the floor. Its just raw numbers with no variables.. Like how Boozers +/- has benefited from Rose and his end of game runs or how a couple other starters for the Pacers have struggled or how this series has been a defensive battle for both teams.

Yes. Lets sweep everyone else under the rug and try to put the numbers all on one player!

Mackey_Rose
04-26-2011, 09:52 AM
Lets ignore the facts and just go with hollow numbers! Thats the best way to go when ignoring whats happening on the court. Its the only way really.

Lets ignore the fact that Hansbrough has made it really tough on Boozer. A matchup where many thought Boozer would walk over Tyler. It hasnt happened. Or how about Tylers other defensive efforts? Like charging out on Korver forcing an airball? Or how about effective half court double teams of Rose? Lets ignore all of it because it makes the 10th man look like he doing something other than taking up space.

Lets ignore the fact that Hibbert has been in foul trouble most of the series and struggling a bit when on the floor.

Lets ignore the fact that Paul George is playing worse than anyone else on the team. Yea he had nice game defensively in game 2 and can contest Rose on his jumpers but Rose also has been driving right by him. What is he shooting? Last I looked it was 22%.

Lets then ignore the fact that the Pacers bench is going against guys like Kurt Thomas , Taj Gibson , CJ Watson ( decent defender )..ect. The Pacers bench have a favorable matchup but yet still cant take advantage.

Lets then ignore the fact that the Pacers starters are playing even if not slightly better as a team than the Chicago Bulls. Thats the reason PG and Hansbrough were put into the stating lineup in the first place.. So the starters can actually compete with the other teams starters. Dont you remember when Dunleavy and McRoberts were starting and everytime the starters left the court the Pacers were down double digits? If your starters cant compete with the other teams starters then its going to be a struggle to win games especially in the playoffs.

[B]I[B] will ignore the +/- and per 48 stats thrown out because they do not take into account what is happening on the floor. Its just raw numbers with no variables.. Like how Boozers +/- has benefited from Rose and his end of game runs or how a couple other starters for the Pacers have struggled or how this series has been a defensive battle for both teams.

Actually, let's do you a favor and just ignore this whole post, because it's a train wreck.

daschysta
04-26-2011, 09:59 AM
Lets ignore the facts and just go with hollow numbers! Thats the best way to go when ignoring whats happening on the court. Its the only way really.

Lets ignore the fact that Hansbrough has made it really tough on Boozer. A matchup where many thought Boozer would walk over Tyler. It hasnt happened. Or how about Tylers other defensive efforts? Like charging out on Korver forcing an airball? Or how about effective half court double teams of Rose? Lets ignore all of it because it makes the 10th man look like he doing something other than taking up space.

Lets ignore the fact that Hibbert has been in foul trouble most of the series and struggling a bit when on the floor.

Lets ignore the fact that Paul George is playing worse than anyone else on the team. Yea he had nice game defensively in game 2 and can contest Rose on his jumpers but Rose also has been driving right by him. What is he shooting? Last I looked it was 22%.

Lets then ignore the fact that the Pacers bench is going against guys like Kurt Thomas , Taj Gibson , CJ Watson ( decent defender )..ect. The Pacers bench have a favorable matchup but yet still cant take advantage.

Lets then ignore the fact that the Pacers starters are playing even if not slightly better as a team than the Chicago Bulls. Thats the reason PG and Hansbrough were put into the stating lineup in the first place.. So the starters can actually compete with the other teams starters. Dont you remember when Dunleavy and McRoberts were starting and everytime the starters left the court the Pacers were down double digits? If your starters cant compete with the other teams starters then its going to be a struggle to win games especially in the playoffs.

[B]I[B] will ignore the +/- and per 48 stats thrown out because they do not take into account what is happening on the floor. Its just raw numbers with no variables.. Like how Boozers +/- has benefited from Rose and his end of game runs or how a couple other starters for the Pacers have struggled or how this series has been a defensive battle for both teams.


this post fails in so many ways, i'll just point out the largest ones.

Calling out Paul George, sure he hasn't had the best series offensively, but he's a HUGE reason that the MVP has played so miserably the past two games, and he has been nothing short of elitely disruptive on defense. That is far more important than his offense, which brings me to hansbrough... What sir, is he bringing to the table when he is shooting badly? He plays OK defense, nothing special (offensive fouls have been playing just as good defense on boozer as hansbrough), he sets wimpy picks, hasn't been rebounding the ball (we're getting killed on the glass and he's a big part of it) and he continues to shoot at a high rate even when he can't hit the broad side of a barn. SMH at acting like rose has been blowing by george, that's why chicago has frantically been running rose around picks trying to get a switch? Or why rose has shot more 3 pointers this series than Ray allen has vs. New york? Yeah... Tyler homers... they like one player more than the whole team...

The bench also was a huge reason we won game four, we handily won that matchup, and noone off of chicago's bench other than korver has really hurt us all that much. Tyler's numbers haven't been hurt by the others on the floor, he's hurt himself by consistantly bricking wide open jumpers after one half of game one.

Tyler has hurt us more than he's helped for the last 3 games.

Also by the way the Collison Dunleavy, McBob, Granger hibbert lineup is by far our most successful one, measured by wins, AND stats. We were on a roll before dunleavy was hurt and it was our best lineup earlier int he year as well.

JEM
04-26-2011, 10:05 AM
This is actually not true.

A simple calculator indicates that Boozer has scored 35 points with Hansbrough on the floor and 13 with him off it. Not exactly most.

http://www.nba.com/statscube/player-vs-player.html#Carlos-Boozer-vs-Tyler-Hansbrough|2430,201946;season=p

Hansbrough has done a good job on Boozer. Boozer is averaging 12.7 points per 36 in this series but only 12.5 with Hansbrough on the court. .2 less.

Boozer has only played 35 minutes in the entire series without Hansbrough on the floor. And his numbers are slightly elevated. He's at 13.4 per 36 over that 35 minute period. A .9 uptick.

But the team defense (and offense oddly enough) is far worse.

And that is indisputable.

If you are going to post something as fact make sure it is actually a fact.

I guess you dont know that teams switch off defending players? I bet you do but you just forgot about that little important FACT.. Example. Game 2 Boozer had 1 bucket before Foster came in and switched over to guarding him ( Tyler still on the floor ).. *Poof* Boozer gets a quick 6 or 8 points before Tyler is moved back on him.

You should try and remember the little things.

BRushWithDeath
04-26-2011, 10:06 AM
Lets ignore the facts and just go with hollow numbers! Thats the best way to go when ignoring whats happening on the court. Its the only way really.

Lets ignore the fact that Hansbrough has made it really tough on Boozer. A matchup where many thought Boozer would walk over Tyler. It hasnt happened. Or how about Tylers other defensive efforts? Like charging out on Korver forcing an airball? Or how about effective half court double teams of Rose? Lets ignore all of it because it makes the 10th man look like he doing something other than taking up space ( who is also shooting just 34% ).

Lets ignore the fact that the Bulls have been focused on Hansbrough defensively. ( Need to try and get the ball to Hansbrough deeper in the post. If you want him to get it 15 feet out then dont even post him up just run him off a screen )

Lets ignore the fact that just like the regular season teams pay no attention to McRoberts and he still struggles ( as usual ).

Lets ignore the fact that Hibbert has been in foul trouble most of the series and struggling a bit when on the floor.

Lets ignore the fact that Paul George is playing worse than anyone else on the team. Yea he had nice game defensively in game 2 and can contest Rose on his jumpers but Rose also has been driving right by him. What is he shooting? Last I looked it was 32%.

Lets then ignore the fact that the Pacers bench is going against guys like Kurt Thomas , Taj Gibson , CJ Watson ( decent defender )..ect. The Pacers bench have a favorable matchup but yet still cant take advantage.

Lets then ignore the fact that the Pacers starters are playing even if not slightly better as a team than the Chicago Bulls. Thats the reason PG and Hansbrough were put into the stating lineup in the first place.. So the starters can actually compete with the other teams starters. Dont you remember when Dunleavy and McRoberts were starting and everytime the starters left the court the Pacers were down double digits? If your starters cant compete with the other teams starters then its going to be a struggle to win games especially in the playoffs.

I will ignore the +/- and per 48 stats thrown out because they do not take into account what is happening on the floor. Its just raw numbers with no variables.. Like how Boozers +/- has benefited from Rose and his end of game runs or how a couple other starters for the Pacers have struggled or how this series has been a defensive battle for both teams.

Yes. Lets sweep everyone else under the rug and try to put the numbers all on one player!

Post of the year.

vnzla81
04-26-2011, 10:10 AM
Also by the way the Collison Dunleavy, McBob, Granger hibbert lineup is by far our most successful one, measured by wins, AND stats. We were on a roll before dunleavy was hurt and it was our best lineup earlier int he year as well.

We were on a roll? :laugh: talking about a fail post.....

Unclebuck
04-26-2011, 10:10 AM
I'm not glossing over anything. Unfortunately for us, this series is not a best of seven series of one-on-one matches between Boozer and Hansbrough. It is a team game.

Indisputably, Josh plays better team basketball than Tyler, on both ends. The Pacers play better with McRoberts on the floor than they do with Hansbrough, and their opponents play worse. This is not a new phenomenon of small sample size in the playoffs. It was the same way during the season.

What constitutes "winning basketball" to you? I always thought that the best way to win was to score points while limiting the other team to fewer points. Call me old fashioned that way.

Hansbrough was great in game 1, but he has not even been mediocre since then. He's been awful. I'm expecting him to come out of this slump and redeem himself tomorrow night. I think he's due for another big offensive game. However, if he doesn't, I hope Vogel doesn't wrongly ride him for heavy minutes like he did in game 3, because he doesn't help at all when his shot isn't falling.


Don't jump all over me, because I am agreeing with you, but also just trying to add a little context to what you are saying. I think something that should be considered as to why the Bulls score better when tyler is in the game is because more than likely he is in the game more often against the Bulls best players.

I commented after game #3 that team defense is better with Josh in there (although jeff also tends to be in there at the same time) but Jeff and Josh are 10X better than Tyler and Roy in trapping Rose, knowing how long to stay with Rose, knowing when to get back to your own man, and knowing where to be defensively. I think Tyler just doesn't know what he is doing yet in the team aspect - especially in a complicated and changing scheme they are playing against Rose. Roy just doesn't have the athleticism to be good in the schemes.

But the good news is when Roy and Tyler are in the game the Pacers tend to play it more straight up and then when Jeff and Josh comes in they trap, help, recover a lot more.

However, I do think Tyler has done a very good job on Boozer and I believe Tyler is significantly better than Josh at guarding Boozer one-on-one.

Offensively: Once again Josh is better in the team concepts, he's a better passer (although Tyler is improving in this area) a better ball handler, better at keeping the offense running well. Josh is pretty good also because of his ball handling at getting into the lane - i think he surprises defenders in this aspects.

Tyler is a better shooter, Tyler is a guy who you can IMO go to for direct post ups, and iso's if the matchups are good. Tyler is a rhythms shooter though.

Overall I think both have done well in their first NBA playoff experience. Both have shown improvments in certain areas.

daschysta
04-26-2011, 10:13 AM
We were on a roll? :laugh: talking about a fail post.....

Immediately post-vogel? Yes we were... The competition was easy, but I didn't comment on that one way or another. Or are you arguing that that wasn't our strongest lineup earlier in the year either? Qualify your statement, because statistically that lineup was in fact our strongest.

Not sure what your trying to get at?

Mackey_Rose
04-26-2011, 10:25 AM
Don't jump all over me, because I am agreeing with you, but also just trying to add a little context to what you are saying. I think something that should be considered as to why the Bulls score better when tyler is in the game is because more than likely he is in the game more often against the Bulls best players.

I commented after game #3 that team defense is better with Josh in there (although jeff also tends to be in there at the same time) but Jeff and Josh are 10X better than Tyler and Roy in trapping Rose, knowing how long to stay with Rose, knowing when to get back to your own man, and knowing where to be defensively. I think Tyler just doesn't know what he is doing yet in the team aspect - especially in a complicated and changing scheme they are playing against Rose. Roy just doesn't have the athleticism to be good in the schemes.

But the good news is when Roy and Tyler are in the game the Pacers tend to play it more straight up and then when Jeff and Josh comes in they trap, help, recover a lot more.

However, I do think Tyler has done a very good job on Boozer and I believe Tyler is significantly better than Josh at guarding Boozer one-on-one.

Offensively: Once again Josh is better in the team concepts, he's a better passer (although Tyler is improving in this area) a better ball handler, better at keeping the offense running well. Josh is pretty good also because of his ball handling at getting into the lane - i think he surprises defenders in this aspects.

Tyler is a better shooter, Tyler is a guy who you can IMO go to for direct post ups, and iso's if the matchups are good. Tyler is a rhythms shooter though.

Overall I think both have done well in their first NBA playoff experience. Both have shown improvments in certain areas.

Nothing for me to jump all over you about. I agree with all of that.

I think Tyler is a better shooter, and a better scorer when his shot is falling. When it isn't falling, I don't think you can keep going to him, because he's going to keep shooting regardless of what is happening.

If his first shot falls, you can almost bet the house on him having a good offensive game. If it doesn't, you can almost bet the house on him struggling the rest of the night.

I'm not sure if it is a confidence thing or what, but that first shot he takes has been a pretty accurate bellwether for his performance the rest of the game.

Unclebuck
04-26-2011, 10:31 AM
Nothing for me to jump all over you about. I agree with all of that.

I think Tyler is a better shooter, and a better scorer when his shot is falling. When it isn't falling, I don't think you can keep going to him, because he's going to keep shooting regardless of what is happening.

If his first shot falls, you can almost bet the house on him having a good offensive game. If it doesn't, you can almost bet the house on him struggling the rest of the night.

I'm not sure if it is a confidence thing or what, but that first shot he takes has been a pretty accurate bellwether for his performance the rest of the game.


I think in this series the Bulls have adjusted and taken away Tyler's open face up jumpers. That is to be expected, and now that it has been pretty well shut down when Tyler does get an open shot or two he is missing. maybe the Pacers need to change the positioning a little bit on that play

vnzla81
04-26-2011, 10:49 AM
Immediately post-vogel? Yes we were... The competition was easy, but I didn't comment on that one way or another. Or are you arguing that that wasn't our strongest lineup earlier in the year either? Qualify your statement, because statistically that lineup was in fact our strongest.

Not sure what your trying to get at?

There is a reason why Vogel decided to make Tyler and Paul the starters and never look back, Josh and Dun were sucking a$$ in the starting unit, the fact that the starting unit is showing that they can play toe to toe againts the number one team in the east makes my point, I can care less about the stats.

BRushWithDeath
04-26-2011, 10:53 AM
I can care less about the stats.

How much less?

Because you've been pretty consistent in bucking all statistical evidence.

daschysta
04-26-2011, 10:57 AM
There is a reason why Vogel decided to make Tyler and Paul the starters and never look back, Josh and Dun were sucking a$$ in the starting unit, the fact that the starting unit is showing that they can play toe to toe againts the number one team in the east makes my point, I can care less about the stats.

He initially put tyler and george in as starters because the starting lineup started sputtering so badly after dunleavey was injured actually...

Someone who completely chooses to ignore all stats is fine... but not in a very strong position to call anyone else's opinions fail, especially when they are heavily backed by statistical data, which while open to a degree of interpretation are certainly not useless, and are certainly less subjective than your typical "eye test". You can't ignore either.

Mackey_Rose
04-26-2011, 11:38 AM
What are you seeing out there that makes you see it differently? I'd like to hear your argument, because the one you have been making so far hasn't been very convincing.

I should amend this to say, entirely unconvincing.

It would have been possibly the worst argument I've seen in my time here, had JEM not come in and saved the day in this very thread.


There is a reason why Vogel decided to make Tyler and Paul the starters and never look back, Josh and Dun were sucking a$$ in the starting unit, the fact that the starting unit is showing that they can play toe to toe againts the number one team in the east makes my point, I can care less about the stats.

You mean you couldn't care less about the stats. Fine, you hate math and facts. If you could care less, it means you care. I don't know how people mess that up all the time, it's one of my pet peeves, but that's neither here nor there.

Tell me what you're seeing that I'm apparently overlooking. Explain your point of view.

cdash
04-26-2011, 11:46 AM
You mean you couldn't care less about the stats. Fine, you hate math and facts. If you could care less, it means you care. I don't know how people mess that up all the time, it's one of my pet peeves, but that's neither here nor there..

Yeah, same here. It seems really simple but people mess it up more often than they get it right. Bizarre.

Hicks
04-26-2011, 12:10 PM
Lets ignore the fact that Paul George is playing worse than anyone else on the team.

Holy ****.

BRushWithDeath
04-26-2011, 12:12 PM
Holy ****.

Don't worry. We're allowed to ignore that fact.

vnzla81
04-26-2011, 12:28 PM
Holy ****.

I think he was talking about this article, stats wise PG looks bad, but like I keep saying the stats don't tell s***.


http://www.hoopsworld.com/Story.asp?STORY_ID=19551


It would be easy to look at Paul George's first-round numbers and assume he was having a horrible series. While 5.8 points and 5.8 rebounds a game isn't completely atrocious, his 32% field-goal shooting, including 22% from three-point range, absolutely is. His value in keeping the Indiana Pacers competitive with the Chicago Bulls, however, hasn't necessarily come on the offensive end of the floor.

Mackey_Rose
04-26-2011, 12:46 PM
I think he was talking about this article, stats wise PG looks bad, but like I keep saying the stats don't tell s***.


http://www.hoopsworld.com/Story.asp?STORY_ID=19551

Very little can be gleaned from looking at an individual's stats. There is a lot of truth to that.

I didn't post any of those.

These team stats do tell us quite a bit though.


http://www.nba.com/statscube/team-vs-player.html#Bulls-vs-Paul-George|1610612741,202331;season=r

The Bulls score 94.2 points per 48 with George on the court.

They score 103.3 with him off of it.

Try again.

You are looking at the regular season stats. In the playoffs, it's been a bit more pronounced.

http://www.nba.com/statscube/team-vs-player.html#Bulls-vs-Paul-George|1610612741,202331;season=p

The Bulls score 92.7 points per 48 with George on the court, and 103.4 with him off it.

It's too bad he's been the worst player in this series.

BRushWithDeath
04-26-2011, 12:54 PM
The Bulls score 92.7 points per 48 with George on the court, and 103.4 with him off it.



What a bum.

vnzla81
04-26-2011, 01:02 PM
Once again those stats don't tell me s***, who is PG playing with must of the time? Call me crazy but I'm pretty sure that person is not Mcbob.

Man, I miss the old times when the Troy Murphy fans kept showing me stats telling me how amazing he was.

Mackey_Rose
04-26-2011, 01:09 PM
Once again those stats don't tell me s***, who is PG playing with must of the time? Call me crazy but I'm pretty sure that person is not Mcbob.

Man, I miss the old times when the Troy Murphy fans kept showing me stats telling me how amazing he was.

Are you fundamentally opposed to posting a viewpoint?

BRushWithDeath
04-26-2011, 01:10 PM
Once again those stats don't tell me s***, who is PG playing with must of the time? Call me crazy but I'm pretty sure that person is not Mcbob.


I assume you are asserting that the majority of the time Paul has played, Tyler has also been on the court.

Which makes it all the more odd that Paul represents a net gain of nearly 11 points per 48 and Tyler represents a net loss of nearly 11.

JEM
04-26-2011, 01:34 PM
Immediately post-vogel? Yes we were... The competition was easy, but I didn't comment on that one way or another. Or are you arguing that that wasn't our strongest lineup earlier in the year either? Qualify your statement, because statistically that lineup was in fact our strongest.

Not sure what your trying to get at?

That has more to do with the players having a weight lifted off their shoulders when OBrien was let go.. Something the players themselves admitted when the losses started coming.

Also during that streak it was the bench that kept bailing out the starters from double digit deficits. Thats when the " Goon Squad " was coined.

BRushWithDeath
04-26-2011, 02:49 PM
That has more to do with the players having a weight lifted off their shoulders when OBrien was let go.. Something the players themselves admitted when the losses started coming.

Also during that streak it was the bench that kept bailing out the starters from double digit deficits. Thats when the " Goon Squad " was coined.

It was our strongest lineup pre-Vogel. It was our strongest lineup post-Vogel.

You say the Goon Squad (I hate myself for saying that) was bailing them out. And I remember that occuring in a few games as well. And that hurts that unit's numbers. Yet they are still the best group we fielded all year by a landslide. Among the best in the entire league.

You say it had more to do with having the weight lifted off their shoulders when JOB was fired. Yet they played together far more with that monkey on their back? That is completely counterintuitive.