PDA

View Full Version : Odd Thoughts: Gored



Peck
03-06-2012, 04:35 AM
The one good thing to take away from this game was that it only counts as one loss, even though it seemed like 5.

One lousy quarter, that is what is so sick, it was all one absolutely horrid putrid quarter of basketball. Other than that we played them fairly even, but that quarter was so bad we could not even pretend to come back.

Note to all of the posters on Pacers Digest who just can not understand why the casual fan does not really care about our club, well those who just watch the sports center highlights or catch the score online or somewhere else will only see that once again when faced with a real team we lost by double digits. They won’t take the time to see that in the first half we outplayed them, because at the end of the day it didn’t matter.

Right now we are beating, handily mind you, the lower echelon of the league. But when faced with real competition we have not won a single game in a month and sadly we haven’t even competed.

This game was just the final straw for me when it comes to accepting the mantra of smash mouth basketball, we don’t do it and haven’t now for over a month. We have reverted to being a jump shooting soft interior weak rebounding club (when faced with real competition not the Charlotte Generals) and the Bulls just beat the living crap out of us tonight.

Frankly that third quarter was such a mess that I don’t even remember it all that much, I think my mind is intentionally blocking it out of my memory. But however many time outs that Frank took, they weren’t enough. Yes they had some big three’s drop, but several of those big three’s were the result of second effort rebounds and tips that our players just never got to.

Yes I know never get to up after a win or to down after a loss but this being blown out by good teams is just not good. It would be one thing if we lost by 8 points in a hard fought battle but this game was over at the end of the 3rd (did Rose even play in the 4th quarter?).

So now we get to face the Hawks tonight. I won’t say must win game, but frankly we lose this one and well…. Miami in Miami on Saturday night then going to Orlando the next night just does not bode well for us.

In all honesty I think tonight’s game has opened me up to the idea that while I appreciate the win loss record, we need to make some changes.

I know a lot of people want a change at the point and I won’t dispute that but right now I want another big man off of the bench. One who is a shot blocker and scorer if at all possible, however getting one of those is going to be hard to find. BTW, I’m not looking to replace Lou here; I have someone else in mind to replace.

I hate the Bulls, their fans, the city of Chicago (at the moment) and most of all I hate the king Rat looking Noah. But the truth of the matter is as much as I want to be mad at them and as much as I want to point out the blatant hypocrisy of their stupid sideline dancing and celebrating we have nobody to blame but ourselves. Yes Rose finally got going, but it wouldn’t have mattered if we would have taken care of John Lucas in the 1st. If we would have just won one or two loose ball or rebound tips in the 3rd we could have thwarted this. But no, they simply out played us. They are the better team and I guess this is what you get when you play a better team and don’t play absolutely perfect basketball.

Don’t get me wrong I’m not saying tank it or blow it up or any of the other hyperbole statements that are made far to often, but I think it is naïve to look at the team as currently constructed and think that it doesn’t need some serious upgrades.

Our bench, which was supposed to be a real strength for us, has just gotten to the point that I am happy if they don’t drop us to a double digit deficit by the time they go out. At times one of them will contribute something but far too often we get nothing from them.

In fact I am at the point that I do not think Frank should play them as a unit anymore. They should just be sprinkled in with starters for a few min. and the only time we don’t have at least two starters on the floor is a blowout either way.

I can’t say enough how bad a 20 point loss hurts this team again. Yes I know whether or not it is 2 points or 20 points it’s a loss either way, but
looking at if just from that point of view is naïve as well.

Any thoughts of this series being a rivalry need to be put on the backburner because until further notice they just simply better than we are.

For tonight let’s just do grades.

Danny Granger: D There were two plays in the 3rd quarter that just flat out infuriated me. Both of them were fast breaks. The first Danny went 1 on 4 and missed a bad shot that the Bulls immediately rebounded and scored. The second one is the one that made me almost throw my controller through the TV. He is coming down 3 on 2 with Paul George on the other wing. Danny is slightly in front but you can see Paul coming fast and both defenders are going at Danny leaving Paul wide open or at the very least open enough to get the and 1 shot. In a perfect world Danny drives the lane flipping a pass to George for the spectacular momentum shifting dunk. But in our world Danny throws up some crappy one handed double teamed shot that of course has no hope of going in and again Chicago quickly rebounds and scores. Selfish is the only word that comes to my mind. Well actually that is not true at all, I believe I called him an ***hole when he did that. The way he started out I thought he was going to prove to Deng that he deserved to be in that all-star game when as it turned out Deng proved to him why he should not.

David West: B Surprisingly he was actually very good tonight on defense. He even had a couple of blocked shots one of which was as a weak side help. He also did try and help out on the boards and when he was down low he got the boards in his area. He didn’t hit a high enough % of his shots but then again other than George Hill & Lou Amundson who did. We probably should have tried to go to him more often on the offensive end.

Roy Hibbert: C Ok right off the bat I’ll ask. What the hell was Joey Crawford calling on that first foul when Noah ran down the court and ran right into Roy? How exactly was that a foul on Roy? For that matter how was that a foul on anybody? Two quick fouls and he was taken out of the game. Noah just abused him again physically and with the foul trouble Roy was just a non-factor on offense & wasn’t much help on the boards. He did try as best as he could to be the last line of defense tonight in the second half and that is what is saving him from a lower grade. He had one good game vs. Noah and almost every other time he has owned him. It is so bad that Sam Smith of Bulls.com was making fun of Roy on twitter about Noah being in his head.

Paul George: A- He never gave up. When every other player had their shoulders slumping and heads down Paul was still trying and was giving effort. He didn’t have the overall good game that he has been having recently, but his effort to score and still play defense sets him apart from any other starter. The Bulls just have no answer for him, few teams do. But Paul is going to need help from someone at almost any position for us to not have out teeth kicked in vs. these really good teams.

Darren Collision: D- As they ask on office space “what would you say you do here”? I have no idea what the hell he was doing in that game. He did a decent job of staying in front of Rose in the first half but he hardly stopped him, Derrick was just missing shots at the rim. 0-6 from the floor is not what I would call making Rose work on the defensive end either. It would be one thing if he had dished out 15 assists but his massive 3 assists to go along with his 0 points does not make me want to vote for him for MVP anytime in our lifetimes.

Tyler Hansbrough: D- Ok I know this is going to cause a fire storm but frankly I don’t care. I have been a supporter of Tyler all season long. Even when he was having one of his long extended slumps (that seemed to last all season). But I think I am now ready to move on. Sadly I think he is the player he is always going to be and while he can make some adjustments to his game, overall I am now pretty much convinced he is just going to be a streak player who can on occasion have a really good game but when he his not really good he is really bad. He was just a non-factor again tonight, which wouldn’t be a problem but for the fact that our entire bench and frankly our “smash mouth” mantra was supposed to be centered around him. I can’t make a good argument that Lou Amundson isn’t better than him on most nights anymore. I think we really need to be looking for a new backup big man either a 4 or 5 and if it costs us Tyler to get them, well I’m ready for it.

George Hill: A- Like Paul George he never gave up either. He was hitting his shots and kept trying to take it to the Bulls. His defense was solid and while he won’t be confused with Steve Nash he still only dropped one less assist and 17 more points than Collison did in 5 less minutes.

Lou Amundson: B+ Solid production for a guy who only played 13 min. He was physical with the Bulls and really was about the only Pacer big who was. In all honesty I wish they would have given him Tyler’s min. along side West as he out produced Tyler in almost ½ the time on the floor. At this point in time I think Lou has done more than enough to earn his time and Jeff should just sit and wait till the end of the season or the playoffs. He is still horrid for the most part on offense but you can never say he doesn’t come in like a bolt of lightning.

A.J. Price: D+ His early in the shot clock three point shot attempt in the second half was just repulsive. In fact he should be fined for every time he calls his own number without looking to run another play. Now don’t get me wrong he wasn’t any worse than the starter (that would be almost impossible), but don’t kid yourself into thinking he was good either and his 25% from the free throw line was scrumtralescent.

Dahntay Jones: N/A Didn’t play enough to even consider his time on the floor, or better yet he didn’t do anything one way or the other to make me remember him.

Oh well the only thing we can do is put this one out of our minds as fast as possible and come back and beat the Hawks.

http://images.nymag.com/images/2/daily/2009/09/20090930_mightnotbereal_560x375.jpg

Kstat
03-06-2012, 04:46 AM
Bottom line, you got a split in Chicago. No reason to be too down that you couldn't take both games there.

Take care of business at home and you win the season series.

Lose by 1, 20 or 50, and it still amounts to only 1 loss.

Willbo
03-06-2012, 04:47 AM
I hate the Bulls, their fans, the city of Chicago (at the moment) and most of all I hate the king Rat looking Noah. But the truth of the matter is as much as I want to be mad at them and as much as I want to point out the blatant hypocrisy of their stupid sideline dancing and celebrating we have nobody to blame but ourselves

As much as the pinpoint analysis this is why you are the best.

Seamless integration of hard analytical prose combined with a perfect snapshot of the emotion of the game.

And I dont intend for that to be patronizing at all - just had yet another 'Peck is right on the money' moment that happens often enough to deserve more than just a 'thanks'.

rexnom
03-06-2012, 04:50 AM
I think Frank deserves some blame for not making any adjustments defensively. As soon as Rose figured out the double team/trap scheme, we should have switched Paul on him. Whatever.

By the way, I went to this game and we had the Bulls fans scared in the first half. A couple of people behind me were trash talking my friend and I at half. Honestly, I was a bit scared that it would escalate. Fortunately, the Pacers took care of that in the 3rd. They were laughing at us and chanting Scalabrini's name by the end of the quarter.

mattie
03-06-2012, 06:20 AM
Bottom line, you got a split in Chicago. No reason to be too down that you couldn't take both games there.

Take care of business at home and you win the season series.

Lose by 1, 20 or 50, and it still amounts to only 1 loss.

There's more to it than that though.

It's hard to stomach a loss when it really hammers home how good your team is.

It's not that we lost, we just haven't seen any actually good basketball in over a month. There has been a definite regression from how they started.

The Pacers started rebounding well, and defending well. That's just not happening right now.

On top of that there's these glaring problems:

Tyler Hansbrough isn't very good at basketball. I mean, call it a slump but as Peck said, this is a season long slump. He's just not good. Why is a very stocky powerful looking guy getting pushed around like he's weaker than Paul George?

Darren Collison is a liability. No matter how many times people say, "oh well if he's your worst starter, than that's good." No, unless there's a significant upgrade in talent in the starting lineup this team will never be able to compete with the Bulls, the Heat, or the Thunder. Except for the Bulls, all three of those teams have significantly more talented starting lineups.

Except for Hill, the bench is not good enough to compete with any other bench in the league. Before we had grand delusions that we would be a competitor because we had a talented team 1-10 and once Paul George grew into his potential we could compete with the best. Now we truly know we have to make some more upgrades not just in the starting lineup but on the bench as well.

Speed
03-06-2012, 07:08 AM
I have no idea whats wrong with Tyler, the books out on him I know, but he is not this bad, he's just not. Has he had 1 good game and sprinkled in 4 or 5 quarters all year that he's really even making an impact, all year? I have no inside info in any way, but it just seems like something is wrong. Its either that or he didn't work on his game in any way in the off season. Maybe both things are wrong, he's really been pedestrian at best and bad at worst.

As for the game, meh, Bulls had alot of incentive to bring it and they are really good. Not sure I expected anything different. It won't mean much if these teams meet in a 7 game series in May.

Strummer
03-06-2012, 07:22 AM
Now we truly know we have to make some more upgrades not just in the starting lineup but on the bench as well.

Wow. We've progressed from an 8th seed last year to a possible 3rd seed this year. And that's not good enough? How big a jump do we have to make in one year to make people happy?

Kstat
03-06-2012, 07:28 AM
There's more to it than that though.

It's hard to stomach a loss when it really hammers home how good your team is.

It's not that we lost, we just haven't seen any actually good basketball in over a month. There has been a definite regression from how they started.

The Pacers started rebounding well, and defending well. That's just not happening right now.

On top of that there's these glaring problems:

Tyler Hansbrough isn't very good at basketball. I mean, call it a slump but as Peck said, this is a season long slump. He's just not good. Why is a very stocky powerful looking guy getting pushed around like he's weaker than Paul George?

Darren Collison is a liability. No matter how many times people say, "oh well if he's your worst starter, than that's good." No, unless there's a significant upgrade in talent in the starting lineup this team will never be able to compete with the Bulls, the Heat, or the Thunder. Except for the Bulls, all three of those teams have significantly more talented starting lineups.

Except for Hill, the bench is not good enough to compete with any other bench in the league. Before we had grand delusions that we would be a competitor because we had a talented team 1-10 and once Paul George grew into his potential we could compete with the best. Now we truly know we have to make some more upgrades not just in the starting lineup but on the bench as well.
Not very impressed at all with Collison's lack of growth in Indiana, but other than that, this can be chalked up to a poor effort on the road against the best team in the East with an axe to grind.

I'm not saying Indiana can't shoot for the moon with Collison, but unless he improves significantly, the Pacers will eventually be faced with either upgrading him or finding a superstar at another position to offset him.

mattie
03-06-2012, 07:29 AM
Wow. We've progressed from an 8th seed last year to a possible 3rd seed this year. And that's not good enough? How big a jump do we have to make in one year to make people happy?

5th seed technically.

I think you're misunderstanding my tone.

It's great frankly. But there is still probably a long way to go talent wise before this team can compete with the top 3. (shouldn't be a shock to anyone) That's a bit of a shock to I think a lot of people including me on here. That's all.

Watching this team win as many games as this team has I think it's only natural to assume this team is not too far off from competing. I really don't think so any more though.

The bench needs a lot of improvement. The starting five needs a PG who can play D, and a big jump from PG.

I mean this is fun and all, but we've all kind of gotten a sucker punch of reality.

CreekShow
03-06-2012, 07:33 AM
Tyler isnt good at basketball, and Lou is better. Ya arguably the best college basketball player EVER isnt any good, Ive seen it all now. Maybe the transition to coming off the bench is hitting him harder than he expected. Its not really fair to put ALL the blame on him. Its not like that second unit is loaded with scorers. Do you guys ever think that maybe teams can focus on him more bc no one is worried about Amundson. He IS in fact the main focal point in the second unit. I agree he has been incredibly inconsistent and slumping bad. He has some serious work to do. I dont know whats wrong, but on any given bad night he is still better than Lou. Theres a reason Tyler is factored in most trade proposals to acquire a marquee player. No one wants to trade for Lou. I had better leave before someone else suggests something that tips me over the edge.

Kstat
03-06-2012, 07:34 AM
I don't think the Pacers need a specific type of point guard. I think they just need a better one.

A guy like Nash that can't defend worth **** would still make a world of difference. Likewise, a defensive player like Jack or Felton that isn't necessarily a better offensive player than Collison would still improve Indiana a bit.

Again, Collison is still young and could become better himself. It all depends on how long your timeline is.

able
03-06-2012, 07:34 AM
so we get clobbered by the bulls, shrug, who cares, ok we do, but let's not forget we entered the season thinking we would make it to the playoffs, only after 10 games came the "Let's try and get homecourt" which turned in "we better end 3rd"

The ever so obnoxious Chi-town crew calling the game, falling ovet themselves to declare absolute innocence on all bulls and foul on every touch from the Pacers, made us a far greater compliment sprinkled with truth than anyone in the gamethread would ever think of doing, and I quite losely "this team is not quite there, they surely are and will be the nr 3 in the east at the end of the season, but they are just shy of some improvement to compete with Chicago and Miami"
I was flabbergasted, no other expression possbile, the worst homers in NBA tv commentating history saying this about our Pacers?

Let's face reality a few minutes shall we? even if we beat Chicago in the playoffs, do they beat Miami for us or do WE have to do that? To be honest I don't see either happening but ok, let's say they do it, do you really think we can still beat them riding that high?

We all know this team needs improvement, with our growing and climbing in the standings, we get the recognition from the zebras as well I hope (though hold out little) and maybe, just maybe they will call Noah for his two-handed defense on Roy continuoulsy and his climbing over the back on most rebounds, now it is seen as "assertiveness" but he is simply fouling and lesser gods get called for it.

Foul 1 AND 2 on Hibbert were madness, and if they don't get called we have another game; conclusion, Hibbert is more important than some realize.

(extract from gamethread; No way Hibberst is a max-type player, nowhere near, we better not overpay for him")

If your opponent is one of the top 3/4 teams in the league and the plan their defense around Hibbert, like once he has the ball and makes a move we collapse with at least 3 on him, he is scary much better then most of us can even think.

With a decent pg and getting the ball to him faster in the short windows he can get the ball because he is not fronted, he could even get a lot more important.

Anyway not a game to remember or forget, take it on board and come back tonight, I feel petty on the hawks.

mattie
03-06-2012, 07:36 AM
Not very impressed at all with Collison's lack of growth in Indiana, but other than that, this can be chalked up to a poor effort on the road against the best team in the East with an axe to grind.

I'm not saying Indiana can't shoot for the moon with Collison, but unless he improves significantly, the Pacers will eventually be faced with either upgrading him or finding a superstar at another position to offset him.

That's exactly why I think so many of us talk about replacing Collison. It's not that he's so bad, its just to offset his play someone of Durant's quality would have to play for the Pacers. I think that's a bit ambitious.

Also- a single loss by it's self is never that big of a deal. Still, we are all waiting for this team to start playing tough defense and rebounding again. They haven't done it since January which is disconcerting. Hopefully that play will return. Regardless, they'll still continue to beat the bad teams as they have improved overall of course.

able
03-06-2012, 07:38 AM
Tyler isnt good at basketball, and Lou is better. Ya arguably the best college basketball player EVER isnt any good, Ive seen it all now. Maybe the transition to coming off the bench is hitting him harder than he expected. Its not really fair to put ALL the blame on him. Its not like that second unit is loaded with scorers. Do you guys ever think that maybe teams can focus on him more bc no one is worried about Amundson. He IS in fact the main focal point in the second unit. I agree he has been incredibly inconsistent and slumping bad. He has some serious work to do. I dont know whats wrong, but on any given bad night he is still better than Lou. Theres a reason Tyler is factored in most trade proposals to acquire a marquee player. No one wants to trade for Lou. I had better leave before someone else suggests something that tips me over the edge.

Tyler is a liability on both ends of the floor, Lou is twice the defender he is, 3 time the shotblocker and within his limitations a more consistand thread on the offensive end than Tyler.

Transition to the bench? from the how many game he started for the Pacers?

mattie
03-06-2012, 07:44 AM
Tyler isnt good at basketball, and Lou is better. Ya arguably the best college basketball player EVER isnt any good, Ive seen it all now. Maybe the transition to coming off the bench is hitting him harder than he expected. Its not really fair to put ALL the blame on him. Its not like that second unit is loaded with scorers. Do you guys ever think that maybe teams can focus on him more bc no one is worried about Amundson. He IS in fact the main focal point in the second unit. I agree he has been incredibly inconsistent and slumping bad. He has some serious work to do. I dont know whats wrong, but on any given bad night he is still better than Lou. Theres a reason Tyler is factored in most trade proposals to acquire a marquee player. No one wants to trade for Lou. I had better leave before someone else suggests something that tips me over the edge.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/h/hansbty01.html

http://www.82games.com/1112/11IND9.HTM

The opposing team nets an additional 8.8 points per 100 possessions just because Tyler exists.

He shoots 38% from the field, a regression from last year. He plays terrible defense. He is a bad rebounder. He took something like 15 games before he even got an assist.

We aren't talking about what Tyler was we are talking about what he is. Right now the facts are right there in those links available for your reading pleasure. Tyler Hansbrough is not a good NBA player.

Kstat
03-06-2012, 07:46 AM
Tyler's problems are twofold: he doesn't have a point guard to get him the ball in his spot, and he doesn't have enough shooters around him in the offense to allow him room to maneuver.

Both of those things he had in spades at UNC.

It's pretty similar to what Christian Laettner faced in the NBA. He has to alter his game a little. He can;t get away with what he did in college.

Asher99
03-06-2012, 08:11 AM
I have no idea whats wrong with Tyler, the books out on him I know, but he is not this bad, he's just not. Has he had 1 good game and sprinkled in 4 or 5 quarters all year that he's really even making an impact, all year? I have no inside info in any way, but it just seems like something is wrong. Its either that or he didn't work on his game in any way in the off season. Maybe both things are wrong, he's really been pedestrian at best and bad at worst.

Its simple, poor usage. He's a banger who draws tons of fouls and uses that to set up his outside game. When he has his big game he gets tons of touches low and tons of FT when he's has these poor games he takes tons of jumpers and never gets to the line. He taken just 1 FT the last two games and it was off a offensive rebound and one, after getting 16 the previous two games in 22/15 and 9 games.

If you want a good game out of Tyler he needs to ball in the post to establish his physical game. If he gets 12 attempts combined from the field an FT line he's getting you a strong double figure game, in fact he's only fell short of it 1 time this year and it was his worst shooting game and it was in a game with 12 FGA/FTA on-the nose.

Like Kstat said here and other posted in other threads the guards and him just don't have any rhythm. In 30 games as a starter he's shooting 49.9% and much of that was him and DC working so well with each other.

Tyler is missed 90% of the time when wide open or when he in good post position, But the second the guy regains the position or gets back on him the pass comes in like clockwork. They also love to give him the ball in a dying shot clock or at the end of the quarters, I'm as big of a Tyler fan as there is and even I know that's a terrible plan but it always happens resulting in a long jumper or wild forced running shot when left out to dry.

Asher99
03-06-2012, 08:20 AM
Tyler isnt good at basketball, and Lou is better. Ya arguably the best college basketball player EVER isnt any good, Ive seen it all now....

No need to waste your time Creek, Tyler has officially became the scapegoat of this team regress of line or outcome. When Tyler is gone or Hurt people will only then realize what he actually brought and people then will see why Lou bounces around team to team and is rarely allowed to play in non-blowouts.

vnzla81
03-06-2012, 08:25 AM
Bottom line, you got a split in Chicago. No reason to be too down that you couldn't take both games there.

Take care of business at home and you win the season series.

Lose by 1, 20 or 50, and it still amounts to only 1 loss.

Yeah but they didn't have Deng the first time and according to reports Noah was still out of shape.

LG33
03-06-2012, 08:32 AM
I've always maintained that our success this season rests on the shoulders of our young duo, Paul George and Roy Hibbert. In order to beat the really good teams in the league, those two have to be solid. Last night, that was clearly not the case.

Asher99
03-06-2012, 08:33 AM
The opposing team nets an additional 8.8 points per 100 possessions just because Tyler exists.

Jones is at 16.2 people here talk bout him being our most consistent bench player.

Asher99
03-06-2012, 08:41 AM
Yeah but they didn't have Deng the first time and according to reports Noah was still out of shape.

Deng was the difference maker, Danny started 3-fo-3 and then finish with 4 makes on 14 attempts. When we knocked them off without Deng, Danny had his second best shooting game of the season.

LG33
03-06-2012, 09:08 AM
Yeah, but Deng didn't shut Danny down. The offense shut down around Danny. We allowed their defense to push us around and control our offense. Was Deng a part of that? Absolutely, but it wasn't him individually winning the battle with Danny that pushed the Bulls over the edge. It was the entire team taking away all our rhythm and open looks.

Unclebuck
03-06-2012, 09:12 AM
One lousy quarter, that is what is so sick, it was all one absolutely horrid putrid quarter of basketball. Other than that we played them fairly even, but that quarter was so bad we could not even pretend to come back.

"] ("http://images.nymag.com/images/2/daily/2009/09/20090930_mightnotbereal_560x375.jpg[/IMG)

I know you weren't intending to make a major point here, but I just want to make a point.

The better teams generally at some point in the game will go on a run and that run will be the difference. If you even look at the past several Pacers wins here lately against poor teams the games were generally close except for 1 big run at some point in the game.

So I guess my overall point is to suggest that it was only 1 bad quarter - while tehcinically true, that was all the Bulls needed - and usually that is all the better team needs in order to win the game

BRushWithDeath
03-06-2012, 09:15 AM
Tyler isnt good at basketball, and Lou is better. Ya arguably the best college basketball player EVER isnt any good, Ive seen it all now. Maybe the transition to coming off the bench is hitting him harder than he expected. Its not really fair to put ALL the blame on him. Its not like that second unit is loaded with scorers. Do you guys ever think that maybe teams can focus on him more bc no one is worried about Amundson. He IS in fact the main focal point in the second unit. I agree he has been incredibly inconsistent and slumping bad. He has some serious work to do. I dont know whats wrong, but on any given bad night he is still better than Lou. Theres a reason Tyler is factored in most trade proposals to acquire a marquee player. No one wants to trade for Lou. I had better leave before someone else suggests something that tips me over the edge.

It has been discussed ad nauseum since Bird selected Tyler with the 13th pick in the 2009 Draft so I won't harp on it too much, but that is 100% irrelevant.

This is the NBA. It's not college.

DGPR
03-06-2012, 09:33 AM
Our bench still needs a major upgrade I think. Tyler has proven to everybody that he can't be counted on to provide scoring and George Hill is about all we have. The point guard play is really what's abysmal on this team right now and that should be addressed if we want a chance to go on a run in the playoffs. Collison, I don't think, is efficient enough to be a scoring point guard and his defense leaves a lot to be desired. AJ Price has some nights where he looks to be a steady hand at the point, and there are some nights where he looks like Jamaal Tinsley circa 2008.

CreekShow
03-06-2012, 09:40 AM
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/h/hansbty01.html

http://www.82games.com/1112/11IND9.HTM

The opposing team nets an additional 8.8 points per 100 possessions just because Tyler exists.

He shoots 38% from the field, a regression from last year. He plays terrible defense. He is a bad rebounder. He took something like 15 games before he even got an assist.

We aren't talking about what Tyler was we are talking about what he is. Right now the facts are right there in those links available for your reading pleasure. Tyler Hansbrough is not a good NBA player.

Now its NBA player. Why dont you make up your mind. Maybe just like a lot of players he just needs to find a fit. And its not with this second unit. Saying he isnt good at basketball is plain ignorant.

Asher99
03-06-2012, 09:42 AM
Tyler has proven to everybody that he can't be counted on to provide scoring.

When he's given the ball often and allowed to be Tyler with it he scores, If we get Chris Kaman and give him 5 or 6 shots a game and most all of it are jumpers he isn't going to score much either.

CreekShow
03-06-2012, 09:42 AM
It has been discussed ad nauseum since Bird selected Tyler with the 13th pick in the 2009 Draft so I won't harp on it too much, but that is 100% irrelevant.

This is the NBA. It's not college.

So you agree then, you can be one of the best college players ever, and not be good @ basketball? You see how silly that sounds? Thats the point im making.

vapacersfan
03-06-2012, 09:50 AM
First game since I purchased NBALP yesterday. A couple of quick thought.

1. Hibbert is very good, and very important.

2. The Bulls got in his head. Hell, the bulls got in all the Pacers heads. The team lost mentally in the third quarter. Not sure what happened, but two diffrent teams between the first half and second half. I had to walk away after the terrible fast break by Granger in the 3rd quarter Peck talked about with George trailing DG.

2B. The bulls had an axe to grind.

(PS. Where is all the coverage of the bulls celebrating., Wasnt all the bru-ha-ha about the Pacers celebrating in the locker room after the last game? Gotta love ESPN starting SC with a clip of the Pacers celebrating on the bench during the last game

BillS
03-06-2012, 10:31 AM
If I refuse to let the 3rd quarter completely destroy my memory of the rest of the game, I have to feel like we played a pretty good game in the first half.

Collison was actually going through screens, not around them.
Granger was taking the ball to the basket instead of shooting jumpers.
Ball movement was solid and crisp.
Defense was active and disruptive.

Our problem was very much that we could not take advantage offensively of the situations we created defensively in the first half.

The difference between the two offenses became very clear in the second half. The Bulls players catch the ball and do something IMMEDIATELY - either move, shoot, or pass. The Pacers catch the ball and have to stop and think, allowing the defense to get in position and losing passing and driving lanes (and rebounding position).

There were at least two plays where Roy caught the ball with plenty of room on the baseline to go to his right and slam the ball down, but instead he went into that "dribble and look around until the double comes" move.

When we take quick shots early in the clock it is seldom that we come across the line and immediately fire one up. It is that we come across the line, fool around for 3-5 seconds, then shoot because there's no one else to get the ball to.

Is this because we are a young team? Is this because our failure to have a decent offense has gotten into our heads so no one wants to make the quick decision and have it go bad? Is this planned on Vogel's part so that the offense is deliberate and thoughtful?

And, at some point, we have to find a player somewhere who doesn't miss wide-open jumpers, especially when our opponents go into a run of making their challenged shots.

mildlysane
03-06-2012, 10:34 AM
A huge problem for me is the fact that DC is HORRIBLE in PnR situations. AND most of our bigs cannot even pick their noses. If you watch good PnR teams, they can score on that play almost at will. DC always swings way around the pick and is completely out of position to make the pass. AND our bigs always bail before any contact (the pick) is made. To compound the problem, DC is so short that he cannot see over the top of the D to hit the "roller". If we had Nash (or a handful of other PGs) and would set proper picks, we would be real hard to stop.

Major Cold
03-06-2012, 10:35 AM
If a loss is a loss, then a win is a win.

I am tired of * behind anything we do. Take the game for what it is worth.

MyFavMartin
03-06-2012, 10:37 AM
Danny posted up well in college. Is there a reason that he doesn't post up down low/on the block in the NBA? I would think he'd have the strength to take Deng there. Obviously, he doesn't have the length or quicks to get by Luol.

CreekShow
03-06-2012, 10:41 AM
Tyler is a liability on both ends of the floor, Lou is twice the defender he is, 3 time the shotblocker and within his limitations a more consistand thread on the offensive end than Tyler.

Transition to the bench? from the how many game he started for the Pacers?

If you really believe all of this, I cant help you. You are too far gone already. & as far as starting goes, until we got DWest, who else was going to be our starter? If you dont have anything useful to add to this discussion besides your made up "assesments", feel free to leave my name out of your quotes.

flakcatcher
03-06-2012, 10:44 AM
I know the popular thing to do is point the finger at our point guard play. But I think the idea that a better "distributor" or "floor general" is going to come in and suddenly start hitting players in perfect position to score is a misnomer. Just as much responsibility lies with players to get into scoring position as it does with the point guard to hit them in scoring position. Our bigs got pushed around in the post last night, again and again.

This game made it glaringly clear what our biggest need is: Interior toughness. To quote Bulls radio producer Jeff Mangurten's Twitter feed: "The Bulls +28 on the glass tonight against the Pacers is the largest rebounding margin by any team in the NBA this season."

Think about that for a second.

I love Roy Hibbert's desire, but he is. not. tough. He's a plodding seven-footer with some nice post moves and a soft touch, and he'll block a shot for you now and then, but he's just embarrassingly ineffective against quicker, more powerful big men. He was flat-out abused by Noah tonight on the boards. How many times did Noah just reach over him and grab the rebound right out his hands? Tyler, though admirably energetic, has no instincts for the ball; he just flails wildly and hopes to end up where the ball lands; Lou, though I like his effort, just lacks the size and strength to do what we need him to do. Jeff is great, but we're lucky if he suits up anymore.

We need an enforcer, not a point guard or another center with a skill set similar to Hibbert. We need a Dale Davis, a Dennis Rodman, a Ben Wallace -- somebody who can actually play the smash-mouth style that we allegedly aspire to. Unfortunately, those kinds of players are few and far between these days. Chris Kaman, who some of you are clamoring for, most certainly isn't one of them.

Nuntius
03-06-2012, 10:48 AM
Bottom line, you got a split in Chicago. No reason to be too down that you couldn't take both games there.

Take care of business at home and you win the season series.

Lose by 1, 20 or 50, and it still amounts to only 1 loss.

:thankyou:

Nuntius
03-06-2012, 11:02 AM
Yeah but they didn't have Deng the first time and according to reports Noah was still out of shape.

Yeah but Ronnie Brewer did his best Deng impersonation.

Really, I'm sick and tired of all the other teams in the league having an excuse for when they lose to us while we are not even allowed to have an excuse for when we lose to them.

Hicks
03-06-2012, 11:02 AM
It's not that Tyler is, permanently or historically, nothing other than a terrible player, but the problem is that more often than not latey he HAS PLAYED TERRIBLY. I don't personally believe that will be his lasting legacy as an NBA player, but he damn well needs to figure things out to prove my opinion right. He's been very disappointing this year to me.

I think there's still hope for him for a few reasons, but in the meantime it's pretty brutal to watch.

kidthecat
03-06-2012, 11:08 AM
I agree with the "you're fortunate to have had a split in Chicago" sentiment, but I'll be damned if the way the Pacers lost doesn't frustrate and baffle me.

As Peck said, this game allows doubt to resurface in terms of how this team is constructed.

I hope Larry doesn't stand pat this deadline. That will be all.

Major Cold
03-06-2012, 11:08 AM
It's not that Tyler is, permamntly or historically, nothing other than a terrible player, but the problem is that more often not latey he HAS PLAYED TERRIBLY. I don't personally believe that will be his lasting legacy as an NBA player, but he damn well needs to figure things out to prove my opinion right. He's been very disappointing this year to me.

I think there's still hope for him for a few reasons, but in the meantime it's pretty brutal to watch.

He has played badly. And I think KStat maybe on to something with the typical wings sorrunding him.

But the best percentage 3pt shooter on this team (besides Foster) is D. Jones. Nonetheless he does not demand a shift in the defense. AJ is spotty, and George Hill has not been a consistent shooter due to injury and a season starting slump.

But for the life of me Tyler cannot run an effective PnP, PnR, or PnS. He is worse at this than a freshman in high school.

Hibbert
03-06-2012, 11:26 AM
I love Roy Hibbert's desire, but he is. not. tough. He's a plodding seven-footer with some nice post moves and a soft touch, and he'll block a shot for you now and then, but he's just embarrassingly ineffective against quicker, more powerful big men. He was flat-out abused by Noah tonight on the boards. How many times did Noah just reach over him and grab the rebound right out his hands?


Did you watch the first game of this series? They didn't have an answer for Roy, he abused Noah on the offensive end and also added four blocked shots. The only reason that was different this game was because the Bulls were smart and literally took Roy out of the game. He played 11 minutes in the first half due to his fouls. Take those away and you have a completely different game.

BillS
03-06-2012, 11:33 AM
A huge problem for me is the fact that DC is HORRIBLE in PnR situations. AND most of our bigs cannot even pick their noses. If you watch good PnR teams, they can score on that play almost at will. DC always swings way around the pick and is completely out of position to make the pass. AND our bigs always bail before any contact (the pick) is made. To compound the problem, DC is so short that he cannot see over the top of the D to hit the "roller". If we had Nash (or a handful of other PGs) and would set proper picks, we would be real hard to stop.

Except I think in the first half we pretty much countered that conventional wisdom. I think we defended the PnR VERY well in that half.

Once they started being able to kill us with outside shooting, our PnR defense degenerated, but not to the point where the PnR beat us. It basically just meant the were finally able to have a balanced attack.

While I understand the defense defense defense mantra that pervades the board, sooner or later you have to score points so your defense can weather periods of in-game let-up. Teams that shoot 25% in the third quarter are seldom going to have a good enough defense to make up for the lack of scoring.

BRushWithDeath
03-06-2012, 11:37 AM
So you agree then, you can be one of the best college players ever, and not be good @ basketball? You see how silly that sounds? Thats the point im making.

I understand your point. I'm saying it's completely irrelevant. College success and NBA success are two entirely independent things. And since the 2009 draft, that hasn't been clear to a large segment of the board.

The fact that an NBA player was good in college has about as much to do with what is being talked about here as how good they are at bowling.

Dgreenwell3
03-06-2012, 11:39 AM
So you agree then, you can be one of the best college players ever, and not be good @ basketball? You see how silly that sounds? Thats the point im making.

You are missing the point also...just because you were an all-time great high school player doesn't mean you will be worth anything in college, it happens all the time, sometimes your game just doesn't transition...

graphic-er
03-06-2012, 11:47 AM
I'm going to put some blame on Vogel for that 3rd qtr collapse. He called 3 time outs, but kepting coming back with DC guarding Rose. Took PG out the game to early, I know he was tired when the Bulls made their run, but you gotta stick with the defensive line up. Did Hill even guard Rose once?

able
03-06-2012, 11:47 AM
If you really believe all of this, I cant help you. You are too far gone already. & as far as starting goes, until we got DWest, who else was going to be our starter? If you dont have anything useful to add to this discussion besides your made up "assesments", feel free to leave my name out of your quotes.

You will be quoted when you say something that is worth quoting like the above in which you state that he wouljd have been the "default" starter "because we had no one else".

Truly an endorsement, but it was made our priority in the off-season to get someone starting at the 4, would there be a particular reason you think with this amazing starting 4 already on the team? why did we not get a cheap backup? or did you hold out hope he would outperform West?

The logic behind the reasoning you diehard Tyler fans, of which you seem to be one, use is baffling to me:

1. he would have been the starting 4 if we not had gotten West
2. he scores fantastic if you just let him take 20+shots a game
3. his defense is good if others just covered better for his wandering

It seems that all those people saying that Tyler is simply not performing as required/hoped/wished/wanted are watching another game or ar to stupid to see the genius that is Tyler.

I call it hogwash

BillS
03-06-2012, 11:49 AM
I'm going to put some blame on Vogel for that 3rd qtr collapse. He called 3 time outs, but kepting coming back with DC guarding Rose. Took PG out the game to early, I know he was tired when the Bulls made their run, but you gotta stick with the defensive line up. Did Hill even guard Rose once?

I felt like the 3rd quarter wasn't about Rose getting free for easy shots, it was about Rose making challenged shots that he makes because he is Derek Rose. That makes it hard for me to blame it on either DC or on Vogel for not taking DC off Rose.

BillS
03-06-2012, 11:54 AM
It seems that all those people saying that Tyler is simply not performing as required/hoped/wished/wanted are watching another game or ar to stupid to see the genius that is Tyler.

I call it hogwash

There is a part of me that thinks that, just as Tyler had an extended period as a "rookie" due to his concussion, he is battling an extended period for his "sophomore slump".

I agree he is not playing up to the expectations people had for him, but I am not convinced it is hopelessly permanent. Ultimately, it is easier to pull back from going 1000 mph all the time than it is to rev up from a laid-back playing style. I think it just bneeds to get through Tyler's head that he CAN play more in control.

graphic-er
03-06-2012, 11:54 AM
I felt like the 3rd quarter wasn't about Rose getting free for easy shots, it was about Rose making challenged shots that he makes because he is Derek Rose. That makes it hard for me to blame it on either DC or on Vogel for not taking DC off Rose.

He made 2 unchallenged 3's. He passed it off to Deng after driving the lane for open 3. Deng made a crazy shot at the top of the key as well that was barely challenged. It was like 4 3's in a row and a spattering of Taj Gibson.

DC couldn't stay with him.

BobbyMac
03-06-2012, 11:55 AM
Mercy! We lost to the best team in the league, on their floor after having beaten them the last time and you all seem ready to throw in the towel! Wow! If we lose 3 the next 2 as well I'll be a bit concerned, til then....go Pacers!

vnzla81
03-06-2012, 11:59 AM
If a loss is a loss, then a win is a win.

I am tired of * behind anything we do. Take the game for what it is worth.

Yeah but the true is the true and the true is that we are not as good as we think we are.

Gamble1
03-06-2012, 12:03 PM
The major take away from that game is that AJ Price is still terrible. We need better pg play if we are going to beat the Bulls in a series.

Pacer Fan
03-06-2012, 12:08 PM
The major take away from that game is that AJ Price is still terrible. We need better pg play if we are going to beat the Bulls in a series.

Pacers need more then a pg to beat them in a series.

CreekShow
03-06-2012, 12:08 PM
I understand your point. I'm saying it's completely irrelevant. College success and NBA success are two entirely independent things. And since the 2009 draft, that hasn't been clear to a large segment of the board.

The fact that an NBA player was good in college has about as much to do with what is being talked about here as how good they are at bowling.

HE DIDNT SAY HE WASNT A GOOD NBA PLAYER, he said he wasnt a good BASKETBALL player. Maybe if I use caps lock you people might understand. Struggling or not, thats just an ignorant statement to make. I get the points, but youre arguing something that wasnt even said to begin with

Unclebuck
03-06-2012, 12:09 PM
My biggest concern right now is our transition defense which at times can be horrible as it was in the third quarter last night. And this clearly was not the first time. Opponents are aware and try to take avantage of it.

Ace E.Anderson
03-06-2012, 12:09 PM
Mercy! We lost to the best team in the league, on their floor after having beaten them the last time and you all seem ready to throw in the towel! Wow! If we lose 3 the next 2 as well I'll be a bit concerned, til then....go Pacers!

I think people are more angry about the WAY we lost, and the fact that this type of a** whooping has become the norm anytime we play a good team. I don't think anybody is ready to throw in the towel, they're just frustrated to see such inconsistencies in effort and play. Those types of expectations come when you have one of the "better records in the league" (no matter how easy your schedule has been)

I agree with you, GO PACERS. I will always be a die hard pacers fan; and because of this fact I am wanting us to put up a better effort. ESPECIALLY against one of the best teams in the league, and ESPECIALLY after the bulls talked so much trash before the game. This was a big game, and we looked awful. That's disappointing.

Pacer Fan
03-06-2012, 12:17 PM
My biggest concern right now is our transition defense which at times can be horrible as it was in the third quarter last night. And this clearly was not the first time. Opponents are aware and try to take avantage of it.

As I agree with you, I am more concerned about the offense in all aspects of the game and 11-46 fg shooting from your best players is very concerning. Yes, defense wins games, but you still have to have a very good offense to compete against the better teams. This the Pacers don't have.

Larry Staverman
03-06-2012, 12:17 PM
Patience Weedhopper!!

Yea last night sucked…all losses do.

A little perspective…everyone remembers the 90’s and the great teams we had back then but Rome wasn’t built in a day.

1986 drafted Chuck Person

1987 drafted Reggie Miller

1988 drafted Rik Smits

1989 drafted George McClound

1990 drafted Antonio Davis (went to Europe) and Kenny Williams

1991 drafted Dale Davis

nice young nucleus with a lot of upside.


1990 won 42 games and lost to Detroit 3-0 1st round

1991 won 41 games and lost to Boston 3-2 1st round

1992 won 40 games and lost to Boston 3-2 1st round

1993 won 41 games and lost to NY 3-1 1st round


over that time they traded for Lasalle Thompson and Detlef Schrempf who was later traded for Derrick McKey.


As of today the Pacers are 10 games over .500 and have a good shot at home court in the playoffs. Obviously we still need a couple more pieces and the team needs to mature together. I wonder how some of you would have felt back in the early 90’s because it came together a lot more slowly back then.

Compared to that team the current team is quite a bit ahead in their development.

Oh by the way the point guard was Vern Fleming a converted shooting guard who people wanted to run out of town more than once who was then replaced by Haywoode Workman who had way more heart than talent.

Games like last night will build character and resolve in the long run. The little brother has to get his *ss kicked several times before he grows up and whips everyone's *ss.

CreekShow
03-06-2012, 12:26 PM
You will be quoted when you say something that is worth quoting like the above in which you state that he wouljd have been the "default" starter "because we had no one else".

Truly an endorsement, but it was made our priority in the off-season to get someone starting at the 4, would there be a particular reason you think with this amazing starting 4 already on the team? why did we not get a cheap backup? or did you hold out hope he would outperform West?

The logic behind the reasoning you diehard Tyler fans, of which you seem to be one, use is baffling to me:

1. he would have been the starting 4 if we not had gotten West
2. he scores fantastic if you just let him take 20+shots a game
3. his defense is good if others just covered better for his wandering

It seems that all those people saying that Tyler is simply not performing as required/hoped/wished/wanted are watching another game or ar to stupid to see the genius that is Tyler.

I call it hogwash

Let me get this clear, Ive never made up any excuses for the way Tyler is playing. Honestly im just as stumped as most of you. Im merely just trying to come up with logical reasons to why his play is down. I love Tyler but he isnt even in my top 2 favorite players on the team and if we had to move him in a trade, id be fine with it. There is something wrong though, and I dont think him "not being talented enough" is the reason

BRushWithDeath
03-06-2012, 12:39 PM
HE DIDNT SAY HE WASNT A GOOD NBA PLAYER, he said he wasnt a good BASKETBALL player. Maybe if I use caps lock you people might understand. Struggling or not, thats just an ignorant statement to make. I get the points, but youre arguing something that wasnt even said to begin with

Seriously? This is an NBA board. Does it really need to be expressed that he's talking about the NBA? If somebody says a player doesn't have range to the three point line, must it be clarified that it's the NBA three point line? Is the context really that difficult to understand?

We're here to talk about the NBA and specifically the Pacers. It is understood that everything said is in the context of this league. Calling him a bad basketball player doesn't mean he'd look that way if he went and jumped into a pick-up game at the Jordan YMCA. It means in the context of the NBA. As everything here should.

Pacer Fan
03-06-2012, 12:39 PM
Let me get this clear, Ive never made up any excuses for the way Tyler is playing. Honestly im just as stumped as most of you. Im merely just trying to come up with logical reasons to why his play is down. I love Tyler but he isnt even in my top 2 favorite players on the team and if we had to move him in a trade, id be fine with it. There is something wrong though, and I dont think him "not being talented enough" is the reason

Just blame the coach. We haven't heard that much, yet!

Since86
03-06-2012, 12:42 PM
Seriously? This is an NBA board. Does it really need to be expressed that he's talking about the NBA? If somebody says a player doesn't have range to the three point line, must it be clarified that it's the NBA three point line? Is the context really that difficult to understand?

We're here to talk about the NBA and specifically the Pacers. It is understood that everything said is in the context of this league. Calling him a bad basketball player doesn't mean he'd look that way if he went and jumped into a pick-up game at the Jordan YMCA. It means in the context of the NBA. As everything here should.

But he's not a bad NBA player. Calling him a bad NBA player, because of this extended stretch of play, is just about as valid as calling him an All-Star because of his 20+ game stretch last season.

The truth, like always, is usually in the middle.

Justin Tyme
03-06-2012, 12:56 PM
Tyler Hansbrough: D- Ok I know this is going to cause a fire storm but frankly I don’t care. I have been a supporter of Tyler all season long. Even when he was having one of his long extended slumps (that seemed to last all season). But I think I am now ready to move on. Sadly I think he is the player he is always going to be and while he can make some adjustments to his game, overall I am now pretty much convinced he is just going to be a streak player who can on occasion have a really good game but when he his not really good he is really bad. He was just a non-factor again tonight, which wouldn’t be a problem but for the fact that our entire bench and frankly our “smash mouth” mantra was supposed to be centered around him. I can’t make a good argument that Lou Amundson isn’t better than him on most nights anymore. I think we really need to be looking for a new backup big man either a 4 or 5 and if it costs us Tyler to get them, well I’m ready for it.


I basically said the samething in the post game thread. It wouldn't hurt my feelings one iota if he was traded.... not one iota. Teams don't worry about playing against Tyler anymore as they have his game figured out and how to stop it.

Kid Minneapolis
03-06-2012, 12:59 PM
We looked overhyped to start, our shots were horrible looking, you could tell they got too amped up for this game and it affected their focus/concentration. Young teams do that, but to be a team of professionals, they need to stop doing that. Every game should be the same. You could tell they had thought too much about this game and came out just not focused, too emotional.

Hansbrough --- is he injured? From my many years of watching this game, I've noticed that players who go through rough patches often have a little-known nagging injury that is keeping them from being 100% on the court. I wonder if he's not dinged up.

Ya, Collison is a weak-spot on this team, he's entirely too inconsistent. Some games he looks engaged, and other games he's just a non-factor, or a negative factor. It's the position I'm most looking forward to improving... DWill or Rondo, please.

Hibbert has to stop letting opposing centers dictate to him. He's better than them. Why does he let them beat him? Silliness. If he's engaged and confident, Noah is not better than him, ever. But he goes out there like a lamb and just sorta fades into the crowd.

BRushWithDeath
03-06-2012, 01:04 PM
But he's not a bad NBA player. Calling him a bad NBA player, because of this extended stretch of play, is just about as valid as calling him an All-Star because of his 20+ game stretch last season.

The truth, like always, is usually in the middle.

This isn't my point. I haven't been critical of Tyler very much this season. And I wasn't in this thread.

My point is that what he did in college means absolutely nothing right now. I didn't say he was a bad player. If I had, I wouldn't have said he's a bad NBA player. Because the context of this board should indicate that I'm referring to this league.

He was a great college player. Nobody denied that. The point is that it just doesn't matter. It shouldn't have to be pointed out that we're talking about the NBA and not the ACC when it's a board about the Pacers.

Brad8888
03-06-2012, 01:19 PM
Without players who instinctively and consistently find players open in scoring position, our scorers are left to create once they do finally receive passes, which leaves them easier to defend. The Pacers can overmatch weaker teams now without running an effective offense, but quality teams that play defense can still turn the Pacers into a jump shooting team.

There is a need for court vision amongst the offensive initiators, and there has been all season. The two best the Pacers had at this last year were Dunleavy and McRoberts. At this point, adding McRoberts could be done for relatively little cost to the Pacers if the Lakers are truly interested in Price. The Pacers have basically no need for a point guard because our perimeter defenders are initiating breaks and the sole function of whoever is playing the 1.5 (combo guard) is still to penetrate or shoot at this time. The need for productive ball and player movement with purpose is far greater than probably any other for the Pacers at this point. McRoberts would at least be a start toward satisfying that need, and he would strengthen our second unit immeasurably in my opinion.

JEM
03-06-2012, 01:26 PM
Hansbrough --- is he injured? From my many years of watching this game, I've noticed that players who go through rough patches often have a little-known nagging injury that is keeping them from being 100% on the court. I wonder if he's not dinged up.



Possible.. He has more claw marks than any other player in the NBA... Easily.

I think both West and Hansbrough havent been good scorers this year because they dont have a point guard than can run the PnR efficiently.

BillS
03-06-2012, 01:46 PM
He made 2 unchallenged 3's. He passed it off to Deng after driving the lane for open 3. Deng made a crazy shot at the top of the key as well that was barely challenged. It was like 4 3's in a row and a spattering of Taj Gibson.

DC couldn't stay with him.

How are the two passes to Deng DC's fault?

Justin Tyme
03-06-2012, 01:50 PM
Let me get this clear, Ive never made up any excuses for the way Tyler is playing. Honestly im just as stumped as most of you. Im merely just trying to come up with logical reasons to why his play is down. I love Tyler but he isnt even in my top 2 favorite players on the team and if we had to move him in a trade, id be fine with it. There is something wrong though, and I dont think him "not being talented enough" is the reason


IIRC, it seems to me Tyler's game stopped, regressed, or any appropriate word you want to use when he got hit in the eye early into the season. To me he hasn't been the same. His games haven't consistant since. Like you, I don't know what the problem is as I can just surmise what it is, BUT unless Hansbro gets it figured out and corrected he's not helping this team as he should. Thus the reason for my feeling about him being traded.

Another thing that REALLY bothers me about Tyler is his health issue. I can vividly remember in the playoffs how Tyler was physically out of it after Boozer hit him in the head. I just have this fear it will happen again. It's not Tyler's fault, it's just me.

joeyd
03-06-2012, 01:51 PM
When Hibbert gets into foul trouble and there is no Foster (or Kamen???) to come off the bench, we are going to be in trouble against the better teams. He has no choice to play more passively when he gets back out on the floor after receiving two quick calls.

There will be some calls that won't go Roy's way whether he actually committed the fouls or not, as evidenced by last night. But thankfully, one of the biggest improvements in his game is that he has learned to largely avoid putting himself in the position of receiving bad calls in the first place.

BillS
03-06-2012, 01:54 PM
Yeah but the true is the true and the true is that we are not as good as we think we are.

We're not as bad as we think we are, either. The whole idea that you are either #1 or you suck is getting kind of old from both directions.

We played a very good half of basketball in the first half, which in and of itself is a far cry from how we played when we got destroyed by the Heat.

Sure, it's the scoreboard that matters, but some people are reacting like this was 1999 and we were projected to win the Eastern Conference.

PaceBalls
03-06-2012, 01:56 PM
Tyler isnt good at basketball, and Lou is better. Ya arguably the best college basketball player EVER isnt any good, Ive seen it all now. Maybe the transition to coming off the bench is hitting him harder than he expected. Its not really fair to put ALL the blame on him. Its not like that second unit is loaded with scorers. Do you guys ever think that maybe teams can focus on him more bc no one is worried about Amundson. He IS in fact the main focal point in the second unit. I agree he has been incredibly inconsistent and slumping bad. He has some serious work to do. I dont know whats wrong, but on any given bad night he is still better than Lou. Theres a reason Tyler is factored in most trade proposals to acquire a marquee player. No one wants to trade for Lou. I had better leave before someone else suggests something that tips me over the edge.


It's a case of WHYDFML..

Which with Tyler is not much, all season. These guys are expected to produce. Their past pedigree doesn't mean jack ******.

Peck
03-06-2012, 02:01 PM
Look I would much rather have come on here and typed out a response to a game where we lost a tough nail biter or at the very least a game that was close. But I can't make up what didn't happen.

I'm sorry to the sunshine brigade for backsliding but I guess I just can't get past the fact that the Pacers have lost to the two best team in the East by an average of 23 points a game. I can't get past the fact that we are sub .500% when we are playing against teams that have .500% records (8-9) and I really can't get past the fact that we have not beat a good team in a month.

Look beat Atlanta tonight and last night's loss can go away, but right now my great fear is that we lose tonight and I'm sorry but the chances of us beating Miami in Miami is about my chance of being elected Chancellor of Germany thus starting what is my real fear a massive losing streak against good teams.

Nobody is mad that we lost to the Bulls. We are upset with the way we lost to the Bulls. Same goes for the Miami games.

I won't lie either, with not being able to beat good clubs and being absolutely smoked by the really good clubs the doubt is starting to creep in that maybe our early season record against the good teams was that we snuck up on them and that they weren't prepared or in shape.

I'm not saying that I believe that, yet. But I won't lie and say that I haven't started to wonder.

vnzla81
03-06-2012, 02:01 PM
We're not as bad as we think we are, either. The whole idea that you are either #1 or you suck is getting kind of old from both directions.

We played a very good half of basketball in the first half, which in and of itself is a far cry from how we played when we got destroyed by the Heat.

Sure, it's the scoreboard that matters, but some people are reacting like this was 1999 and we were projected to win the Eastern Conference.

Playing a good half doesn't mean that we are not as bad as we think we are(you see what I did there? ;)) for all I know Drose was just taking it easy with us until the 3rd quarter when he decided to destroy us, that's what good teams usually do, they turn the switch on anytime they want to.

Rogco
03-06-2012, 02:04 PM
[QUOTE=rexnom;1389913]I think Frank deserves some blame for not making any adjustments defensively. As soon as Rose figured out the double team/trap scheme, we should have switched Paul on him. Whatever.

QUOTE]

I thought the D of Rose was perfect. In the third quarter we stopped him from driving and had him shooting 3s from 6 feet behind the arc. I know he hit three 3s in a row, but the guy shoots below 33% from 3, and two of his shots were tough, the type he would generally hit 20% of the time. To me the plan worked, what foiled it was Rose played way above his general ability. We play him like that 5 more times and I guarantee he'll won't hit all three of those shots again, much more likely hit miss all 3.

CreekShow
03-06-2012, 02:05 PM
Seriously? This is an NBA board. Does it really need to be expressed that he's talking about the NBA? If somebody says a player doesn't have range to the three point line, must it be clarified that it's the NBA three point line? Is the context really that difficult to understand?

We're here to talk about the NBA and specifically the Pacers. It is understood that everything said is in the context of this league. Calling him a bad basketball player doesn't mean he'd look that way if he went and jumped into a pick-up game at the Jordan YMCA. It means in the context of the NBA. As everything here should.

Yeah when someone says something as vague as "hes just not a good basketball player" I expect you to clarify if you dont want to be misunderstood. But ya im in the wrong for adressing it and giving him a chance to explain what he meant. Ill start assuming from now on

Justin Tyme
03-06-2012, 02:08 PM
At this point, adding McRoberts could be done for relatively little cost to the Pacers if the Lakers are truly interested in Price. The Pacers have basically no need for a point guard because our perimeter defenders are initiating breaks and the sole function of whoever is playing the 1.5 (combo guard) is still to penetrate or shoot at this time. The need for productive ball and player movement with purpose is far greater than probably any other for the Pacers at this point. McRoberts would at least be a start toward satisfying that need, and he would strengthen our second unit immeasurably in my opinion.


I could make a good case for bringing Jarrett Jack back. Wishful thinking on both are parts, but the reality is it just ain't gonna happen. Those ships have already sailed into the sunset never to be seen again.

Rogco
03-06-2012, 02:11 PM
What worried me last night was our lack of "smash mouth" basketball. In large part this was due to the phantom foul on Hibbert at the beginning of the game. Roy didn't do anything physical after that...

But we were being out-jumped and muscled on the defensive end all the time, and we had no one underneath trying to get offensive rebounds. Frustrating against a team like the Bulls who have a couple of physical players who look out of control most of the time.

cinotimz
03-06-2012, 02:27 PM
Yes, the loss only counts as one loss...its true. But there were things that happened that are cause for serious concern.

Danny, AJ Price, Roy and Tyler gave me great cause for concern regarding the future last night.

I simply said wow a number of times.

The team as a whole came out relatively sharp to start. After his 2 fouls, Roy climbed into a shell. Disappeared. Period. Lou actually brought a great spark. Which disappeared when Roy re-entered. If not for the long llasting consequences of doing so, he shouldve just been left on the bench for the whole game.

AJ price...man..where to begin. He simply let Lucas get off. Played very soft defense and only seemed interested in getting his own shot off. And it served as an omen of things to come.

Danny started out great and was impressive I thought. Then it was like something happened. He became totally lethargic. No getting to loose balls. No hustle. Unbelievable lazy decision making. Peck mentioned the 2 plays. But those wererent all. Almost catatonic state. Incredibly disappointing.

Tyler? Lol. ONe play epitomized him. He set a pick at the top of the key for Collison and both men left him and the lane was so wide open it was scary. He just stood there. Like a statue. Like he had no clue how to roll to the basket. A basic play u learn in elementary school. Left Collison with absolutely nothing to do as he was in the one place that Collison couldnt possibly get him the ball with 2 men on him. Truly sad. I sat in amazement.

As for Collison...I dont even know what to say. He looked totally lost and inept.

Unclebuck
03-06-2012, 02:31 PM
Nobody is mad that we lost to the Bulls. We are upset with the way we lost to the Bulls. Same goes for the Miami games.

I won't lie either, with not being able to beat good clubs and being absolutely smoked by the really good clubs the doubt is starting to creep in that maybe our early season record against the good teams was that we snuck up on them and that they weren't prepared or in shape.

I'm not saying that I believe that, yet. But I won't lie and say that I haven't started to wonder.


Also the really good teams know the Pacers are a pretty good team, so they are generally more ready to play the Pacers than they are to play a .500 team. The Heat played two great games against us, the Bulls last night played a great, great third quarter and overall a very solid game against us last night.

There is a huge difference when two of the top teams in the NBA play each other because generally both teams play up to the competition.

Pacer Fan
03-06-2012, 02:33 PM
I am at the 2:02 mark in the 3rd qtr and thus far thru the entire 3rd the defense for the Pacers is pretty solid. DC got picked from Noah and Rose was contested by Hans (could have been a foul), Gibson gets a put back and DC could have tried to box him out at the free throw line but that very seldom happens from any defender. Just a great play by Gibson.

Then, Gibson drives from the right side base line and throw to Deng on the left 3pt and was contested by a late Granger but he misses it. The defense was solid under the basket, but Brewer was left alone on the right side baseline and the ball went right to Brewer for a very quick dunk, Hans was boxing out Noah and the best athlete couldn't have reacted quick enough to Brewers put back. To this point of the 3rd quarter the game was being lost by the offense not the defense and definitely not because of DC's defense. the score at the 1:59 mark is 70-54.

As far as the Deng 32 footer or whatever it was, I beleive it was contested late by Danny but he still got a hand up and who the hell would have thought he would have shot from there. More times then not he wouldn't have hit it anyways.

I wanted to post this cause I have read so much crap in multiple threads on how the defense failed and DC was horrible in the 3rd qtr. and I knew this was not the case, so I went back and watched the 3rd qtr.

I really wonder how and why people leave comments that are so unfounded. I mean do some of you guys really watch the game. Do some of you guys think that Hans could have made a play on Brewer. It was the luck of the bounce on that play, no more, no less!

Ace E.Anderson
03-06-2012, 02:40 PM
Also the really good teams know the Pacers are a pretty good team, so they are generally more ready to play the Pacers than they are to play a .500 team. The Heat played two great games against us, the Bulls last night played a great, great third quarter and overall a very solid game against us last night.

There is a huge difference when two of the top teams in the NBA play each other because generally both teams play up to the competition.

There is also a huge difference between losing to two of the best teams in the league, and the games being complete blowouts. You don't see the Bulls, getting blown out by the Heat, or Vice Versa. You also don't see the Pacers beating up on any decent - good teams in the league either.

I think other teams respect us, but I doubt they look at us as a "good team". if they did, it wouldn't be so easy for them to exert their will on us so early and often.

I don't think ANYBODY is clamoring for us to beat the likes of the Heat and the Bulls every time out, but it'd be nice for us to at least seem competitive. Hell if we lost by 8- 10 points, that's a whole lot better than the opposing team being able to empty their bench against us.

In the end, it's all about your perspective of the Pacers. If you see the fact that they have one of the best records in the league, then you expect them to play to their record. If you see them as a team that's slowly improving, but is still not one of the better teams in the league; then you aren't too disappointed with these blowouts against good competition.

I for one WANT to believe our record isn't a product of an easy schedule, and so I expect the Pacers to do a hell of a lot better than what we saw last night.

Since86
03-06-2012, 02:44 PM
There is also a huge difference between losing to two of the best teams in the league, and the games being complete blowouts. You don't see the Bulls, getting blown out by the Heat, or Vice Versa. You also don't see the Pacers beating up on any decent - good teams in the league either.


Nope. The Bulls just get blown out by the 76ers (17pts), Grizz (16pts), and Atlanta(15pts).

Pacer Fan
03-06-2012, 02:47 PM
Nope. The Bulls just get blown out by the 76ers (17pts), Grizz (16pts), and Atlanta(15pts).

and you left out a 12 point loss to the Nets. :)

BillS
03-06-2012, 02:52 PM
Nope. The Bulls just get blown out by the 76ers (17pts), Grizz (16pts), and Atlanta(15pts).

Well, see, those are GOOD teams. The Pacers could never hope to beat them.

backslash, I say, backslash green.

Peck
03-06-2012, 02:58 PM
Well, see, those are GOOD teams. The Pacers could never hope to beat them.

backslash, I say, backslash green.

Well other than one game vs. the Hawks we haven't.

PGisthefuture
03-06-2012, 02:58 PM
I was waiting for this game all day yesterday. I was hoping for a hard fought game that was going to be physical and I expected things to get chippy. I was very disappointed as most of us fans were...

The first two quarters made it seem like the game would be this way. The biggest thing that hurt us was the fact that Derrick Rose finally started hitting his shots after halftime. We got out-rebounded and out-hustled all game. The Bulls remembered what we did to them last time we met on their home-court.
I honestly think Roy was somewhat scared of Noah because Noah was playing like a mad man and Roy could not match that intensity. He got the ball and often forced up a bad shot or passed it right away.

Our bright spots are becoming the same guys every night we play a good team. Those bright spots are of course; Paul George, David West, and George Hill. David West gives you the same effort night in and night out. Paul George could have even better games if he would just take over on offense. I think from now on if Roy and Danny aren't going Vogel should just draw up plays for PG and West...

Losing to the best teams in the East by 20 points on a regular basis does not bode well for the team trying to regain it's fanbase from the Reggie days. We obviously need to add another big man and I sure hope Larry notices it sooner than later. I'm basically saying I will be unhappy if Chris Kaman is not in a Pacer uniform by March 15th. As for the whole point guard debate I think DC has been playing pretty good defense, he guarded Rose pretty well for the most part last night. After halftime Rose just took over and there's not much you can do about that. I would like to get Deron Williams, Rondo, or Nash as much as the next guy, but I think we will have to give up too much. As for Hansbrough I think the main reason he has dropped off so much is simply the fact that he is not a starter anymore. He doesn't feel like he is good enough to start so he has lost confidence in his game. That's the only conclusion I have come up with.

The bottom line is, yes this team has vastly improved over last year. Some of you are happy with that. I am not. We have the chance to be one of the best teams in the East/league if we make a move or two. I also understand a loss is a loss, but when you wait all day for what you think is going to be a great game in an up-and-coming rivalry it is really disappointing to see the team get blown out like that and it gives Bulls fans so much confidence and shows that we are not even allowed to sit at the same lunch table as them.

vnzla81
03-06-2012, 03:00 PM
Nope. The Bulls just get blown out by the 76ers (17pts), Grizz (16pts), and Atlanta(15pts).

With Deng and Rose?

xIndyFan
03-06-2012, 03:07 PM
I was waiting for this game all day yesterday. I was hoping for a hard fought game that was going to be physical and I expected things to get chippy. I was very disappointed as most of us fans were...

The first two quarters made it seem like the game would be this way. The biggest thing that hurt us was the fact that Derrick Rose finally started hitting his shots after halftime. We got out-rebounded and out-hustled all game. The Bulls remembered what we did to them last time we met on their home-court.

I honestly think Roy was somewhat scared of Noah because Noah was playing like a mad man and Roy could not match that intensity. He got the ball and often forced up a bad shot or passed it right away.

Our bright spots are becoming the same guys every night we play a good team. Those bright spots are of course; Paul George, David West, and George Hill. David West gives you the same effort night in and night out. Paul George could have even better games if he would just take over on offense. I think from now on if Roy and Danny aren't going Vogel should just draw up plays for PG and West...

Losing to the best teams in the East by 20 points on a regular basis does not bode well for the team trying to regain it's fanbase from the Reggie days. We obviously need to add another big man and I sure hope Larry notices it sooner than later. I'm basically saying I will be unhappy if Chris Kaman is not in a Pacer uniform by March 15th. As for the whole point guard debate I think DC has been playing pretty good defense, he guarded Rose pretty well for the most part last night. After halftime Rose just took over and there's not much you can do about that. I would like to get Deron Williams, Rondo, or Nash as much as the next guy, but I think we will have to give up too much. As for Hansbrough I think the main reason he has dropped off so much is simply the fact that he is not a starter anymore. He doesn't feel like he is good enough to start so he has lost confidence in his game. That's the only conclusion I have come up with.

The bottom line is, yes this team has vastly improved over last year. Some of you are happy with that. I am not. We have the chance to be one of the best teams in the East/league if we make a move or two. I also understand a loss is a loss, but when you wait all day for what you think is going to be a great game in an up-and-coming rivalry it is really disappointing to see the team get blown out like that and it gives Bulls fans so much confidence and shows that we are not even allowed to sit at the same lunch table as them.

too hard to read, added some spacing

Ace E.Anderson
03-06-2012, 03:09 PM
Nope. The Bulls just get blown out by the 76ers (17pts), Grizz (16pts), and Atlanta(15pts).

Teams get blownout, even the good ones. But do the Bulls get CONSISTENTLY blownout when they play good teams? No they do not.

Also, D. Rose didnt play against Memphis, and Deng was out against the 76ers. We played this team at full strength.

Nice try though

Ace E.Anderson
03-06-2012, 03:10 PM
With Deng and Rose?

See my post below

Since86
03-06-2012, 03:18 PM
With Deng and Rose?

I thought you didn't care about excuses?

TheDavisBrothers
03-06-2012, 03:22 PM
Teams get blownout, even the good ones. But do the Bulls get CONSISTENTLY blownout when they play good teams? No they do not.

Also, D. Rose didnt play against Memphis, and Deng was out against the 76ers. We played this team at full strength.

Nice try though

The Bulls have lost 4 games by 12+
The Pacers have lost 4 games by 12+
We are not "consistently" getting blown out, and we have also blown out Atl and Orl, plus Bos a couple times, not to mention we beat the defending champs by 11

Since86
03-06-2012, 03:23 PM
Teams get blownout, even the good ones. But do the Bulls get CONSISTENTLY blownout when they play good teams? No they do not.

Also, D. Rose didnt play against Memphis, and Deng was out against the 76ers. We played this team at full strength.

Nice try though

The Pacers don't get CONSISTENTLY blown out either. The Pacers have lost by double digits six times out of their 13 losses. The Bulls have been beat by double digits 4 times out of their 8 losses.

But let's continue overreacting.

CableKC
03-06-2012, 03:27 PM
At the beginning of the game, I saw that DC was guarding Rose and PG was guarding Rip. My assumption was that Vogel didn't want a smaller DC guarding Rip ( which makes sense ). After Rip sat out the rest of the game when he ran into Hibbert's shoulder....why didn't we have DC/AJ/GH switch off to guard Brewer and then have PG guard/disrupt Rose for the rest of the game?

graphic-er
03-06-2012, 03:35 PM
How are the two passes to Deng DC's fault?

One could say that DC's in ability to stay in front of Rose caused Granger to have to sag off Deng to bring the help Defense.

Ace E.Anderson
03-06-2012, 03:37 PM
The Pacers don't get CONSISTENTLY blown out either. The Pacers have lost by double digits six times out of their 13 losses. The Bulls have been beat by double digits 4 times out of their 8 losses.

But let's continue overreacting.

Again it's all about perspective.

To me, getting "blown out" means not having a chance to win the game. We may have only lost by double digits six out of our 13 losses; but we were never really "in" the games against DET (L by 8), BOS (L by 7) or CLE (L by 9). So that means we didn't really have a chance to win in 9 of our 13 losses this season. That's pretty consistent to me.

I hardly think being frustrated with a team that hasn't beaten a team with a winning record since Dallas (Feb 3rd) is overreacting.

BillS
03-06-2012, 03:38 PM
One could say that DC's in ability to stay in front of Rose caused Granger to have to sag off Deng to bring the help Defense.

One could say that, but one could also say that Granger had a lapse in man-to-man defense on Deng, which looked more like the case to me.

Since86
03-06-2012, 03:38 PM
:laugh: You're right, it is all about perseptive. You have a negative one. Easy to understand.

PGisthefuture
03-06-2012, 03:39 PM
Just got done looking through a Bulls forum and they are still not satisfied... Still talking about how we are their number one hated team and they wish Hansbrough would get knocked on his a**... This is why I hate the Bulls and their fans.

graphic-er
03-06-2012, 03:51 PM
I wonder why the Pacers went away from the trap that was working so well in the 1st half.

Dr. Hibbert
03-06-2012, 03:54 PM
Danny started out great and was impressive I thought. Then it was like something happened. He became totally lethargic. No getting to loose balls. No hustle. Unbelievable lazy decision making. Peck mentioned the 2 plays. But those wererent all. Almost catatonic state. Incredibly disappointing.


Hey, you just described the majority of Granger's season.

Sookie
03-06-2012, 04:07 PM
I'm still in the "this isn't a big deal" side of things. In fact, I said before I expected it.

No one, other than Lou and Hill played well. And we played a focused Bulls team on their home floor, we're lucky we didn't lose by 40 in that scenario.

They are a better team. But that doesn't mean we can't beat them, or couldn't win a series against them. We aren't that far off.

This is a good inexperienced team. There will be games like this. And there will be games like the first Bulls game. There will be times where they just falter, and times where they play above themselves.

This one game doesn't mean anything. It doesn't mean we need to blow it up, it doesn't mean we need immediate help - just like if we had won it wouldn't have meant that we were title contenders and better than the Bulls.

Honestly, tonight's game is more important anyway.

PaceBalls
03-06-2012, 04:15 PM
I'm still in the "this isn't a big deal" side of things. In fact, I said before I expected it.

No one, other than Lou and Hill played well. And we played a focused Bulls team on their home floor, we're lucky we didn't lose by 40 in that scenario.

They are a better team. But that doesn't mean we can't beat them, or couldn't win a series against them. We aren't that far off.

This is a good inexperienced team. There will be games like this. And there will be games like the first Bulls game. There will be times where they just falter, and times where they play above themselves.

This one game doesn't mean anything. It doesn't mean we need to blow it up, it doesn't mean we need immediate help - just like if we had won it wouldn't have meant that we were title contenders and better than the Bulls.

Honestly, tonight's game is more important anyway.

It may not mean we need to blow it up, but it does mean we need to add another piece or two. Tweak things a bit. Immediate help does come to mind... Larry Bird is in the perfect position to do that. I am pretty excited to see what happens before the trade deadline. This already is a very special year for the team. I want it to be one of the best ever.

Since86
03-06-2012, 04:22 PM
A show of hands of people who thought the Pacers would be 10 games over 0.500 a little over half way of the season.

Anyone?

I understand being upset that the Pacers haven't been playing up to standards lately, but let's not forget that the new "standard" is still miles ahead of where most of us, if not all, figured they were going to be.

That should be a pretty important part of the perspective discussion.

The Pacers, even with their recent struggles, have still improved immensely from where they were. Their record translates to a 50+ win season. Are we really going to continually ***** about a team on pace to win 52 games, considering they barely won 40 last year?

Ace E.Anderson
03-06-2012, 04:27 PM
A show of hands of people who thought the Pacers would be 10 games over 0.500 a little over half way of the season.

Anyone?

I understand being upset that the Pacers haven't been playing up to standards lately, but let's not forget that the new "standard" is still miles ahead of where most of us, if not all, figured they were going to be.

That should be a pretty important part of the perspective discussion.

The Pacers, even with their recent struggles, have still improved immensely from where they were.

I agree. We definitely don't need to panic, but we definitely need to realize that we need to make improvements to the roster. Both from within, and potentially through a small tweak or two during the trade deadline. I think the most frustrating thing about this team is the fact that we have the ability to play so well whether its for a game, a half, or a quarter. The team has flashes of brilliance at times, we just aren't able to consistently keep up that level of play.

But we are still WAY better than where we used to be. Now if only we could beat a good team lol

Since86
03-06-2012, 04:47 PM
It's still like pushing down your toddler, because she doesn't run after she crawls.

Of course the Pacers need to improve. Whether it's from getting more pieces, improving individual play, or both. You doubt anyone argues that they don't need to improve.

The difference in saying they need to improve and saying that the Pacers get consistently blown out by good teams is miles apart though.

Gold
03-06-2012, 04:54 PM
I think Frank deserves some blame for not making any adjustments defensively. As soon as Rose figured out the double team/trap scheme, we should have switched Paul on him. Whatever.

By the way, I went to this game and we had the Bulls fans scared in the first half. A couple of people behind me were trash talking my friend and I at half. Honestly, I was a bit scared that it would escalate. Fortunately, the Pacers took care of that in the 3rd. They were laughing at us and chanting Scalabrini's name by the end of the quarter.

Vogel usually does that kind of thing in the 4th now and I'm guessing he was trying to hold out until then, but I agree though. When we got down ten, he should've just put Paul George on him.

Mackey_Rose
03-06-2012, 05:01 PM
Why is this so surprising to everybody? There is really no need to panic. They'll probably run off a stretch of 6 straight wins leading to the Chicago game, starting tonight. They have 4 games against the 2 worst teams in the league, and 2 home games against teams that have combined to win 19 games.

This team is who we all should have known they were, from the very beginning. They won more than their share of close games, and played a really weak schedule early. They've lost a couple close games, and got blown out by a far superior team. Last night was a stinker, but a .500 (or maybe slightly better) team will have those on occasion. It happens, and it will happen again this year.

Everyone overreacted to the good record early, and now are overreacting to a bad stretch now. This is who they've always been. I fully expect this 5 game losing streak to be followed up by a 6 game win streak, and then everybody will think we're back to being contenders, when in reality we've been the same all along.

That's what I wrote after we got smoked in Cleveland in mid-February. It basically applies to last night as well, except now instead of a collection of the worst teams in the NBA to try to recover against, we have to play against some of the best.

Nothing changed because we lost 5 games in a row. Nothing changed because we won 5 games in a row. Nothing changed because we got ran out of the gym by a superior team last night. It happens.

They better win tonight. A home game against a severely depleted Hawks team, should be a win. You can't afford to give this one up, when you have to play at Miami and Orlando over the weekend. Tonight should be a win, but if it doesn't work out that way, it could portend a very long month of March.

Peck
03-06-2012, 05:02 PM
A show of hands of people who thought the Pacers would be 10 games over 0.500 a little over half way of the season.

Anyone?

I understand being upset that the Pacers haven't been playing up to standards lately, but let's not forget that the new "standard" is still miles ahead of where most of us, if not all, figured they were going to be.

That should be a pretty important part of the perspective discussion.

The Pacers, even with their recent struggles, have still improved immensely from where they were. Their record translates to a 50+ win season. Are we really going to continually ***** about a team on pace to win 52 games, considering they barely won 40 last year?

But over the past month we are only 9-7 with 6 of those wins coming against the bottom feeders of the NBA.

ASkin_ANight
03-06-2012, 05:05 PM
Hey, you just described the majority of Granger's season.
It's true, and it's really disappointing. Too many times this season I've seen him jog up the court, miss open guys, and try to take it 1 on 2 or 3 only to throw it off the side of the backboard. I love the guy, but this season has been bad. Hopefully he turns it around, but honestly I don't see that happening. Seems like he just doesn't care.

graphic-er
03-06-2012, 05:13 PM
It's true, and it's really disappointing. Too many times this season I've seen him jog up the court, miss open guys, and try to take it 1 on 2 or 3 only to throw it off the side of the backboard. I love the guy, but this season has been bad. Hopefully he turns it around, but honestly I don't see that happening. Seems like he just doesn't care.

What in the world? Doesn't care? The team is winning and you postulate that Danny doesn't care because he takes some bad shots? If he dont' care this year, I can't imagine what his demeanor was the past few years.

How about he took some bad shots because the team needed some buckets badly, and being the leading scorer its falls upon him to hoist up some shots?

Since86
03-06-2012, 05:13 PM
But over the past month we are only 9-7 with 6 of those wins coming against the bottom feeders of the NBA.

And? If the Pacers were in the Heat/Bulls/Thunder category, it might be a warning sign.

But for a young team in the Pacers who barely got a taste of winning last year, this season has been an improvement.

That's why I said pushing your toddler down before they can run. We are now expecting the Pacers to jump from the 8th position to the 3rd position, without some ups and downs along the way? That's like going from crawling to running, skipping the middle steps along the way.

Since86
03-06-2012, 05:17 PM
Peck, let me ask this. If you were told before the season that the Pacers would be 10 games above 0.500 after 36 games, what would have been your reaction?

Kstat
03-06-2012, 05:21 PM
That's about where I expected them to be, actually. The east is pretty mediocre outside of Chicago and Miami.

ASkin_ANight
03-06-2012, 05:26 PM
What in the world? Doesn't care? The team is winning and you postulate that Danny doesn't care because he takes some bad shots? If he dont' care this year, I can't imagine what his demeanor was the past few years.

How about he took some body shots because the team needed some buckets badly, and being the leading scorer its falls upon him to hoist up some shots?
It's not just bad shots, though. I really hope he still cares, and who knows, maybe he's just tired. But to me, it definitely looks like he doesn't sometimes. Going up against the #1 team in the NBA last night, I'd expect our leader and supposed "best player" to give it 100% and play his hardest, which he clearly wasn't. There's nothing I dislike more than players not giving it their all.

McKeyFan
03-06-2012, 05:27 PM
the chances of us beating Miami in Miami is about my chance of being elected Chancellor of Germany

You know, if that's the case, then I really think we'd really have a fighting chance against Miami—if only your election was for Der Furhrer.




:zip:

LG33
03-06-2012, 05:36 PM
Here's a positive takeaway: The player we believe to be the future of the franchise, Paul George, showed up and played very aggressive on offense. He didn't play a great all-around game, but he certainly didn't shy away from the challenge.

Ace E.Anderson
03-06-2012, 05:38 PM
It's still like pushing down your toddler, because she doesn't run after she crawls.

Of course the Pacers need to improve. Whether it's from getting more pieces, improving individual play, or both. You doubt anyone argues that they don't need to improve.

The difference in saying they need to improve and saying that the Pacers get consistently blown out by good teams is miles apart though.

The comparison of "pushing down a toddler" isn't relevant. This is a professional basketball team of fully functional professional athletes, and most importantly grown *** men. These aren't helpless toddlers? I know you were simply using a hyperbole to make a point, but....

All I was doing within my posts was pointing out the fact that we have had numerous games this season where we weren't competitive. I find it to be a detriment that we have come up small against good teams more often than not.

When your record looks as good on paper as ours does, it raises expectations. Sometimes it's fair, and sometimes it's not, but that's the price for success. Once that happens, there are some fans that expect you to consistently play to that level. When that doesn't happen, those same fans tend to be frustrated with their team. It's not an overreaction.

My point is: We shouldn't get a pass when we aren't playing well just because we are exceeding original expectations. Our expectations should be raised, and hopefully the level of the Pacers play will raise as well.

Dr. Hibbert
03-06-2012, 05:39 PM
What in the world? Doesn't care? The team is winning and you postulate that Danny doesn't care because he takes some bad shots? If he dont' care this year, I can't imagine what his demeanor was the past few years.

How about he took some bad shots because the team needed some buckets badly, and being the leading scorer its falls upon him to hoist up some shots?

Yeah, terrible shot selection and a refusal to consistently play at the defensive level he's capable of sure makes him a great leader.

But we already know that Danny's not a leader, so I'm not going to harp on that tangent.

McKeyFan
03-06-2012, 05:42 PM
A show of hands of people who thought the Pacers would be 10 games over 0.500 a little over half way of the season.

Anyone?

I understand being upset that the Pacers haven't been playing up to standards lately, but let's not forget that the new "standard" is still miles ahead of where most of us, if not all, figured they were going to be.

That should be a pretty important part of the perspective discussion.

The Pacers, even with their recent struggles, have still improved immensely from where they were. Their record translates to a 50+ win season. Are we really going to continually ***** about a team on pace to win 52 games, considering they barely won 40 last year?
You bring a good perspective here, and I appreciate it.

That said, I have been saying since last season that the key strategic change this team needs to compete with the big boys is a point guard that can point and play defense.

We still don't have that. It doesn't matter to me if we are on a winning streak or losing streak this season. It's all fool's gold until we make the needed serious change.

So, yes, I'm happy with the record this season. But, at the end of the day, we are not playing winning basketball in some strategic areas, and that does frustrate me.

vnzla81
03-06-2012, 05:52 PM
I thought you didn't care about excuses?

Those are not excuses is the true, taking Rose and Deng out is the equivalent of us losing Danny and Roy, then it is reasonable to expect to lose those games.

In your case and others your excuses are based in how young our players are and how little playing time and training camp the poor babies have, it's usually the "poor DC he we need to wait until he develops because he had 3 coaches in 3 years poor baby" or the "poor Danny we need to wait until he detox from the JOB system because he doesn't know any better", I'm even tired of the Tyler Hansbrough excuses and I like Tyler.

mattie
03-06-2012, 05:58 PM
Yeah when someone says something as vague as "hes just not a good basketball player" I expect you to clarify if you dont want to be misunderstood. But ya im in the wrong for adressing it and giving him a chance to explain what he meant. Ill start assuming from now on

Oh is that what you did? You gave me a chance to clarify it and explain what I meant?

Because my follow up post literally did refer to him being a bad NBA player. But then you said I couldn't make up my mind.

I'll try one more time to explain what I mean because obviously we're having a break down in communication, as this has nothing to do with your love affair with Tyler.

Tyler Hansbrough is a bad NBA player. There got it? Ok now here's my proof:

http://www.82games.com/1112/11IND9.HTM

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/h/hansbty01.html

Those stats show the following: Tyler has never played defense. He has always shot a poor shooting percentage culminating in one of the worst shooting percentages in the NBA this season. Tyler doesn't rebound.

Tyler has demonstrated the rare ability: he has no definable strength! That by itself is impressive.

I'm not hating either. He very well could turn into a good NBA player at some point. (doubtful at this point) But right now he isn't good. (and for those not paying attention I mean he isn't good in the NBA)

Asher99
03-06-2012, 06:05 PM
If someone told you before the game that the Bulls starting 5 would scored just 46 points on 34.1% shooting and one of our starters had the game high point total, would you ever guessed the end result being our starters getting out shot and scored with the team losing by 20?

Bball
03-06-2012, 06:10 PM
Just got done looking through a Bulls forum and they are still not satisfied... Still talking about how we are their number one hated team and they wish Hansbrough would get knocked on his a**... This is why I hate the Bulls and their fans.\

Why do they hate Hansbrough so much? There's times he does as much damage to the Pacers as players on the opposing team....

Granger is the guy that either needs to step up or step aside. I don't know what happened to Granger a year or two ago but he's never been the same player since. He seems erratic and moody which = inconsistent. And not just a little inconsistent. He's wildly inconsistent with his overall game, even within a single game.

TheDavisBrothers
03-06-2012, 06:13 PM
Those are not excuses is the true, taking Rose and Deng out is the equivalent of us losing Danny and Roy, then it is reasonable to expect to lose those games.

In your case and others your excuses are based in how young our players are and how little playing time and training camp the poor babies have, it's usually the "poor DC he we need to wait until he develops because he had 3 coaches in 3 years poor baby" or the "poor Danny we need to wait until he detox from the JOB system because he doesn't know any better", I'm even tired of the Tyler Hansbrough excuses and I like Tyler.

It's not like they have missed time together, the Bulls have had one or the other every game this year. If we are going to go this route then don't the Pacers get a pass in the games Danny has missed too?
Also the Bulls lost to NJ by 12 points with Deng :-o, odviously that was without Rose, but again if we are going to make these kinds of arguements, then you can say that the Nets didn't have a huge part of their team in Brook Lopez for that game either.
The Bulls also lost by 16 to the 76ers, with Rose. Tho they were without Deng, the sixers were without their 2 main Cs and were left with TONY BATTIE starting.
Finally DC played for 4 coachs in a span of like 15 months! Think about that, that's a whole lot of transition, and a ton to learn, esp for a PG.
I'm not making excuses, I'm just stating facts ;)

vnzla81
03-06-2012, 06:19 PM
It's not like they have missed time together, the Bulls have had one or the other every game this year. If we are going to go this route then don't the Pacers get a pass in the games Danny has missed too?
Also the Bulls lost to NJ by 12 points with Deng :-o, odviously that was without Rose, but again if we are going to make these kinds of arguements, then you can say that the Nets didn't have a huge part of their team in Brook Lopez for that game either.
The Bulls also lost by 16 to the 76ers, with Rose. Tho they were without Deng, the sixers were without their 2 main Cs and were left with TONY BATTIE starting.
Finally DC played for 4 coachs in a span of like 15 months! Think about that, that's a whole lot of transition, and a ton to learn, esp for a PG.
I'm not making excuses, I'm just stating facts ;)

:laugh: you are funny, good one.

righteouscool
03-06-2012, 06:59 PM
I am at the 2:02 mark in the 3rd qtr and thus far thru the entire 3rd the defense for the Pacers is pretty solid. DC got picked from Noah and Rose was contested by Hans (could have been a foul), Gibson gets a put back and DC could have tried to box him out at the free throw line but that very seldom happens from any defender. Just a great play by Gibson.

Then, Gibson drives from the right side base line and throw to Deng on the left 3pt and was contested by a late Granger but he misses it. The defense was solid under the basket, but Brewer was left alone on the right side baseline and the ball went right to Brewer for a very quick dunk, Hans was boxing out Noah and the best athlete couldn't have reacted quick enough to Brewers put back. To this point of the 3rd quarter the game was being lost by the offense not the defense and definitely not because of DC's defense. the score at the 1:59 mark is 70-54.

As far as the Deng 32 footer or whatever it was, I beleive it was contested late by Danny but he still got a hand up and who the hell would have thought he would have shot from there. More times then not he wouldn't have hit it anyways.

I wanted to post this cause I have read so much crap in multiple threads on how the defense failed and DC was horrible in the 3rd qtr. and I knew this was not the case, so I went back and watched the 3rd qtr.

I really wonder how and why people leave comments that are so unfounded. I mean do some of you guys really watch the game. Do some of you guys think that Hans could have made a play on Brewer. It was the luck of the bounce on that play, no more, no less!

Good post. The Luol Deng dagger was also defended well and he shot that because it was the end of the shot clock. I thought the defense was very good. More often than not they don't hit all those 3s. The thing that lost the game wasn't the defense, but the rebounding.

PGisthefuture
03-06-2012, 07:02 PM
\

Why do they hate Hansbrough so much? There's times he does as much damage to the Pacers as players on the opposing team....

Granger is the guy that either needs to step up or step aside. I don't know what happened to Granger a year or two ago but he's never been the same player since. He seems erratic and moody which = inconsistent. And not just a little inconsistent. He's wildly inconsistent with his overall game, even within a single game.

I don't know... I mean Kurt Thomas already did it once in the playoffs last year. They also mention Vogel and Foster as guys they cannot stand. They must have a thing for white guys for some reason. They hate Vogel, Foster, and Hansbrough and love Scalabrine.

Hibbert
03-06-2012, 07:19 PM
Peck, let me ask this. If you were told before the season that the Pacers would be 10 games above 0.500 after 36 games, what would have been your reaction?

Through 36 games last year our record was 16-20. 23-13 is a major improvement and a lot better than I thought we would be at.

McKeyFan
03-06-2012, 07:35 PM
Well, I just rewatched the third quarter to try to figure things out.

My conclusion: it wasn't as bad as it seemed. Arguably, it was a bit of the perfect storm of mistakes on our part and luck on their part that moved us from three up to 16 down in about four or five minutes.

The key thing: every single one of our starters made a poor judgment error during that stretch. Nobody was responsible for most of them. Everybody had at least one.

Danny took it to the hole on a 1 on 2. Bad idea.

Paul George tried for a steal on one end and failed to get back in time to defend Deng's three from the corner.

Roy got fouled, but missed both free throws.

Collison went to the hole with two guys in front of him and no way to get a shot off and lost the ball.

David West dribbled it off his knee. Just one of those mistakes, not a judgment error. But then he made a stupid foul against Noah who was shooting with his left hand. Real mistake.

Add all those together and we lose ten or so points.

THEN . . .

The Bulls had some luck.

Taj Gibson made kind of a ridiculous tip in that goes in one out of fifty times.

Deng makes a three from eight feet behind the line.

Rose makes three threes in a row, all decently contested.

Let's say Rose deserves two of those baskets. Then that's eight points the Bulls got in kind of a lucky way. There's your 18 point swing.

Other than that, the defense was pretty solid and the shot selection was good as well. Just a perfect storm of a$$ whooping.

Nuntius
03-06-2012, 07:44 PM
Yeah but the true is the true and the true is that we are not as good as we think we are.

It all comes down to how good we think we are.

After the first 7 games, I said that we are a team that will battle for the 3th to 6th seed in the East. I don't remember anyone saying that we're gonna challenge the Heat or the Bulls for the first two spots this season.

You said that we're as good as 6th to 7th seed.

So, the team is within my expectations and has exceeded yours. So, I call :bs: on the "we're not as good as we think we are". We are actually better than what you thought we are.

TheDavisBrothers
03-06-2012, 07:48 PM
Well, I just rewatched the third quarter to try to figure things out.

My conclusion: it wasn't as bad as it seemed. Arguably, it was a bit of the perfect storm of mistakes on our part and luck on their part that moved us from three up to 16 down in about four or five minutes.

The key thing: every single one of our starters made a poor judgment error during that stretch. Nobody was responsible for most of them. Everybody had at least one.

Danny took it to the hole on a 1 on 2. Bad idea.

Paul George tried for a steal on one end and failed to get back in time to defend Deng's three from the corner.

Roy got fouled, but missed both free throws.

Collison went to the hole with two guys in front of him and no way to get a shot off and lost the ball.

David West dribbled it off his knee. Just one of those mistakes, not a judgment error. But then he made a stupid foul against Noah who was shooting with his left hand. Real mistake.

Add all those together and we lose ten or so points.

THEN . . .

The Bulls had some luck.

Taj Gibson made kind of a ridiculous tip in that goes in one out of fifty times.

Deng makes a three from eight feet behind the line.

Rose makes three threes in a row, all decently contested.

Let's say Rose deserves two of those baskets. Then that's eight points the Bulls got in kind of a lucky way. There's your 18 point swing.

Other than that, the defense was pretty solid and the shot selection was good as well. Just a perfect storm of a$$ whooping.

I appreciate the autopsy, it's a dirty job that I probably would have lost my cookies to:puke:, if I watched it again:p

xIndyFan
03-07-2012, 12:23 AM
I appreciate the autopsy, it's a dirty job that I probably would have lost my cookies to:puke:, if I watched it again:p

yeah, me too. i was going to do this, but just couldn't make myself do it.

man, i really don't like chicago.

Since86
03-07-2012, 10:41 AM
Those are not excuses is the true, taking Rose and Deng out is the equivalent of us losing Danny and Roy, then it is reasonable to expect to lose those games.

In your case and others your excuses are based in how young our players are and how little playing time and training camp the poor babies have, it's usually the "poor DC he we need to wait until he develops because he had 3 coaches in 3 years poor baby" or the "poor Danny we need to wait until he detox from the JOB system because he doesn't know any better", I'm even tired of the Tyler Hansbrough excuses and I like Tyler.

It's true that David West is coming off ACL surgery, but when that's brought up you label it an excuse too.

You are always quit to dismiss excuses for the Pacers, while quick to offer some up for other teams.

vnzla81
03-07-2012, 11:09 AM
It's true that David West is coming off ACL surgery, but when that's brought up you label it an excuse too.

You are always quit to dismiss excuses for the Pacers, while quick to offer some up for other teams.

Find me a post were I'm saying that that's an excuse, I call bs on that one again, good try though.

Major Cold
03-07-2012, 11:31 AM
Yeah but the true is the true and the true is that we are not as good as we think we are.


31 wins


23-14---We are better than you thought we were. So quick trying to paint everything to make it out that we are as bad as you predicted, so that you can throw it in our faces.

This team is better than last year. But not as good as next year and beyond. There are some who believe that we should be the 3rd best team in the East. I think we are the 5.

vnzla81
03-07-2012, 11:45 AM
23-14---We are better than you thought we were. So quick trying to paint everything to make it out that we are as bad as you predicted, so that you can throw it in our faces.

This team is better than last year. But not as good as next year and beyond. There are some who believe that we should be the 3rd best team in the East. I think we are the 5.

Who said that we are as bad as I predicted? there was also a new prediction thread where I predicted 35 wins and so far it looks like they are going to surpass that, I still think that at the end we are going to end up 6th or 7th, maybe you are right with 5th, that doesn't mean that we are supposed to be happy because we are 23-14 and never talk about the bad games, like I told other guys, hey if you are ready to celebrate because we are better than last year go ahead and have at it.

Major Cold
03-07-2012, 11:55 AM
We all have our different ways of "celebrating".

Since86
03-07-2012, 11:55 AM
Find me a post were I'm saying that that's an excuse, I call bs on that one again, good try though.

Again? This is the first time I've ever said it. There's a number of examples just within the past few days.

You said the Bulls missing Rose/Deng was a valid excuse because it's true. You were then presented with a fact that DC has had 4 coaches in less than 3 years. You replied to that by laughing.

Is it not true that DC has had 4 coaches in less than 3 years? It sure is.

You are always dismissive other other's people excuses while you offer excuses for other teams.

There's no point in denying it, when everyone see's your constant *****fest every day.

Since86
03-07-2012, 12:00 PM
Here's a pretty intereseting quote from you.


Yep and I don't buy those excuses either, hell, even at this point I don't really have an excuse of why Tyler is playing the way he is playing right now, I guess I just don't like excuses in general? "the schedule loss" and the rest of other excuses really grind my gears. :mad:

Like I've said. You don't just don't like excuses, yet you're making them for the Bulls.

vnzla81
03-07-2012, 12:04 PM
Again? This is the first time I've ever said it. There's a number of examples just within the past few days.

You said the Bulls missing Rose/Deng was a valid excuse because it's true. You were then presented with a fact that DC has had 4 coaches in less than 3 years. You replied to that by laughing.

Is it not true that DC has had 4 coaches in less than 3 years? It sure is.

You are always dismissive other other's people excuses while you offer excuses for other teams.

There's no point in denying it, when everyone see's your constant *****fest every day.

I don't get what are you arguing about? the Bulls missing the NBA's MVP and a 2012 All Star player is a way bigger "excuse" than "poor DC and his 4 coaches" or the "we are young BS" Danny must be a "young" 28 years old player because he has been sucking all year, "poor Danny he didn't have a good coach all this time we need to give time", come up with a different excuse and I might buy it, but telling me the same BS over and over again is not going to make it true.

vnzla81
03-07-2012, 12:13 PM
Here's a pretty intereseting quote from you.



Like I've said. You don't just don't like excuses, yet you're making them for the Bulls.

It's not an excuse they were missing the NBA MVP and their other All Star, how hard is to understand that? if I was trying to make excuses like you guys do I would say "poor baby Boozer he needs to mature a little more he is just trying to aclimate to his new enviroment" or "poor baby Noah he just needs somebody to hug him because right now his mind is not in the game" or some BS like that, big difference.

Since86
03-07-2012, 12:34 PM
:laugh: Pointing out that DC has had 4 different HC in 2 1/2 years is like saying "poor baby Boozer he needs to mature a little more he is just trying to aclimate to his new enviroment?"

Dgreenwell3
03-07-2012, 12:44 PM
Pocket post