PDA

View Full Version : Can we PLEASE Trade for this guy! Please Larry make it happen!



90'sNBARocked
12-23-2011, 11:44 AM
http://www.hoopsworld.com/nba-am-where-are-all-the-nba-trades


Josh Smith: To say Josh Smith is tired of taking the blame for all of the Hawks problems as a team is an understatement. But rather than come into camp and complain, Josh dropped some 20 pounds and has been killing it in training camp.

The Hawks have marveled at Josh’s drive and motivation and have moved him to the small forward spot to better utilize his athleticism. The Hawks seem pretty happy with where they are in the grand scheme in the Eastern Conference and are reluctant to break that up, which is why the team has turned away overtures on Josh.

Like Golden State, it would take a serious player to get the Hawks off the dime on Smith, and as long as the Hawks are in the hunt for home court in the East and Josh continues to lead by example, Hawks sources said recently that moving Josh just didn’t make sense for what’s possible in return.

If the Hawks struggle, or implode as a team that could change, but after a full week of camp no one in Atlanta is talking trade, they are talking playoffs and as long as the direction of the team stays that way Josh will stay with the Hawks.

Even though we have West , I would offer Hibbert and anyone outside of Ty, PG, or DG

P_George
12-23-2011, 11:55 AM
Smith is a beast. He would have to play PF for us, which may be his best position.

Tom White
12-23-2011, 11:57 AM
Why? What does this do to solve the team's real needs?

Dr. Awesome
12-23-2011, 12:05 PM
I find it funny that people are so willing to trade Hibbert.

I'm glad it's so easy to find a servicable Center, otherwise we would be screwed!!

/green font

90'sNBARocked
12-23-2011, 12:05 PM
Why? What does this do to solve the team's real needs?

Yes I think it helps a lot

Im not convinced Roy will ever be anything more than an average center in this league

I like everything about his personality, but I really feel those who think he will be much better, will be let down

I feel Josh, West, Ty, Foster, Pendegrass, and Amudson, could hold down the C/PF spots

just my opinoion

Hicks
12-23-2011, 12:08 PM
You know what's worse than having an average center? Not having a center!

90'sNBARocked
12-23-2011, 12:10 PM
I find it funny that people are so willing to trade Hibbert.

I'm glad it's so easy to find a servicable Center, otherwise we would be screwed!!

/green font

Really?

Check the tape Doc

We played better against the Bulls WITHOUT Roy in the game!

Scot Pollard
12-23-2011, 12:10 PM
Think what you want.

90'sNBARocked
12-23-2011, 12:10 PM
Think what you want.

why you always got to be a smart azz?

Dr. Awesome
12-23-2011, 12:11 PM
why you always got to be a smart azz?

Cuz he's Scot Pollard...

90'sNBARocked
12-23-2011, 12:12 PM
half the people on here are a bunch of *** talkers behind an internet keyboard

always looking to show someone up with a smart remark

Now I understand what Kemo was talking about

which it was a face to face forum

Scot Pollard
12-23-2011, 12:12 PM
Cuz he's Scot Pollard...

:nod:

Dr. Awesome
12-23-2011, 12:12 PM
Really?

Check the tape Doc

We played better against the Bulls WITHOUT Roy in the game!

Glad to know that one series tells us all we need to know.

In that case, let's cut Hibbert and sign Chuck Hayes.

troyc11a
12-23-2011, 12:17 PM
Trade Hibbert for a bonehead like Josh Smith = Back to the Lottery we go. Trade a quality starting center for a player who plays a position we are the strongest at.

Hibbert is not the best Center. But any team in the NBA would love to have him. He could start for 75% of them. Adequate Centers are to hard to come by. Ball hogging, undersized PF's, who provide good highlights but dont help their team win are not that important if your goal is a championship.

Scot Pollard
12-23-2011, 12:17 PM
When Roy is at his best, we are nearly unstoppable.

He doesn't suck. He's a hell of a center when he takes his time. This is a new season and hopefully we see a consistent Roy Hibbert.

BTW, Josh Smith is far from a center and we don't need to force him here just because. We're good on PF and doubt Atlanta is shopping at this moment.

Dr. Awesome
12-23-2011, 12:17 PM
0_0

Dr. Awesome
12-23-2011, 12:18 PM
90's I've always liked you as a poster here, not too sure where all this is coming from...but I kinda like it ;-).

90'sNBARocked
12-23-2011, 12:27 PM
90's I've always liked you as a poster here, not too sure where all this is coming from...but I kinda like it ;-).

liked you too bro. yes in that way :) syke not homephobic just rather crack jokes than be a dikhead, which I can do both quite well

just pissed at sears.com , they are the worst. Its been over 3 weeks and they are holdign over 400.00 of my money hostage while promising to return it

Now I wont have it before christmas

So Im being a dikhead myself.

Just lashing out like an angry teenager

you know how it goes sometime

If only Brandon Rush had this drive :)

Tell Scotty po po I said my bad :)

Scot Pollard
12-23-2011, 12:29 PM
I apologize on my behalf as well.

Now that we got that out of the way NO TO JOSH SMITH AND KEEP ROY HIBBERT! :D

1984
12-23-2011, 12:33 PM
http://cdn3.sbnation.com/imported_assets/915689/CP-got-Stern_d.gif

Basketball reasons.

ksuttonjr76
12-23-2011, 12:39 PM
I'm cool with the current makeup of the team minus a backup SF which could resolved depending on the rotation that Vogel uses.

90'sNBARocked
12-23-2011, 01:12 PM
I apologize on my behalf as well.

Now that we got that out of the way NO TO JOSH SMITH AND KEEP ROY HIBBERT! :D

me too bro

and Im sending Josh Smith an ECard from you thats says

"Scotty P from PD says you ant hold Tylers jockstrap, along with your indy address"

:)

cdash
12-23-2011, 01:28 PM
My whole thing with acquiring Josh Smith is that he would be a perfect complement to Hibbert. If we have to trade Roy to get him, it kind of ruins the point of acquiring J Smoove. But in order to get Smith, we would likely have to deal Hibbert away.

yoadknux
12-23-2011, 01:28 PM
I'm a big fan of Smith and his game, and I think he fits great next to Roy, but it doesn't make sense to trade for him anymore. starting SF/PF are not our weak points.

If we're talking about 'dream' trades, I'd hope we could get Iggy without losing our starting 5. (Yes, I'm willing to trade Paul George and a pick as long as we have enough cash to sign Hibbert. let the hate begin :-p)

I mean, just look at this rotation:

Collison/Hill/Price
Iggy/Hill
Granger/Iggy
West/Hansbrough
Hibbert/Foster

BEAST team!

cramerica
12-23-2011, 01:30 PM
This is one weird thread.

90'sNBARocked
12-23-2011, 01:32 PM
This is one weird thread.

No freakin Diggity

or for our Republican faithfull followers

"yes you are correct sir"

Pacer Fan
12-23-2011, 01:52 PM
LOL

bballpacen
12-23-2011, 03:32 PM
Would love to get Smith still, but to pair him next to Hibbert... I would give up Psyco-T and a pick... But doubt that is enought for ATL...

BlueNGold
12-23-2011, 03:48 PM
Pass. Smith is a head case...and that's the only reason he might be available.

pacer4ever
12-23-2011, 03:58 PM
Pass. Smith is a head case...and that's the only reason he might be available.

no he is available because he ask for a trade to a team that wanted to win.

BlueNGold
12-23-2011, 04:50 PM
no he is available because he ask for a trade to a team that wanted to win.

Chris Mannix (Sports Illustrated) isn't the first guy who's said this. Here is Chris's take:

“Josh has incredible talents. He’s a high-flier, he’s a great rebounder, when he attacks the rim, he’s one of the better power forwards in the entire league. The problem is, he only does that about 60 percent of the time. He’s a massive head case. There’s a reason Atlanta is willing to part with him. So, I would be real careful about any kind of deal — believing any kind of deal, and being willing to talk about and accept any kind of deal for Josh Smith.”

clownskull
12-23-2011, 06:55 PM
it has been said before but, i will say it as well:
the position(s) he can play pf/sf are probably the strongest spots on this team. adding him isn't going to really help much. we already have west and tyler. west is a guy who we really haven't even gotten a chance to see how he will work on the squad in the regular season and tyler is looking like he could be a monster off the bench.
granger has the sf spot and george can play that one too.

and if we traded roy for smith, that would be a huge mistake as hicks explained well. i don't want to push feisty with too many minutes and have his back freak out as we are currently thin at the 5. and at 6'8, i really don't want to see josh playing that spot even if he can jump really high. he's still just giving up too much height.

josh is a valuable player for sure but, we are already full with quality and depth at his spot(s)
this team needs help- just not where he plays.

pezasied182
12-23-2011, 07:12 PM
So we would have 3 good PFs on the roster, but no real starting centers? How's that working out for Utah?

If we didn't sign West, I'd be for trying to reel in Josh Smith, but with West, I don't see the point.

Pacergeek
12-23-2011, 09:57 PM
We are weak at SG. Josh Smith could play Smith there

A.B.Hollywood
12-23-2011, 10:17 PM
I was all for Smith , including the exact trade you proposed but that was prior to getting West, now that we have West that really changes things IMO.

If a package of Tyler + Granger gets us Josh Smith, Hinrich and a future #1 I am all for it. That way Smith could play both PF and the 3 spot all while paving a way for PG to start. Hinrich is another defensive minded guard who can play both the 1 and 2 and we have a pretty sick lineup.

Having DC, PG, Josh Smith, David West and Hibbert all on the floor at the same time is a real possibility and has components that are perfectly complimentary. Not to mention we'd have 2 #1's in a very deep 2012 draft.

Although, My guess is it would take Tyler + a future #1 of our own to maybe land Jsmooth.

troyc11a
12-23-2011, 10:40 PM
I was all for Smith , including the exact trade you proposed but that was prior to getting West, now that we have West that really changes things IMO.

If a package of Tyler + Granger gets us Josh Smith, Hinrich and a future #1 I am all for it. That way Smith could play both PF and the 3 spot all while paving a way for PG to start. Hinrich is another defensive minded guard who can play both the 1 and 2 and we have a pretty sick lineup.

Having DC, PG, Josh Smith, David West and Hibbert all on the floor at the same time is a real possibility and has components that are perfectly complimentary. Not to mention we'd have 2 #1's in a very deep 2012 draft.

Although, My guess is it would take Tyler + a future #1 of our own to maybe land Jsmooth.

Bad trade for the Pacers. No way should we think about including Tyler in a trade for Smith unless the Hawks throw in something. Tyler is better than Smith period!

BlueNGold
12-23-2011, 10:46 PM
Josh cannot shoot from any distance and that will cause teams to pack the paint and load up on Roy...which will hurt our offense. Not so with West. Also, David West is at least as good if not better. Even not counting any baggage, Josh isn't even preferred over West IMHO.

Somebody shut this thread down.

troyc11a
12-23-2011, 10:54 PM
Josh cannot shoot from any distance and that will cause teams to pack the paint and load up on Roy...which will hurt our offense. Not so with West. Also, David West is at least as good if not better. Even not counting any baggage, Josh isn't even preferred over West IMHO.

Somebody shut this thread down.

Josh is an idiot who shoots his team out of games. We have 2 power forwards better than him now. Dont need his bad attitude or inferior play.

DonSwanson
12-23-2011, 11:20 PM
Trade Hibbert for a bonehead like Josh Smith = Back to the Lottery we go. Trade a quality starting center for a player who plays a position we are the strongest at.

Hibbert is not the best Center. But any team in the NBA would love to have him. He could start for 75% of them. Adequate Centers are to hard to come by. Ball hogging, undersized PF's, who provide good highlights but dont help their team win are not that important if your goal is a championship.

Roy Hibbert is the 5th best starting center in the Central Division.

A.B.Hollywood
12-23-2011, 11:28 PM
Bad trade for the Pacers. No way should we think about including Tyler in a trade for Smith unless the Hawks throw in something. Tyler is better than Smith period!

I... just...

I...

wow.

BlueNGold
12-23-2011, 11:32 PM
Roy Hibbert is the 5th best starting center in the Central Division against the Chicago Bulls.

Fixed.

Roy's issue is both mental and physical...and Noah is his worst match-up. I think he might intimidate Roy and Noah's energy and physicality is too much for now. Most other centers are simply not going to give him as much trouble. I would even say Dwight will be easier because the Magic will not double Roy.

One other thing to keep in mind is, our offense has a lot of work to do. That is Roy's biggest issue...even bigger than a tough match-up for him. Next time we see the Bulls, expect him to play better.

At the same time, the jury is still deliberating on our big man. This is a critical year for him...

DonSwanson
12-23-2011, 11:44 PM
Fixed.

Roy's issue is both mental and physical...and Noah is his worst match-up. I think he might intimidate Roy and Noah's energy and physicality is too much for now. Most other centers are simply not going to give him as much trouble. I would even say Dwight will be easier because the Magic will not double Roy.

One other thing to keep in mind is, our offense has a lot of work to do. That is Roy's biggest issue...even bigger than a tough match-up for him. Next time we see the Bulls, expect him to play better.

At the same time, the jury is still deliberating on our big man. This is a critical year for him...

Forget about Chicago. If you had $10,000 riding on the Pacers making the playoffs, and you had to pick between Hibbert and Varejao as our starting center for the season--you're telling me that you would not take Wild Thing??

Wow.

Wanna know what's funny though? I'm guessing that 95% of people on here probably agree with you. But if my cash was on the line, I wouldn't even flinch in taking Varejao. I would have no hesitation whatsoever in saying we would have a top 5 defense with him rotating in the interior, collecting the boards, leading the league in charges and still providing some efficient scoring. Lebron was BRILLIANT in Cleveland, but who was the 2nd most important player on those teams that made the 2nd round or better for 5 straight seasons? Andy Varejao. If the goal was to actually win as many games as we could instead of patting ourselves on the back for having a young and charismatic center who has shown improvement, then you have to take Varejao.

beast23
12-24-2011, 12:13 AM
But if my cash was on the line, I wouldn't even flinch in taking Varejao. I would have no hesitation whatsoever in saying we would have a top 5 defense with him rotating in the interior, collecting the boards, leading the league in charges and still providing some efficient scoring. Lebron was BRILLIANT in Cleveland, but who was the 2nd most important player on those teams that made the 2nd round or better for 5 straight seasons? Andy Varejao. If the goal was to actually win as many games as we could instead of patting ourselves on the back for having a young and charismatic center who has shown improvement, then you have to take Varejao.

I don't disagree that having Varejao would improve the post defense significantly.

But you also have to evaluate how the dynamics of the offense would be changed with Varejao in the lineup replacing Hibbert. My own personal opinion is that the offense would simply not be as good.

Whether the improvement in defense would more than make up for the decrease in offense, I don't know. But it would be one thing that must be considered. It certainly does pose a possible risk.

DonSwanson
12-24-2011, 12:43 AM
I don't disagree that having Varejao would improve the post defense significantly.

But you also have to evaluate how the dynamics of the offense would be changed with Varejao in the lineup replacing Hibbert. My own personal opinion is that the offense would simply not be as good.

Whether the improvement in defense would more than make up for the decrease in offense, I don't know. But it would be one thing that must be considered. It certainly does pose a possible risk.

Well two things.

First, On whether the improvement in defense would more than make up for the "decrease in offense"--No question I would take a top 5 defense in most hypothetical trade-offs between defense and offense. In 2009-10 when Milwaukee won 46 games, they were a top 5 defensive team but 23rd in offense. On that Cavs team that made the finals, they were a top 5 defensive team, but 18th in offense. Last November when Roy was getting some hype for Most Improved just for shooting 49% and for rebounding at a level that Varejao does not just for November but every month, we were winning ballgames because our team defense was outstanding, holding top teams like the Thunder, Lakers and Heat to 38%. If we had a healthy Varejao instead of Hibbert, we would have sustained that top defense for the entire season.

Second, last year the average NBA center shot 51%.... how does going from a guy who shot 46%, averaged 12.7 ppg and 2.3 turnovers to the next guy who shot 52.8%, averaged 9.1 ppg and 1.3 turnovers "decrease" the offense? What does Roy Hibbert bring to the table that makes him more likely to produce a higher number of wins than Andy Varejao? Varejao with the length of our wings would almost assure us an elite defense, while with Hibbert last year we were 23rd in offense. There would be no trade-off here. With Varejao, we are winning more games.

DonSwanson
12-24-2011, 01:45 AM
I made this next point a year ago but I'll go ahead and recycle my own material--b/c now I'm in a bit of a Hibbert bashing mood--and frankly he deserves it and then some for all of the excuses that fans make for him. Season hasn't started yet so I'm not violating my pledge, I'm getting it out of my system now, etc...

2009-10 Milwaukee Bucks vs 2009-10 Indiana Pacers.

Why were the Bucks a much better defensive team than the Pacers that year?

I'm sure most on here would say, "Well they had Scott Skiles and we had the worst flippin' coach on the planet, that's why. O'Brien didn't care about defense." It's a reflex.

But actually--Bucks opponents shot 45.1% that season, Pacers opponents shot 45.3%. So both teams generated good, above average results in forcing the miss.

Yet the Bucks had the league's 2nd most efficient defense, and the Pacers were 14th. How could there be such a discrepancy in overall defensive efficiency if both teams held opponents to around 45%???

Was it because we put opponents on the line more often than they did?

Nope. The Bucks actually put opponents on the free throw line more frequently (they were 29th in opponent free throws per field goal attempt) and yielded a higher free throw discrepancy than us.

The answer? They were 3rd in the NBA in defensive rebounding percentage, we were 22nd. They had Andrew Bogut who was top 10 in the league in Defensive Rebounding % at 26.4%, we had a starting center who was at an eddy curryish def rebounding % of 15.5% and 8.2 boards per 36. So for all this talk about how Skiles = Amazing, O'Brien=Trash--you make the switch between Bogut and Hibbert, and we would have been the elite defensive team and thus making the playoffs in spite of an anemic offense, not them. Yet I think many made the case that Hibbert, at 25 mpg, was playing too FEW minutes? That going 3-4 in games that Murphy started at center is somehow the reason why we missed the playoffs in 09-10 and NOT this rebounding issue?? Yet I'm sure all the Pacers history textbooks will conveniently leave all of this out in favor of the popular narrative. I'm just thankful that with fans this year, Roy Hibbert will no longer have cover with an unlikable, unpopular coach, b/c Vogel may actually be more likable than Big Roy!!

DonSwanson
12-24-2011, 02:03 AM
Bottom line as it relates to this thread--You trade for Jay Smoove b/c that's clear talent upgrade. I don't know if I do it NOW or not since we already signed West--I probably would I guess, but I would have originally overpaid for Nene and his league leading FG% efficiency, decent low post defense, then would have looked to unload Granger/Hibbs. A frontline of Nene, Jay Smooove, Paul George who would dominate at his position from a rebounding standpoint (and with Hans still playing 30 mins off the bench)? Now THAT'S change (and a frontcourt) I could believe in and predict to finish top 4 or 5 in the East. And probably keeping B Rush and Dunleavy.... I don't believe you win by building around Roy Hibbert and Danny Granger, so that belief right there would motivate me to bring in efficient players like Nene and Jay Smooooooove, and give George the 3 spot.

Also--I realize this would have prevented us from landing George Hill--but I would have strongly looked at drafting Kenneth Faried based on some of my above hypotheticals--led the nation in rebounding last year. GREAT underrated pick by Denver here.

Alright, no more Hibbert bashing from me until June. I'm out til next week, Happy Holidays everyone.

vnzla81
12-24-2011, 02:21 AM
I made this next point a year ago but I'll go ahead and recycle my own material--b/c now I'm in a bit of a Hibbert bashing mood--and frankly he deserves it and then some for all of the excuses that fans make for him. Season hasn't started yet so I'm not violating my pledge, I'm getting it out of my system now, etc...

2009-10 Milwaukee Bucks vs 2009-10 Indiana Pacers.

Why were the Bucks a much better defensive team than the Pacers that year?

I'm sure most on here would say, "Well they had Scott Skiles and we had the worst flippin' coach on the planet, that's why. O'Brien didn't care about defense." It's a reflex.

But actually--Bucks opponents shot 45.1% that season, Pacers opponents shot 45.3%. So both teams generated good, above average results in forcing the miss.

Yet the Bucks had the league's 2nd most efficient defense, and the Pacers were 14th. How could there be such a discrepancy in overall defensive efficiency if both teams held opponents to around 45%???

Was it because we put opponents on the line more often than they did?

Nope. The Bucks actually put opponents on the free throw line more frequently (they were 29th in opponent free throws per field goal attempt) and yielded a higher free throw discrepancy than us.

The answer? They were 3rd in the NBA in defensive rebounding percentage, we were 22nd. They had Andrew Bogut who was top 10 in the league in Defensive Rebounding % at 26.4%, we had a starting center who was at an eddy curryish def rebounding % of 15.5% and 8.2 boards per 36. So for all this talk about how Skiles = Amazing, O'Brien=Trash--you make the switch between Bogut and Hibbert, and we would have been the elite defensive team and thus making the playoffs in spite of an anemic offense, not them. Yet I think many made the case that Hibbert, at 25 mpg, was playing too FEW minutes? That going 3-4 in games that Murphy started at center is somehow the reason why we missed the playoffs in 09-10 and NOT this rebounding issue?? Yet I'm sure all the Pacers history textbooks will conveniently leave all of this out in favor of the popular narrative. I'm just thankful that with fans this year, Roy Hibbert will no longer have cover with an unlikable, unpopular coach, b/c Vogel may actually be more likable than Big Roy!!

Ok I was agreeing with you until you decided to defend "the clown" of JOB ..... :nono: ...... Boo this man boo :tongue:

pacer4ever
12-24-2011, 02:26 AM
I don't disagree that having Varejao would improve the post defense significantly.

But you also have to evaluate how the dynamics of the offense would be changed with Varejao in the lineup replacing Hibbert. My own personal opinion is that the offense would simply not be as good.

Whether the improvement in defense would more than make up for the decrease in offense, I don't know. But it would be one thing that must be considered. It certainly does pose a possible risk.

Like having a guy who wants to set hard screens on floor?? Andy is a guy you dont have to run squat for but will do all the stuff necessary to win. I am biased I will always take the rebounder/defender/ hard pick setter at C over the skilled guy if they are at least in the same ball park. I just prefer that style. i think the intagibles that Andy brings is something this team has missed for years we dont have one good screener on the roster IMO that trait gets really over looked.

CooperManning
12-24-2011, 04:38 AM
Josh Smith aka Mr. Inconsistent would soon become a scapegoat around here.

Regardless, it doesn't make sense to trade for Smith, considering the West signing. Smith will be a UFA in two years when West's contract expires. If we want him, we'll get him then and not give up anything.

D-BONE
12-24-2011, 06:37 AM
I made this next point a year ago but I'll go ahead and recycle my own material--b/c now I'm in a bit of a Hibbert bashing mood--and frankly he deserves it and then some for all of the excuses that fans make for him. Season hasn't started yet so I'm not violating my pledge, I'm getting it out of my system now, etc...

2009-10 Milwaukee Bucks vs 2009-10 Indiana Pacers.

Why were the Bucks a much better defensive team than the Pacers that year?


I'm sure most on here would say, "Well they had Scott Skiles and we had the worst flippin' coach on the planet, that's why. O'Brien didn't care about defense." It's a reflex.

But actually--Bucks opponents shot 45.1% that season, Pacers opponents shot 45.3%. So both teams generated good, above average results in forcing the miss.

Yet the Bucks had the league's 2nd most efficient defense, and the Pacers were 14th. How could there be such a discrepancy in overall defensive efficiency if both teams held opponents to around 45%???

Was it because we put opponents on the line more often than they did?

Nope. The Bucks actually put opponents on the free throw line more frequently (they were 29th in opponent free throws per field goal attempt) and yielded a higher free throw discrepancy than us.

The answer? They were 3rd in the NBA in defensive rebounding percentage, we were 22nd. They had Andrew Bogut who was top 10 in the league in Defensive Rebounding % at 26.4%, we had a starting center who was at an eddy curryish def rebounding % of 15.5% and 8.2 boards per 36. So for all this talk about how Skiles = Amazing, O'Brien=Trash--you make the switch between Bogut and Hibbert, and we would have been the elite defensive team and thus making the playoffs in spite of an anemic offense, not them. Yet I think many made the case that Hibbert, at 25 mpg, was playing too FEW minutes? That going 3-4 in games that Murphy started at center is somehow the reason why we missed the playoffs in 09-10 and NOT this rebounding issue?? Yet I'm sure all the Pacers history textbooks will conveniently leave all of this out in favor of the popular narrative. I'm just thankful that with fans this year, Roy Hibbert will no longer have cover with an unlikable, unpopular coach, b/c Vogel may actually be more likable than Big Roy!!

Completely agree with the overall point. Rebounding, and defensive rebounding in particular, have been our achilles heel for some time now. If we want to be a legit defensive squad with aspirations of doing some damage in the playoffs, we have to be able to successfully close defensive possessions.

Are we in a position to improve here this season? Potentially yes, but I need to see it to believe it. Bottom line on Hibbert is he's just not a dominant rebounder. Thus far, we can count on decent but inconsistent point production and solid shot blocking.

I hate to continually harp on our lack of a physical interior D & rebounding specialist, but this is a big piece of the team D equation. We will truly have to rebound well as a team this season as we don't have one or two guys who can carry the load here. George and Granger really nee to step up here.

D-BONE
12-24-2011, 06:45 AM
Bottom line as it relates to this thread--You trade for Jay Smoove b/c that's clear talent upgrade. I don't know if I do it NOW or not since we already signed West--I probably would I guess, but I would have originally overpaid for Nene and his league leading FG% efficiency, decent low post defense, then would have looked to unload Granger/Hibbs. A frontline of Nene, Jay Smooove, Paul George who would dominate at his position from a rebounding standpoint (and with Hans still playing 30 mins off the bench)? Now THAT'S change (and a frontcourt) I could believe in and predict to finish top 4 or 5 in the East. And probably keeping B Rush and Dunleavy.... I don't believe you win by building around Roy Hibbert and Danny Granger, so that belief right there would motivate me to bring in efficient players like Nene and Jay Smooooooove, and give George the 3 spot.

Also--I realize this would have prevented us from landing George Hill--but I would have strongly looked at drafting Kenneth Faried based on some of my above hypotheticals--led the nation in rebounding last year. GREAT underrated pick by Denver here.

Alright, no more Hibbert bashing from me until June. I'm out til next week, Happy Holidays everyone.

Don, you're preaching to the choir with me on this whole topic. Although I am far having my mind made up, I'm honestly a tad bit nervous as to what G. Hill is really going to amount to for us. Hopefully we won't look back on that decision and say, we could have addressed the inside void instead.

I totally agree as well with the assertion about Granger and Hibbert as building blocks. Not only are those guys not good enough to be your foundation, I feel neither has the intestinal fortitude/tenacity to carry a team anyway. Can they be nice complementary pieces? Of course, if viewed and deployed in that role. Personally, I almost wish DG had never discovered the 3 or been ordained the go-to scorer, although that's by no means his fault. Who else was a better option at the time?

D-BONE
12-24-2011, 06:48 AM
Now, as to the Josh Smith thing, honestly only mildly interested. Think the guy is potentially dicey from an attitude standpoint. It would depend on what the deal looked like and who would be left to team with him.

D-BONE
12-24-2011, 06:50 AM
Like having a guy who wants to set hard screens on floor?? Andy is a guy you dont have to run squat for but will do all the stuff necessary to win. I am biased I will always take the rebounder/defender/ hard pick setter at C over the skilled guy if they are at least in the same ball park. I just prefer that style. i think the intagibles that Andy brings is something this team has missed for years we dont have one good screener on the roster IMO that trait gets really over looked.

This is more my MO too, although I'd take the player you describe and 4 or 5. If you have him at 4, then a more versatile and/or mildly more "finesse" 5 could work. Problem for us is we just don't have anyone who fits that role period right now, IMO.

Slick Pinkham
12-24-2011, 08:49 AM
We all know that O'Brien was nuts for wanting 5 guards on the floor. Well, a lineup of 3 PFs and 2 SFs is about as crazy.

BlueNGold
12-24-2011, 10:42 AM
Forget about Chicago. If you had $10,000 riding on the Pacers making the playoffs, and you had to pick between Hibbert and Varejao as our starting center for the season--you're telling me that you would not take Wild Thing??

Wow.

Wanna know what's funny though? I'm guessing that 95% of people on here probably agree with you. But if my cash was on the line, I wouldn't even flinch in taking Varejao. I would have no hesitation whatsoever in saying we would have a top 5 defense with him rotating in the interior, collecting the boards, leading the league in charges and still providing some efficient scoring. Lebron was BRILLIANT in Cleveland, but who was the 2nd most important player on those teams that made the 2nd round or better for 5 straight seasons? Andy Varejao. If the goal was to actually win as many games as we could instead of patting ourselves on the back for having a young and charismatic center who has shown improvement, then you have to take Varejao.

95% agree with me because they are factoring in a few things you are not.

Hibbert played under JOb who destroyed his confidence last year. That will take awhile to resolve. There is a mental part to his issues that you are not recognizing. Second, he lost weight last year which hurt him in the paint. Third, our offense was a mess because we had not practiced and Hibbert's effectiveness is in the half court where he can use his skills with some kind of consistent offensive plan. Fourth, defense is always ahead of offense at this time of the year. Fifth, Hibbert was going against the worst matchup in the league for him. Yes, he looked weak and bad...but you've just seen him at his worst...probably for the rest of his career.

Finally, right or wrong, those of us who support Hibbert still see potential. He has a LOT of growth potential compared to Varejao who is basically who he's going to be.

Edit: Also Don, the bottom line is...J-Smoove isn't going to be a Pacer and I highly doubt the Pacers were ever interested. They are looking for good players but with David West they got a better player.

BlueNGold
12-24-2011, 10:48 AM
Josh Smith aka Mr. Inconsistent

That pretty much sums it up.

xBulletproof
12-24-2011, 12:07 PM
I don't buy the whole confidence shot theory. If you're soft enough mentally that Jim O'Brien can ruin you, you aren't mentally fit for the stress of fighting for a championship anyway. I would bet money Hibbert is offended by this idea.

Besides that I have read stories about Hibbert being laughed off courts when he started playing and it didn't ruin him mentally. It made him work harder and come back better. Some of you make it sound like he's some big pussy mentally.

ksuttonjr76
12-24-2011, 12:37 PM
Honestly, I REALLY BELIEVE that Noah is that ONE center will give Hibbert the most problems. For the Indiana Pacers to win the Eastern Conference Finals, the road goes through Chicago and most importantly it will be based on the factor of whether or not Hibbert can OUTPLAY Noah.

When I reflect on last season, there wasn't too many centers that outright "manhandled" him. In some cases, I attributed his low production to the offense that was being ran that night. If you look at the game logs AFTER Vogel took over and his average production against teams, Hibbert was mostly productive.

http://espn.go.com/nba/player/gamelog/_/id/3436/roy-hibbert
http://espn.go.com/nba/player/splits/_/id/3436/roy-hibbert

As you can see, Hibbert didn't averaged double figures against SIX teams in the entire leauge. Four of those teams are in the West while remaining two are in the East. One team has an All-Star center (Dwight Howard), and the other team is the Chicago Bulls. Personally, I'm not all that worried about the other teams in a 7-game series. Orlando is pretty much a one-man team. Boston wouldn't be able to keep up with our youth and bench. Miami lacks overall talent outside of the Big 3. But Chicago....youth, bench, strong at ALL starting positions. Let the rivalry begin.

beast23
12-24-2011, 05:31 PM
Like having a guy who wants to set hard screens on floor?? Andy is a guy you dont have to run squat for but will do all the stuff necessary to win. I am biased I will always take the rebounder/defender/ hard pick setter at C over the skilled guy if they are at least in the same ball park. I just prefer that style. i think the intagibles that Andy brings is something this team has missed for years we dont have one good screener on the roster IMO that trait gets really over looked.

I also prefer that one of the front court players be a rebounder / defender / pick setter.

In this instance, we just picked up West for a reason. To have a third scorer in the lineup that would compel opposing teams to no longer attempt to double Hibbert and Granger. If you remove Hibbert from the lineup and insert Verajao, you no longer have that.

The next time someone double teams Verajao in the post will also be the first time someone double teams Verajao in the post. With Hibbert, you have a player that other teams are compelled to double team. If they do, we now have to very good options (West, Granger) for scoring and if Hibbert is double teamed, at least one of them will be open. Verajao does not accomplish that because he does not draw a double team.

Most teams attempt to double team Hibbert. When they do, I think we can make them pay for it. When they don't double team Hibbert in the post, I believe that Hibbert can make most teams pay for that decision as well.

All I'm saying is that swapping out Hibbert for Verajao is not as simple as you guys make it out to be. I have no doubts that we would have a better defending starting lineup, but I also contend that we might very well have a starting lineup that is not capable of scoring as well.