PDA

View Full Version : Validation for Jim O'Brien?



Hicks
06-18-2012, 01:58 PM
When I look at how the Thunder and Spurs kept going small on one another, and now the Heat are giving OKC / Perkins trouble with their lineup of Chalmers, Wade, Battier/James, and Bosh, and also how Orlando kept us on our toes with their smaller lineups, and I think I'm forgetting other playoff teams that would do this 4-out-ish lineups, was O'Brien right to emphasize going small while he was here? Is that just what this league is now? I know we went with a bigger lineup, but did we really punish Miami with it? Would we be better off with another big wing to put at the "PF" spot (like Shawne Williams might have been had he stuck around, or another guy with similar size/game)?

Wondering out loud; thought it might generate an interesting discussion (hopefully not just a bunch of Jim bashing).

Trader Joe
06-18-2012, 02:02 PM
Jim's strategies were fine in small doses. As always personnel is a huge part of how/why it works, going with a guy like Battier as a small 4 is a lot different than going with Murphy as your full time power forward.

Since86
06-18-2012, 02:07 PM
The major difference in JOb smallball and Miami/OKC smallball is that shooting threes was the primary option for Jim and a secondary option for Miami/OKC.

Unclebuck
06-18-2012, 02:14 PM
I always rejected what seemed to me to be the common notion during Jim's tenure that "small ball" bad - that you cannot win that way.

Obviously you can if you have the right players. Keep in mind the Mavs last year went small at lot also.

In fact I think unless you can go small you won't win the championship. Notice I used the word "can" go small.

Why do teams go small - because their best players are often small (although the heat could easily play Haslem at power forward), but they want to have Battier drawing a Thunder big away from the basket to open up driving lanes for Wade and Lebron.

Teams also love getting a slow big center or pf in pick and rolls.

I think every team could use a player who can play power forward who can shoot the three point shot - that can be a real benefit as we see in this series

idioteque
06-18-2012, 02:27 PM
The Pacers could have done a much better job exploiting our size advantage over Miami if our PG play was better, if Roy was stronger, and if Battier wasn't so adept at keeping D. West off his game. We were unable to beat Miami for a lot of reasons, but two big contributing factors were our inability to feed our bigs and our bigs inability to get into really good position in the post.

In other words, I don't see it much as a matter of small ball at all.

vnzla81
06-18-2012, 02:33 PM
It's different to go small with Durant/Lebron at the power forward position than going small with Murphy/Dunleavy/Posey, etc.

Yes small works sometimes but it shouldn't be the main lineup for any team, OKC going small with at 6'4" point guard and a 6'11" power forward in Durant is not going small in my opinion, JOB going small with Ford,Head, Dunleavy,Danny,Murphy is a horrible way to go small.

Kid Minneapolis
06-18-2012, 02:33 PM
Nothing wrong with the style at all --- if you have the right guys. JOB didn't. He was forcing a square peg into a round hole instead of finding a square hole to fit them into. That was my biggest issue with JOB, his absolutely stubborn loyalty to his system instead of working with what he had. He also had horrible player-management skills --- ridiculing your own players in public (especially after they just had a great game) just doesn't do it for me.

OlBlu
06-18-2012, 02:48 PM
When I look at how the Thunder and Spurs kept going small on one another, and now the Heat are giving OKC / Perkins trouble with their lineup of Chalmers, Wade, Battier/James, and Bosh, and also how Orlando kept us on our toes with their smaller lineups, and I think I'm forgetting other playoff teams that would do this 4-out-ish lineups, was O'Brien right to emphasize going small while he was here? Is that just what this league is now? I know we went with a bigger lineup, but did we really punish Miami with it? Would we be better off with another big wing to put at the "PF" spot (like Shawne Williams might have been had he stuck around, or another guy with similar size/game)?

Wondering out loud; thought it might generate an interesting discussion (hopefully not just a bunch of Jim bashing).

It is nice to see someone mentioning this. JOB took over this troubled team and the main thing he brought was discipline. Screw up and you did not play. Screw up badly and you were gone. He got their attention and laid the foundation for the success they are now enjoying. Rebuilding is a thankless task. The coaches who do the rebuilding are rarely around to reap the rewards (think hard about that new Colts coaches). I thought he should have been allowed to finish out the year (he might have gotten them to the playoffs too) and then replace him with a coach who was ready to win and much more experienced than Vogel. I think Vogel had done a good job but he does get outcoached in game situations. Thanks, JOB, for all you did to prepare this team for respectability........:cool:

Sandman21
06-18-2012, 02:54 PM
What does the Fox59 Weatherguy have to do with the Pacers?

Unclebuck
06-18-2012, 03:02 PM
Yes small works sometimes but it shouldn't be the main lineup for any team, .

The heats main lineup in these playoffs has been with Battier at power forward. That seems pretty small to me

d_c
06-18-2012, 03:04 PM
By some kind of mysterious magic, small ball seems to work better when guys like Lebron, Wade and Durant and involved in it.

Seriously, small ball is a tactic used in 2 cases:

1. A team is down 20+ points and has nothing to lose at that point. They need a quick lineup that can cause some turnovers and shoot 3s for any hopes of getting back into the game. The best example of this was the Clippers going small in the 2nd half of game 1 vs. the Grizzlies. They pulled out DeAndre Jordan because he was pretty much useless garbage.

IIRC, the Clips went small with a lineup of Chris Paul, Randy Foye, Nick Young, Caron Butler and Blake Griffin. That's how they got back into the game and eventually won.

2. A team doesn't feel the opposition has big guys that can punish them for going small. In this series, guys like Ibaka, Perkins and Joel Anthony aren't going to punish anyone inside for going small. So anyone playing against those guys won't be afraid to throw a smaller lineup at them.

vnzla81
06-18-2012, 03:17 PM
The heats main lineup in these playoffs has been with Battier at power forward. That seems pretty small to me

Bosh getting hurt has a lot to do with that.

wintermute
06-18-2012, 03:29 PM
While I agree that small ball has its place, I'm not sure I agree with Hicks' premise. I'd argue that the Heat and OKC are in the Finals not because of small ball, but because they have 6 of the NBA's top 30 players between them, including probably the 2 best individual players this season. Place better big men on the Heat and Thunder, and they'd probably be even more dominant.

So to me it's the players more than the style, and really you want to design your system to put your best players in a position to succeed. No one has been more brilliant at it than Pop the last few years, radically altering the Spurs' Duncan-based offense to one that now relies on Tony Parker.

Was Obie was right in getting the Pacers to play small ball? The crux of it is that he considered Troy Murphy to be one of the Pacers' better players, and designed his system accordingly. He may even have been right at that time, but I'll just say that any team that has to rely heavily on Troy Murphy is in for a long season. Vogel on the other hand, quickly figured that Hibbert and West were his best players, and designed *his* system around their post play. I think the results speak for themselves.

Hicks
06-18-2012, 03:37 PM
I think everyone realizes that better talent makes any scheme look better. My point is that the best teams are using small ball more than a little, and I'm wondering if it's time we accept the fact that the league is trending more and more to 4-out style attacks like this. Even the Lakers are about to breakup the best big ball front court in the league this summer by ditching Pau Gasol (which I find crazy; I'd love to have a front court that big).

Unclebuck
06-18-2012, 03:40 PM
I don't think playing Murphy at power forward is going small at all. Not in todays NBA. Playing Murphy at all might be a bad decision, it might be a lot of things, but it isn't going small.

Unclebuck
06-18-2012, 03:41 PM
I think everyone realizes that better talent makes any scheme look better. My point is that the best teams are using small ball more than a little, and I'm wondering if it's time we accept the fact that the league is trending more and more to 4-out style attacks like this. Even the Lakers are about to breakup the best big ball front court in the league this summer by ditching Pau Gasol (which I find crazy; I'd love to have a front court that big).

Yes, but I think the trend to small started several years ago. i don't think this is anything new at all. Started maybe 10-12 years ago

Slick Pinkham
06-18-2012, 03:55 PM
....to open up driving lanes...

Yes! This is what Miami wants to do, and Jim O'Brien to my knowledge was not using small lineups to accomplish this. They have slashers/scorers, and this opens space for them. I see nothing in Miami's approach that vindicates Jim O'Brien's goofy rotations.

CableKC
06-18-2012, 03:57 PM
i don't think that we'd be having this discussion if the Heat wasn't 'essentially' playing Small Ball with a Chalmers/Wade/Battier/LeDecision/TagAlong if the Heat didn't have LeWade. The Heat are able to get away with TagAlong manning the paint when you essentially have a super Athletic freak of nature like LeDecision manning the PF spot. As some have suggested....in theory...on paper...Small Ball CAN WORK.....but IMHO it only works for the Heat cuz they happen to have 2 of the best Players in the NBA. Try sticking TagAlong at the Center Spot with DC/GH/PG/Granger and see how they do. Probably not bad....but they won't get as far as having LeWade in the lineup.

Since86
06-18-2012, 03:59 PM
The heats main lineup in these playoffs has been with Battier at power forward. That seems pretty small to me

Part of the situation with Miami is that they really don't have a normal lineup. They either play small or play really small.

Hicks
06-18-2012, 04:07 PM
Yes! This is what Miami wants to do, and Jim O'Brien to my knowledge was not using small lineups to accomplish this. They has slashers/scorers, and this opens space for them. I see nothing in Miami's approach that vindicates Jim O'Brien's goofy rotations.

Actually, O'Brien used to talk about doing it to open up lanes. The problem was we had no slashers, the D knew that, and we were left with jumpshots.

Bball
06-18-2012, 04:25 PM
Actually, O'Brien used to talk about doing it to open up lanes. The problem was we had no slashers, the D knew that, and we were left with jumpshots.

And O'Brien encouraged quick 3 point shots, talked openingly of his disdain for the midrange game, and rewarded 3 point shooters with plenty of PT no matter what the rest of their game consisted of.

It's hard to draw any conclusions about modern basketball, or peach basket era basketball either, from O'Brien's insanity.

Hicks
06-18-2012, 04:29 PM
And O'Brien encouraged quick 3 point shots, talked openingly of his disdain for the midrange game, and rewarded 3 point shooters with plenty of PT no matter what the rest of their game consisted of.

It's hard to draw any conclusions about modern basketball, or peach basket era basketball either, from O'Brien's insanity.

His theory was any open shot was a good shot, and he was a big fan of 3's over long 2's, yes. So you combine that with what the D was giving (by denying the paint and discouraging attacking it) and you get what we got: A lot of 3-point chucks.

I think Stan Van Gundy feels similarly, and frankly ORL made that series scarier than I thought it might be (not that it ever got out of hand after Game 1, mind you, but games were closer than I thought they had any business being, and a lot of that was the 3's added up and kept them alive).

Since86
06-18-2012, 04:46 PM
Yes, Orlando did rely on a lot of threes, but they also rely on a lot of PnRs to balance it out. There wasn't anything to balance the chucking from Jim.

Bball
06-18-2012, 04:50 PM
Big Baby had a lot to do with keeping Orlando close against the Pacers....

vnzla81
06-18-2012, 04:53 PM
The main player that was killing the Pacers in Orlando was Big Baby not Ryan Anderson, yes they play small ball and shoot a lot of threes but they still get points inside by driving and by playing the pick and roll non stop, and also when Howard is playing, just the fact that you have him there denies any "small ball line up".

vnzla81
06-18-2012, 05:45 PM
Here is a look of "small ball" for OKC by the way:

Westbrook 6'4", Harden 6'5", Thabo 6'5", Durant 6'11" and Ibaka 6'11" give me this "small ball" lineup all day.

And here is a look at Miami's "small ball team":

Chalmers 6'1, Wade 6'4", Battier 6'7", Lebron 6'8" and Bosh 6'11".

Those two teams are playing fake "small ball" not only that but OKC's coach is forcing the big lineup, in my opinion if he doesn't change the Ibaka/Perkins duo they are going to lose this.

Note that by fake "small ball" I mean that a lot of those players play bigger than their height, specially Westbrook, Wade, Durant and Lebron.

Hicks
06-18-2012, 06:00 PM
It's just an expression. What I'm trying to talk about is having only one true "big man" (a true low post power forward or a center; not a stretch four, not an oversized wing) along with 4 teammates comprised of guards and wings. In other words, one post/pivot, four perimeter players. I'm not at all concerned with their height.

Brad8888
06-18-2012, 06:02 PM
Small ball works when a team has quicker smalls who have court vision and pass effectively, or when the smalls shoot at a high percentage from all over the court. It sometimes works if there is one giant (like Howard) to clean up the mess on the inside.

The Pacers had absolutely none of those things during O'Brien's time here. Also, playing Murphy on the perimeter was done as a part of small ball. His presence at the arc was a calculated effort to draw interior defenders out (which it usually didn't) to open up lanes for dribble penetration (which didn't happen effectively due to the lack of a low post outlet for the penetrator to dish to when the defense collapsed at the midpost to slow the drives and cover the passing lanes for kickouts).

So, I see no validation for O'Brien. Rather, I see a further indictment of his stubborn refusal to adapt to the roster he had, instead using the same philosophy that his teams elsewhere used despite not having the necessary types of players on the roster to make the strategy have a positive outcome. Vogel immediately changed the result of the blessed season of Pacers rebirth by simply doing away with small ball and allowing the roster to maximize the talent present at the time, with a less talented McRoberts instead of West and a period of lockerroom turmoil caused by Stephenson (from what we have been led to believe) that led to a multigame losing streak leaving the Pacers to face Chicago in the playoffs instead of having a higher seed with perhaps easier matchups overall.

Hicks
06-18-2012, 06:03 PM
Yes, Orlando did rely on a lot of threes, but they also rely on a lot of PnRs to balance it out. There wasn't anything to balance the chucking from Jim.

I agree, though I seem to recall pick and pops ran with Troy.

But in any case, obviously the Magic did a lot of PnR, and when it's done like that... well, it's getting harder every season for me to argue against it. I see how effective it can be when you do it well (plenty of 3's with plenty of PnR with plenty of dribble drives and with one pivot to keep the D honest.)

It was also essentially what was working for Pheonix's offense for years (four guys who could stretch the D out to the 3 point line with lots of PnR, drives, and 3's with one pivot), and Tim Duncan was paired up with Matt Bonner for a while and they will/did go small this year with Duncan and lineups like Parker/Manu/Jackson/Leonard.

Unless teams are going to go out of their way to punish that with size on the block on the other end, I see it becoming even more prevalent. And I've come to realize, too, that it's getting harder and harder to do that because defenses have gotten smarter and faster while the players have gotten bigger, which makes it easier to trap the post, force him to get rid of it, then recover before they burn you too bad (or at least not burned often enough).

I think it's especially effective when the 'small 4' is a guy like Battier or Leonard or back in the day Shawn Marion who can play respectable defense as opposed to doing it with Troy Murphy or Ryan Anderson or Steve Novak.

Hicks
06-18-2012, 06:11 PM
Another thought is that this is making me think once David West's time is done here (in the next 1-4 seasons, I'd guess), maybe we should look for another Danny-style or Leonard-style guy to replace him with. Or maybe even just let Danny do it, slide Paul to the 3, and find another starting 2.

:devil: You know, like Eric Gordon. :devil:

OlBlu
06-18-2012, 06:13 PM
Another thought is that this is making me think once David West's time is done here (in the next 1-4 seasons, I'd guess), maybe we should look for another Danny-style or Leonard-style guy to replace him with. Or maybe even just let Danny do it, slide Paul to the 3, and find another starting 2.

:devil: You know, like Eric Gordon. :devil:

Enough of that IU cripple, Eric Gordon....... He ain't coming here and who wants a player that will be on the injured list most of the time......:cool:

vnzla81
06-18-2012, 06:14 PM
Another thought is that this is making me think once David West's time is done here (in the next 1-4 seasons, I'd guess), maybe we should look for another Danny-style or Leonard-style guy to replace him with. Or maybe even just let Danny do it, slide Paul to the 3, and find another starting 2.

:devil: You know, like Eric Gordon. :devil:

I've been in the "Josh Smith" bandwagon for a while, I think he can be our power forward of the future.

Eleazar
06-18-2012, 06:18 PM
This is like saying the Colts should switch to the 3-4 because the Ravens run a 3-4, even though there is nothing inherently better about it over the 4-3. It is ignoring the fact that the Ravens would have one of the best defenses no matter what scheme they run because they have some of the best talent. If you have the talent you can make any scheme work. On the other hand if you don't have the talent you best stick with the 4-3 as you are more likely to have a decent defense under a 4-3 without great talent than you are a 3-4 without great talent.

It is the same way with basketball. If you don't have great talent you are better served going with a traditional big line-up, but if you have the right talent you can run small ball for great lengths at a time and succeed with it, chances are though you would be just as good running a traditional line-up as the small ball line-up. When you have a players like LeBron and Durant you are more able to go to the "small-ball" line-up because your talent is so good it will create a mismatch that the other team might not be able to counter without also going small. If the other team had a line-up like Tinsley, Miller, Artest, JO, and Miller like we did in the early 00's, it would not be a smart idea to go small against no matter what kind of talent you have.

spreedom
06-18-2012, 06:23 PM
I think the phrase "going small" has little to do with the physical size of the players. It has to do with how "big" they play. Troy is 6'11", but he plays smaller than that because he doesn't play the post, box out, or defend. Compare him with 6'8" Nick Collison, who does all of those things.

OlBlu
06-18-2012, 06:27 PM
This is like saying the Colts should switch to the 3-4 because the Ravens run a 3-4, even though there is nothing inherently better about it over the 4-3. It is ignoring the fact that the Ravens would have one of the best defenses no matter what scheme they run because they have some of the best talent. If you have the talent you can make any scheme work. On the other hand if you don't have the talent you best stick with the 4-3 as you are more likely to have a decent defense under a 4-3 without great talent than you are a 3-4 without great talent.

It is the same way with basketball. If you don't have great talent you are better served going with a traditional big line-up, but if you have the right talent you can run small ball for great lengths at a time and succeed with it, chances are though you would be just as good running a traditional line-up as the small ball line-up. When you have a players like LeBron and Durant you are more able to go to the "small-ball" line-up because your talent is so good it will create a mismatch that the other team might not be able to counter without also going small. If the other team had a line-up like Tinsley, Miller, Artest, JO, and Miller like we did in the early 00's, it would not be a smart idea to go small against no matter what kind of talent you have.

You would think the Colts might have considered that they have two of the best outside pass rushers in the NFL. Now they try to become linebackers. Silliness.....:cool:

Pacergeek
06-18-2012, 06:28 PM
To an extent, yes. The NBA has evolved away from big lumbering centers. It has become a game for smaller, quicker players that play several positions. This is why I'm reluctant to re-sign Roy to a big contract

BlueNGold
06-18-2012, 06:30 PM
Miami is the rare exception where a team can go small and play effectively. They can do that because they don't need a big C with a hook shot to penetrate. They have Wade and James who do that just fine. Then you look at James and he's physically stronger than most PF's in the NBA...and he's really not that much shorter than most of them. Then you have Wade who is extremely strong too. Let's just say these guys are really not small and you take a DWade and LeBron over a couple big stiffs any day of the week. But they are the exception because their pure talent overrides size.

...and small ball didn't win the last championship. Tyson Chandler was a huge reason the Mavs won because he represented an obstacle in the paint preventing a Wade and James a space jam type series. Then you have a 7 foot PF in Dirk. No, that was not small.

As for Jim, you can forget about any validation for him. Just look at his terrible record vs Frank's. The fact he had smallish guys playing had a lot more to do with whether he thought they could hit threes. That's why TJ Ford and Tyler didn't play much...

BlueNGold
06-18-2012, 06:33 PM
To an extent, yes. The NBA has evolved away from big lumbering centers. It has become a game for smaller, quicker players that play several positions. This is why I'm reluctant to re-sign Roy to a big contract

I don't know about that.. Roy clogged the lane and was a huuuuuuuge reason we could even compete with Miami.

adamscb
06-18-2012, 06:40 PM
two skill assets that a team needs to have when playing small is 1) athleticism and 2) ball handling. our teams with JOB didn't excel in either, but he refused to recognize it and played small anyway. seeing teams with top-tier talent like miami and okc playing small ball successfully doesn't validate JOB at all, imo.

Larry Staverman
06-18-2012, 07:24 PM
Small ball in and of itself can work in the NBA with right personnel but the fact that Vogel took the very same personnel and changed the system away from small ball and led the team to a winning record and a playoff spot totally repudiates O'brien's effort to force small ball on that Pacer team.

PR07
06-18-2012, 08:11 PM
I think the Thunder should actually go small in this series, it would speed up the game and wouldn't allow Miami to cheat when Ibaka and Perkins are screening. Plus, you can put Durant at the 4 and match him up with Battier where he's far less likely to get in foul trouble.

beast23
06-18-2012, 09:10 PM
Wow. Validation for JOB?

This kind of reminds me of the old South Park episode "The Christmas Poo"'. You can disguise it and dress it up any way you want, but in the end, you still have something that stinks.

Same holds true for JOB and his offense. Both stunk. That's the only validation necessary. What any other team is doing is irrelevant.

rock747
06-18-2012, 10:31 PM
Has Jim O'brien been completely ostracized from the Association? Why have we heard absolutely nothing from him....

BlueNGold
06-18-2012, 10:36 PM
Has Jim O'brien been completely ostracized from the Association? Why have we heard absolutely nothing from him....

That's all the validation you need to know about. I suppose he might wind up at Florida International. I heard they need a coach and they'll take anybody.

Unclebuck
06-18-2012, 11:13 PM
The main player that was killing the Pacers in Orlando was Big Baby not Ryan Anderson, yes they play small ball and shoot a lot of threes but they still get points inside by driving and by playing the pick and roll non stop, and also when Howard is playing, just the fact that you have him there denies any "small ball line up".


No, Big Baby was allowed to do as he pleased as the Pacers pushed out on the three point shooters. Pacers geared their whole defense on stopping the three.

Nelson was who hurt s. he created almost all of their offense

Unclebuck
06-18-2012, 11:26 PM
Has Jim O'brien been completely ostracized from the Association? Why have we heard absolutely nothing from him....

He worked for ESPN before we hired him. My guess is Jim has decided he doesn't want to work in the media. I'm sure several media outlets would take his call.

I personally believe he's shown some class staying out of sight

Heisenberg
06-18-2012, 11:30 PM
He worked for ESPN before we hired him. My guess is Jim has decided he doesn't want to work in the media. I'm sure several media outlets would take his call.

I personally believe he's shown some class staying out of sightEspecially the way he's STILL referenced by local media and players (Roy). It's always "a former coach" or something like that, and I understand he about ruined Roy's career, but eventually you've got to take some personal responsibility. It really rubs me the wrong way.

vnzla81
06-18-2012, 11:31 PM
He worked for ESPN before we hired him. My guess is Jim has decided he doesn't want to work in the media. I'm sure several media outlets would take his call and hire him by phone

fixed ;)

Brad8888
06-19-2012, 12:25 AM
Originally Posted by Unclebuck

He worked for ESPN before we hired him. My guess is Jim has decided he doesn't want to work in the media. I'm sure several media outlets would take his call and divert it to a management intern for a practice interview assignment on "Telephone Etiquette: How to Politely Refuse a Request for Employment from a Former Coach and Colleague Who Is Looking for Employment Despite Now Being Irrelevant in his Former Field"

More fully developed and corrected expression of the concept brought forth by the esteemed vnzla81.

spreedom
06-19-2012, 12:43 AM
...and small ball didn't win the last championship. Tyson Chandler was a huge reason the Mavs won because he represented an obstacle in the paint preventing a Wade and James a space jam type series. Then you have a 7 foot PF in Dirk. No, that was not small.


Yes it did. The Finals series turned when Carlisle put JJ Barea into the starting lineup, and all of their best lineups had three guards and Dirk in them. And Dirk, for all of his greatness, wasn't exactly swatting shots left and right either. Chandler is almost a prototypical small-ball center because his athleticism and smarts are what allow him to play center, not just his size. He's barely bigger than Dirk, and 20 years ago he'd have been a forward.

Peck
06-19-2012, 02:29 AM
I'm just trying to figure out how you make a thread entitled "Validation for Jim O'Brien" and then not want it to turn into a Jim O'Brien gripe session on this forum?

But to answer the question straight out, no.

Believe it or not Jim O'Brien did not come up with the concept of floor spacing, drawing the big man from the basket and using a motion offense.

If you just want to take Miami vs. Us as an example I will still state that the type of ball didn't beat us, it was the quality of the players (two of them anyway) that beat us and it took superhuman games from them to get it done. Two lesser players and I don't care if they played small or not we would have won.

But better yet if the NBA wouldn't punish defenders for defending then this would not be a question either.

wintermute
06-19-2012, 03:17 AM
Another thought is that this is making me think once David West's time is done here (in the next 1-4 seasons, I'd guess), maybe we should look for another Danny-style or Leonard-style guy to replace him with. Or maybe even just let Danny do it, slide Paul to the 3, and find another starting 2.


Danny isn't a bad 4 actually - he's shown that he can defend most 4's and he obviously works as a stretch 4. The big problem we had with Granger at PF is that our rebounding suffers. Granger is a pedestrian rebounder at best for a SF and is downright bad for a PF. Still, we could possibly make up the rebounding deficit from other positions. IMO it should be an option for us (and frankly, I'm puzzled we didn't go to it more often during the season with Hansbrough's struggles).


Small ball in and of itself can work in the NBA with right personnel but the fact that Vogel took the very same personnel and changed the system away from small ball and led the team to a winning record and a playoff spot totally repudiates O'brien's effort to force small ball on that Pacer team.

Hell yeah. Though in fairness, the personnel improvement (West, Hill) this season made a big difference.

wintermute
06-19-2012, 03:23 AM
Especially the way he's STILL referenced by local media and players (Roy). It's always "a former coach" or something like that, and I understand he about ruined Roy's career, but eventually you've got to take some personal responsibility. It really rubs me the wrong way.

Hah, I thought I was the only one.

I love Roy, but man he needs to let go. He made his point the first time, he doesn't need to keep bringing it up.

And really, was Obie so wrong? He thought Hibbert should get quicker, and Hibbert did, and that was to the good.

Phree Refill
06-19-2012, 11:57 AM
Small ball as a strategy of choice is bogus to me. If I'm faced with the option of playing Eddy freakin Curry vs playing Battier/Haslem I'm pretty sure I'm gonna go with with Battier or Haslem. Teams play small because they HAVE TO. They quite literally have noone big thats worth anything. How many legit game changing centers have been drafted over the last 15 years? Maybe a dozen.... and thats being generous by including players like Kaman and Hibbert who you could easily argue as not being game changers. Small ball exists simply because there are 10 crap centers to every 1 legit center in the league these days. To give coaches credit for playing their best 5 man lineups rather than sticking to conventional positional lineups is like praising a teenager for wiping their own @ss; its something they should be expected to do.


And before anyone says "Jim had Roy, why did he go small so much then?", Roy was nowhere near the player he is now when Jim was here and I'm convinced no amount Jim's encouragement rather belittlement would have expedited that progress. Roy has been on the same steady improvement slope ever since he was a rookie. Time is the biggest contributor to Roy's improvement. Not encouragement.

Peck
06-19-2012, 12:20 PM
For those of you saying Roy should let it go, I won't say you are wrong. But I will counter with this.

Jim O'Brien is the only coach I have ever seen in any sport where is former players have had such hard feelings for them that they continue to say bad things about him openly and for years. If you think Roy is bad you should hear Chris Webber talk about him or Samuel Dalembert. Heck Grant Long used his position as an NBA analyst for the Grizzlies to tell the whole world how lousy of a coach Jim O'Brien was and how they did not get along. I've never heard that done before.

Obviously Jim is not the only coach who is a my way or the highway kind of guy, in fact the best ones usually have some aspect of that to them. But I don't think he has the winning pedigree to be the type of coach he is and force players to play out of their natural position.

Look at all of the above players and what do they have in common? They are all low post players. Jim has no place on offense for that type of player.

Since86
06-19-2012, 12:37 PM
And really, was Obie so wrong? He thought Hibbert should get quicker, and Hibbert did, and that was to the good.

No. Roy dropped the weight for the 2010-2011 season. He added weight for this past season, 2011-2012.

After inconsistent play under previous coach Jim O'Brien, for whom Hibbert lost weight in an attempt to play more up-tempo, he has thrived under first-year coach Frank Vogel. Hibbert gained weight and strength in the offseason, and Vogel designs his offensive and defensive sets to keep Hibbert near the basket. And even though Hibbert has lamented his lack of perimeter development, West says, "Roy embraces his size. Too many big guys want to be guards. He knows who he is."

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7881895/how-indiana-pacers-all-star-center-roy-hibbert-avoided-becoming-stiff

BillS
06-19-2012, 01:12 PM
No. Roy dropped the weight for the 2010-2011 season. He added weight for this past season, 2011-2012.

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7881895/how-indiana-pacers-all-star-center-roy-hibbert-avoided-becoming-stiff

I think the thought process that could be implied from that story is a little unfair. The weight and muscle he gained back was not the same as the weight he lost. He had to lose what he did to be in a position to gain properly, and there is no evidence whatsoever that he would not have been encouraged to do that had the regime not changed.

PR07
06-19-2012, 01:24 PM
I'm just trying to figure out how you make a thread entitled "Validation for Jim O'Brien" and then not want it to turn into a Jim O'Brien gripe session on this forum?

But to answer the question straight out, no.

Believe it or not Jim O'Brien did not come up with the concept of floor spacing, drawing the big man from the basket and using a motion offense.

If you just want to take Miami vs. Us as an example I will still state that the type of ball didn't beat us, it was the quality of the players (two of them anyway) that beat us and it took superhuman games from them to get it done. Two lesser players and I don't care if they played small or not we would have won.

But better yet if the NBA wouldn't punish defenders for defending then this would not be a question either.

For this discussion, I'd probably take this one step further and eliminate Wade entirely. Sure, small ball is working great for Miami, but they also have LeBron James...a guy that could probably play any position 1-5 and be just fine. Not many teams have a guy like him, and there have been few athletes with his kind of skillset, well ever. His versatility allows for Miami to do pretty much whatever scheme it wants, and they'll still win a lot of games.

Since86
06-19-2012, 01:27 PM
He had to lose what he did to be in a position to gain properly,

Huh?

BillS
06-19-2012, 01:40 PM
He had to lose what he did to be in a position to gain properly.


Huh?

My understanding is that he needed to lose weight.

I believe it is easier to focus on one goal (lose weight and get quicker) and then make a new goal (build up muscle to be able to hold position with the new body structure) than it would have been to try to come up with a good combined goal and get there all at once. If he'd worked on the lower body at his full old weight he might have ended up still being slow.

I am not a trainer of any kind, but since I see many athletes take this kind of "one step per off season" approach it makes sense.

Unclebuck
06-19-2012, 01:54 PM
For those of you saying Roy should let it go, I won't say you are wrong. But I will counter with this.

Jim O'Brien is the only coach I have ever seen in any sport where is former players have had such hard feelings for them that they continue to say bad things about him openly and for years. If you think Roy is bad you should hear Chris Webber talk about him or Samuel Dalembert. Heck Grant Long used his position as an NBA analyst for the Grizzlies to tell the whole world how lousy of a coach Jim O'Brien was and how they did not get along. I've never heard that done before.

Obviously Jim is not the only coach who is a my way or the highway kind of guy, in fact the best ones usually have some aspect of that to them. But I don't think he has the winning pedigree to be the type of coach he is and force players to play out of their natural position.

Look at all of the above players and what do they have in common? They are all low post players. Jim has no place on offense for that type of player.

And I would counter that I could bring quote after quote from Jim's former Celtics players about how they respected and enjoyed playing for O'Brien. I don't know maybe the players just hated Pitino so much or maybe Jim changed his coaching style after he left - but he seemed to have been respected as the Celtics coach

Since86
06-19-2012, 02:02 PM
My understanding is that he needed to lose weight.

I believe it is easier to focus on one goal (lose weight and get quicker) and then make a new goal (build up muscle to be able to hold position with the new body structure) than it would have been to try to come up with a good combined goal and get there all at once. If he'd worked on the lower body at his full old weight he might have ended up still being slow.

I am not a trainer of any kind, but since I see many athletes take this kind of "one step per off season" approach it makes sense.

As someone who has went through this process as an athlete, and as a Exercise science student, I can assure that it's not right.

Peck
06-19-2012, 02:03 PM
And I would counter that I could bring quote after quote from Jim's former Celtics players about how they respected and enjoyed playing for O'Brien. I don't know maybe the players just hated Pitino so much or maybe Jim changed his coaching style after he left - but he seemed to have been respected as the Celtics coach

I'd like to read those, I've never seen them. I can get you links to the anti-O'Brien camp btw, the only time I think Gran Long played for O'Brien was in Boston (I could be wrong there).

vnzla81
06-19-2012, 02:08 PM
My understanding is that he needed to lose weight.

I believe it is easier to focus on one goal (lose weight and get quicker) and then make a new goal (build up muscle to be able to hold position with the new body structure) than it would have been to try to come up with a good combined goal and get there all at once. If he'd worked on the lower body at his full old weight he might have ended up still being slow.

I am not a trainer of any kind, but since I see many athletes take this kind of "one step per off season" approach it makes sense.

I don't think Jim told Roy to lose weight so he could get it back in muscle, I think Jim wanted to convert Roy into a center that could run up and down the court and shoot jumpers, in other words he wanted Roy to be a taller version of Troy Murphy.

Unclebuck
06-19-2012, 02:28 PM
I'd like to read those, I've never seen them. I can get you links to the anti-O'Brien camp btw, the only time I think Gran Long played for O'Brien was in Boston (I could be wrong there).


It was mainly Walker, Pierce, Kenny Anderson, I forget the name of their center back then, he was not a post up player, but he was complimentary

vnzla81
06-19-2012, 02:31 PM
It was mainly Walker, Pierce, Kenny Anderson, I forget the name of their center back then, he was not a post up player, but he was complimentary

I think you can ad to that list Murphy, Dunleavy, Posey, etc ;)

Edit: and don't forget Rasho NestSUCKovich.

PR07
06-19-2012, 02:34 PM
It was mainly Walker, Pierce, Kenny Anderson, I forget the name of their center back then, he was not a post up player, but he was complimentary

My guess is Tony Battie or Mark Blount.

Unclebuck
06-19-2012, 03:00 PM
Here are just a few


http://articles.boston.com/2004-05-22/sports/29200470_1_doc-rivers-paul-pierce-ainge<O:p></O:p>

Paul Pierce - “It was different with [O'Brien]. When he was with [Rick] Pitino, [O'Brien] commanded a lot of respect even though he wasn't the head coach. That's why it was easier for [O'Brien] to come in and turn everything around” .<O:p></O:p>
<O:p></O:p>

http://www.boston.com/sports/basketball/celtics/articles/2003/10/21/celtics_deal_walker_to_dallas/<O:p></O:p>

"We all know the business and respect the business. Obviously, I'll miss Coach O'Brien. We've grown close. Hopefully, we can continue to be close. It's very rare that you find a coach-player relationship like that. He had a lot of respect for my game and for my opinion of the game. I just want to thank all the fans and people who supported me over the seven years. They know who they are."<O:p></O:p>
<O:p></O:p>


http://www.cbc.ca/sports/story/2001/01/24/walker010124.html<O:p></O:p>

"I like (O'Brien) a lot," Walker said Wednesday. "I have a lot of respect for him ... He came in and I think he's done a great job." <O:p></O:p>


http://www.kezoki.com/forum/sports-nba-boston-celtics/12822/it-begins.html<O:p></O:p>

The Doc Rivers era begins in Boston against the Philadelphia 76ers. Those 76ers are led by former beloved coach, Jim O'Brien.<O:p></O:p></SPAN>
<O:p></O:p>

OlBlu
06-19-2012, 03:07 PM
Here are just a few


http://articles.boston.com/2004-05-22/sports/29200470_1_doc-rivers-paul-pierce-ainge<O:p></O:p>

Paul Pierce - “It was different with [O'Brien]. When he was with [Rick] Pitino, [O'Brien] commanded a lot of respect even though he wasn't the head coach. That's why it was easier for [O'Brien] to come in and turn everything around” .<O:p></O:p>
<O:p></O:p>

http://www.boston.com/sports/basketball/celtics/articles/2003/10/21/celtics_deal_walker_to_dallas/<O:p></O:p>

"We all know the business and respect the business. Obviously, I'll miss Coach O'Brien. We've grown close. Hopefully, we can continue to be close. It's very rare that you find a coach-player relationship like that. He had a lot of respect for my game and for my opinion of the game. I just want to thank all the fans and people who supported me over the seven years. They know who they are."<O:p></O:p>
<O:p></O:p>


http://www.cbc.ca/sports/story/2001/01/24/walker010124.html<O:p></O:p>

"I like (O'Brien) a lot," Walker said Wednesday. "I have a lot of respect for him ... He came in and I think he's done a great job." <O:p></O:p>


http://www.kezoki.com/forum/sports-nba-boston-celtics/12822/it-begins.html<O:p></O:p>

The Doc Rivers era begins in Boston against the Philadelphia 76ers. Those 76ers are led by former beloved coach, Jim O'Brien.<O:p></O:p></SPAN>
<O:p></O:p>

There is no question that JOB was a good coach. He was given a job when he came here and that was to weed out the bad eggs, install some discipline on the players who remained and rebuild the team on the fly while winning enough games to keep the fans interested. He did exactly that. He was also brought in to change the Pacers into a running team. He did that too and once the dead weights (Murphy, Dunleavy, McRoberts, Tinsley and Posey) were gone, they did develop into a winner. Like I said earlier, he deserves a big thank you for bringing this team along. The coach doing the rebuilding rarely stays around to enjoy the fruits of his labor and so it is with JOB. Has Larry Bird ever said anything negative about JOB other than it was time for a new voice? I think JOB did exactly what Bird wanted him to do with the team..........:cool:

BillS
06-19-2012, 03:17 PM
As someone who has went through this process as an athlete, and as a Exercise science student, I can assure that it's not right.

I'll accept that as a knowledgeable correction. Without studying myself I would not be able to figure out how high a percentage of success trainers would have in predicting how weight loss would affect Roy's body and correct for it at the same time over a single off season. We've seen an awful lot of instances, though, where the corrections had to be re-corrected.


I don't think Jim told Roy to lose weight so he could get it back in muscle, I think Jim wanted to convert Roy into a center that could run up and down the court and shoot jumpers, in other words he wanted Roy to be a taller version of Troy Murphy.

Without getting into JOB's head and trying to argue his particular intent, I think it is safe to say that most everyone here felt like Roy had to lose weight and that he was a better player after he did (look at the difference in fouls if nothing else). If we're going to say that it was the right decision but that since it was JOB who suggested it for his own nefarious reasons that somehow makes it the wrong decision, we're getting into fairly silly ground.

Since86
06-19-2012, 03:34 PM
We've seen an awful lot of instances, though, where the corrections had to be re-corrected.

JO gaining weight in his upper body is the example that pops into mind for me. But I don't really think that's a correction in the way he trained, as opposed to the goal he trained for.

But eating correctly, and training correctly would acheive both fat loss goals, and adding muscle mass/strength both at the same time.

Sandman21
06-19-2012, 03:51 PM
And I would counter that I could bring quote after quote from Jim's former Celtics players about how they respected and enjoyed playing for O'Brien. I don't know maybe the players just hated Pitino so much or maybe Jim changed his coaching style after he left - but he seemed to have been respected as the Celtics coach

It would be pretty hard to blast the guy at the ONE place his entire coaching style worked at....

flox
06-19-2012, 04:14 PM
Look, Jim O'Brien did the best he did with the players he was given.

The organization did not support Jim O'Brien at all by giving him the players he needed for his system to succeed, in fact Bird went out and drafted Hansborough (no place in his system), signed Jones (doesn't fit), and basically gave him the wrong players.

Should O'Brien have changed his coaching style to fit his players? Hell no. As a coach you have a system and you believe in it and to stick to it. That's how great coaches are made.

Small ball and guards are basically the new wave of attack. With players getting bigger, stronger, and faster, you need more space in the NBA for players to operate. Unless you have an elite scorer who can score over defenders and double teams, you need proper court spacing in order to get great shots. Back when Jim was our coach, we really didn't have that and one of the biggest reasons that we can work so well now is because of the pick and pop game that we have with West that we really didn't have when Jim was our coach, so we had to go out further and space to the 3 point line. With West here and Hibbert could play back into the post without us giving Hansborough the post and letting Hibbert play out, or playing Hibbert in the post and having McRoberts stretch us.

If we had drafted Ty Lawson instead of Hansborough I 100% believe that Jim would still be our coach today. He could have ran the type of attack that Jim would have wanted.

Since86
06-19-2012, 04:19 PM
Look, Jim O'Brien did the best he did with the players he was given.

Frank Vogel took the exact same roster to the playoffs that Jim O'Brien said couldn't get there. To say that he did the "best" with what he was given is just ignoring reality and the statements of the man you're defending.


And I'll go to my deathbed thinking that Jim was fired because of him saying that he didn't think they could make the playoffs. That was unexcuseable.

Hicks
06-19-2012, 04:24 PM
For those of you saying Roy should let it go, I won't say you are wrong. But I will counter with this.

Jim O'Brien is the only coach I have ever seen in any sport where is former players have had such hard feelings for them that they continue to say bad things about him openly and for years. If you think Roy is bad you should hear Chris Webber talk about him or Samuel Dalembert. Heck Grant Long used his position as an NBA analyst for the Grizzlies to tell the whole world how lousy of a coach Jim O'Brien was and how they did not get along. I've never heard that done before.

Obviously Jim is not the only coach who is a my way or the highway kind of guy, in fact the best ones usually have some aspect of that to them. But I don't think he has the winning pedigree to be the type of coach he is and force players to play out of their natural position.

Look at all of the above players and what do they have in common? They are all low post players. Jim has no place on offense for that type of player.

I was with you until the last paragraph; I actually recall hearing Webber say that when he went to Philly JOB was talking to him about playing in the low post, but Chris said he didn't do that anymore (for physical reasons) and played on the high post, and that was an immediate point of contention between the two.

O'Brien wants one pivot with four perimeter players. I think he wanted Chris to be his pivot.

Hicks
06-19-2012, 04:25 PM
I think the thought process that could be implied from that story is a little unfair. The weight and muscle he gained back was not the same as the weight he lost. He had to lose what he did to be in a position to gain properly, and there is no evidence whatsoever that he would not have been encouraged to do that had the regime not changed.

Yeah, he lost fat and then gained muscle.

Hicks
06-19-2012, 04:26 PM
I don't think Jim told Roy to lose weight so he could get it back in muscle, I think Jim wanted to convert Roy into a center that could run up and down the court and shoot jumpers, in other words he wanted Roy to be a taller version of Troy Murphy.

I think this is pretty much true. In theory it could have worked (at least in the half court) because Roy is a good passer, played the high post in college, and can hit the long 2. But his ability to score on the low block is more exceptional to have on a roster these days, and that's where he's valued even more, obviously, by most people/coaches.

Hicks
06-19-2012, 04:28 PM
Here are just a few


http://articles.boston.com/2004-05-22/sports/29200470_1_doc-rivers-paul-pierce-ainge<O:p></O:p>

Paul Pierce - “It was different with [O'Brien]. When he was with [Rick] Pitino, [O'Brien] commanded a lot of respect even though he wasn't the head coach. That's why it was easier for [O'Brien] to come in and turn everything around” .<O:p></O:p>
<O:p></O:p>

http://www.boston.com/sports/basketball/celtics/articles/2003/10/21/celtics_deal_walker_to_dallas/<O:p></O:p>

"We all know the business and respect the business. Obviously, I'll miss Coach O'Brien. We've grown close. Hopefully, we can continue to be close. It's very rare that you find a coach-player relationship like that. He had a lot of respect for my game and for my opinion of the game. I just want to thank all the fans and people who supported me over the seven years. They know who they are."<O:p></O:p>
<O:p></O:p>


http://www.cbc.ca/sports/story/2001/01/24/walker010124.html<O:p></O:p>

"I like (O'Brien) a lot," Walker said Wednesday. "I have a lot of respect for him ... He came in and I think he's done a great job." <O:p></O:p>


http://www.kezoki.com/forum/sports-nba-boston-celtics/12822/it-begins.html<O:p></O:p>

The Doc Rivers era begins in Boston against the Philadelphia 76ers. Those 76ers are led by former beloved coach, Jim O'Brien.<O:p></O:p></SPAN>
<O:p></O:p>

It should be noted, however, that Pierce and Walker were both eager and willing to shoot a ton of 3's, which fit O'Brien like a glove.

Hicks
06-19-2012, 04:33 PM
Should O'Brien have changed his coaching style to fit his players? Hell no. As a coach you have a system and you believe in it and to stick to it. That's how great coaches are made.

That's a BIG point of contention with a lot of coaches. Many coaches believe the exact opposite. I tend to be in that opposing camp (if you have a bunch of grapes, quit trying to make lemonade because it ain't gonna happen; time to be thirsty for some grapejuice or some wine).


Small ball and guards are basically the new wave of attack. With players getting bigger, stronger, and faster, you need more space in the NBA for players to operate. Unless you have an elite scorer who can score over defenders and double teams, you need proper court spacing in order to get great shots.

This is what I'm coming to believe more and more.


Back when Jim was our coach, we really didn't have that and one of the biggest reasons that we can work so well now is because of the pick and pop game that we have with West that we really didn't have when Jim was our coach, so we had to go out further and space to the 3 point line.

I suspect O'Brien would have encouraged West to keep working on his 3 point shot (which he already has in limited amount) and tried to use him more like Antoine Walker. I think we would have used him more often at center, with four perimeter players, as well.

Sandman21
06-19-2012, 04:59 PM
And I'll go to my deathbed thinking that Jim was fired because of him saying that he didn't think they could make the playoffs. That was unexcuseable.

I said it about two or three weeks before O'Brien was let go. He had QUIT on his own team. And it was pretty clear to me even before his final game when he refused to put the hot-shooting McBob in over Posey.

Look at EVERY time he tried to put Posey up against an athletic 4 who proceeded to eat Posey for lunch....

spazzxb
06-19-2012, 05:12 PM
It's different to go small with Durant/Lebron at the power forward position than going small with Murphy/Dunleavy/Posey, etc.

Yes small works sometimes but it shouldn't be the main lineup for any team, OKC going small with at 6'4" point guard and a 6'11" power forward in Durant is not going small in my opinion, JOB going small with Ford,Head, Dunleavy,Danny,Murphy is a horrible way to go small.

So you admit that part of the problem was our players weren't that good. Never forget the hardcore job haters thought mcroberts was the answer. While not a great coach, JOB was the scapegoat, for all the teams problems. Murphy was our best option, unfortunately, and Granger was the Small 4. Murphy is a soft 4, not small

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

Peck
06-19-2012, 05:17 PM
I was with you until the last paragraph; I actually recall hearing Webber say that when he went to Philly JOB was talking to him about playing in the low post, but Chris said he didn't do that anymore (for physical reasons) and played on the high post, and that was an immediate point of contention between the two.

O'Brien wants one pivot with four perimeter players. I think he wanted Chris to be his pivot.

I don't have time right now but I will pull up the philly article where Webber calls O'Brien a liar for that, saying he never once said that.

On another note let's not forget that the man was fired from Philly after a successful season because his players hated him so much.

But one thing that did slip my mind and I want to remind everyone of, have you ever heard of a long time assistant coach criticize a head coach before? Well if you were around here & heard Lester Conner you did.

flox
06-19-2012, 06:55 PM
Frank Vogel took the exact same roster to the playoffs that Jim O'Brien said couldn't get there. To say that he did the "best" with what he was given is just ignoring reality and the statements of the man you're defending.


Just because he said that they couldn't doesn't mean that they would not have. Lets not also forgot the SoS that Vogel had in the closing stretch of that season, it was one of the most cupcake stretches I have ever seen in a schedule. And those players that we had? I seemed to have forgotten how many playoff games they ended up winning. 37-45 as a playoff team is laughable and in most years should not have been a playoff team and what did Vogel do in that cupcake schedule? 20-18 is hardly a sign of a playoff team, and extrapolated for this season would have not made the playoffs this year.


That's a BIG point of contention with a lot of coaches. Many coaches believe the exact opposite. I tend to be in that opposing camp (if you have a bunch of grapes, quit trying to make lemonade because it ain't gonna happen; time to be thirsty for some grapejuice or some wine).
I think it's the coaches job to the players to listen and believe in the system. If you don't have a system that you believe in in place then you are screwed. I think the difference is that players need to be managed better. I don't think Jimmy was a good player manager over here in last season but that doesn't excuse the players for not follow the system.




I suspect O'Brien would have encouraged West to keep working on his 3 point shot (which he already has in limited amount) and tried to use him more like Antoine Walker. I think we would have used him more often at center, with four perimeter players, as well.
Agreed except I don't think he would have tried to use him as Walker because part of what made him somewhat dangerous was his willingness to take any shot. I think West would have had much better shot selection, which would have limited his "walker" role. But like walker, I agree.

BlueNGold
06-19-2012, 11:15 PM
Yes it did. The Finals series turned when Carlisle put JJ Barea into the starting lineup, and all of their best lineups had three guards and Dirk in them. And Dirk, for all of his greatness, wasn't exactly swatting shots left and right either. Chandler is almost a prototypical small-ball center because his athleticism and smarts are what allow him to play center, not just his size. He's barely bigger than Dirk, and 20 years ago he'd have been a forward.

Wow. When is a front court with a 7 foot PF and a 7'1" C small? ...and you are saying JJ Barea is why the Dallas Mavericks won the NBA championship? Sure he put up numbers just like Battier is doing...but he's not why the Mavs won. If it wasn't for Chandler it would have been a dunk fest.

Unclebuck
06-20-2012, 08:13 AM
Wow. When is a front court with a 7 foot PF and a 7'1" C small? ...and you are saying JJ Barea is why the Dallas Mavericks won the NBA championship? Sure he put up numbers just like Battier is doing...but he's not why the Mavs won. If it wasn't for Chandler it would have been a dunk fest.

Going small just isn't the center and power forward. it can be the shooting guard it can be the small forward. Plus Dirk plays small he isn't a power forward in the classic sense at all. When Kidd is basically your small forward (or put another when he is your third smallest or third biggest player on the court) - that is going small.

Since86
06-20-2012, 09:34 AM
Just because he said that they couldn't doesn't mean that they would not have. Lets not also forgot the SoS that Vogel had in the closing stretch of that season, it was one of the most cupcake stretches I have ever seen in a schedule. And those players that we had? I seemed to have forgotten how many playoff games they ended up winning. 37-45 as a playoff team is laughable and in most years should not have been a playoff team and what did Vogel do in that cupcake schedule? 20-18 is hardly a sign of a playoff team, and extrapolated for this season would have not made the playoffs this year.



So you don't think Jim knew their schedule to close out the season when he was making those remarks? If he didn't then he's not only a bad basketball coach, he's stupid to boot.

Sandman21
06-20-2012, 10:18 AM
Just because he said that they couldn't doesn't mean that they would not have. Lets not also forgot the SoS that Vogel had in the closing stretch of that season, it was one of the most cupcake stretches I have ever seen in a schedule. And those players that we had? I seemed to have forgotten how many playoff games they ended up winning. 37-45 as a playoff team is laughable and in most years should not have been a playoff team and what did Vogel do in that cupcake schedule? 20-18 is hardly a sign of a playoff team, and extrapolated for this season would have not made the playoffs this year.
And how many games from the half season that Coach Quitter coached did we lose because of his poor coaching decisions late in the game? (San Antonio, OKC, Milwaukee, and Houston, all at home last year come to mind).

How many games did Vogel win that JOB probably wouldn't have? (@Cleveland for Frank's first game that O'Brien would have probably lost, at home against I believe Minnesota when Dahntay got hot in the 4th quarter for prime examples)

Unclebuck
06-20-2012, 10:27 AM
Can't believe we are discussing this again. Jim had lost the team, he knew that, so it didn't matter in 2011 what the schedule was like the rest of the season the pacers weren't going to win many games the rest of the way. That is why Bird made the coaching change.

FlavaDave
06-20-2012, 10:39 AM
The key to going small is having a smaller guy that can defend a bigger guy. Battier was able to handle D West. Shawn Marion could handle bigger guys when Pheonix/Dallas went small. Thabo & Durant can slide down a position defensively.

The problem with JOB small ball was that Murphy and Posey were utterly incable
of defending bigger people (or even people of their own size, honestly).

Small ball isn't a losing strategy inherently. If anyone thought that, it has been disproven. But you have to have the right players. In the case of small ball, you need a guy that can defend a bigger position. JOB didn't have it. It was a mistake, and he hasn't been vindicated.

neosmndrew
06-20-2012, 06:14 PM
I've never been super against small line-ups or the JOB philosophy. Our players just didn't understand that they needed to play defense, and JOB was under the assumption that they couldn't play defense so he just let it go, which obviously led to problems.

Our problem against Miami was that Joel Anthony was planning out of his mind against Roy and Lebron seemed to find himself defensively in the series, which I think is something that doesn't get a lot of attention. He still can't really defend a KD type player, but who can?

Small ball worked for us in my opinion -- we were just a low-talent team that wasn't really getting along. Now that era is over.

spreedom
06-20-2012, 11:22 PM
Wow. When is a front court with a 7 foot PF and a 7'1" C small? ...and you are saying JJ Barea is why the Dallas Mavericks won the NBA championship? Sure he put up numbers just like Battier is doing...but he's not why the Mavs won. If it wasn't for Chandler it would have been a dunk fest.

<!--[if !mso]> <style> v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} .shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);} </style> <![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves/> <w:TrackFormatting/> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:DoNotPromoteQF/> <w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w:DontGrowAutofit/> <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/> <w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/> <w:DontFlipMirrorIndents/> <w:OverrideTableStyleHps/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> <m:mathPr> <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/> <m:brkBin m:val="before"/> <m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/> <m:smallFrac m:val="off"/> <m:dispDef/> <m:lMargin m:val="0"/> <m:rMargin m:val="0"/> <m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/> <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/> <m:intLim m:val="subSup"/> <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="true" DefSemiHidden="true" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99" LatentStyleCount="267"> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Normal"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 7"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 8"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 9"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" QFormat="true" Name="caption"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Title"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" Name="Default Paragraph Font"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Strong"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="59" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Table Grid"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Placeholder Text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Revision"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="List Paragraph"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Quote"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Quote"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Emphasis"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Emphasis"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Reference"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Reference"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" Name="Bibliography"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading"/> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";} </style> <![endif]-->I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion, but that isn't at all what I said.

Opposite of "Thanks".

Bball
06-21-2012, 05:44 AM
The beautiful thing about discussing Jim O'Brien these days is the knowledge of where he is right now- Fired from the Pacers and out of basketball.

CableKC
06-22-2012, 05:42 PM
This is why I try to stay out of anything that has JO'B in the title or at least try to stay on Topic ( in this case simply discuss whether "Small Ball" in general works or not and not bring JO'B into the discussion )....it always turns into a "JO'B Bash" thread.

So, to remain on topic...I maintain that having the most athletic and likely strongest, quickest freak of an Player like Lebron that pretty much is a super quick and athletic PF and having the best ComboGuard in the League makes Small Ball with the Heat possible. Take away LeWade and substitute GH and Granger into the Heat Lineup with Granger as PF with Bosh manning the middle and you would see a 2nd round Playoff Team. Few Teams have Players like LeWade in their lineup that draws so much attention on the defensive end.

PR07
06-22-2012, 06:03 PM
This is why I try to stay out of anything that has JO'B in the title or at least try to stay on Topic ( in this case simply discuss whether "Small Ball" in general works or not and not bring JO'B into the discussion )....it always turns into a "JO'B Bash" thread.

So, to remain on topic...I maintain that having the most athletic and likely strongest, quickest freak of an Player like Lebron that pretty much is a super quick and athletic PF and having the best ComboGuard in the League makes Small Ball with the Heat possible. Take away LeWade and substitute GH and Granger into the Heat Lineup with Granger as PF with Bosh manning the middle and you would see a 2nd round Playoff Team. Few Teams have Players like LeWade in their lineup that draws so much attention on the defensive end.

I agree with this, but I would probably just simplify it to LeBron and leave Wade out entirely. Having LeBron allows the Heat to go small, and there's nothing anyone can do about it at the present time.

Shade
06-22-2012, 06:07 PM
There will never be any validation for JOB.

Worst. Coach. Ever.

CableKC
06-22-2012, 06:21 PM
I agree with this, but I would probably just simplify it to LeBron and leave Wade out entirely. Having LeBron allows the Heat to go small, and there's nothing anyone can do about it at the present time.
Wade makes a difference as well.....the guy commands attention on the defensive end. The guy is more athletic, stronger and better than most Guards in the NBA while having a fairly good post game. You can't leave him open like you'd leave Udonis Haslem open. I agree that LeDecision is the main reason why it works....the guy pretty much is a PF....but having a Player like Wade means one less defender to try to contain LeDecision.

Naptown_Seth
06-22-2012, 07:12 PM
The major difference in JOb smallball and Miami/OKC smallball is that shooting threes was the primary option for Jim and a secondary option for Miami/OKC.
Exactly, and it wasn't subjective. You could objectively compare the amount of 3pt shots his rosters took compared to the norm.

His teams also stink at offensive rebounding and appear to stink at interior defense.


Going small to accomplish a "traditional" goal in a different way is not the same as what JOB was doing. Going small so you can get back in transition defense or defend a post entry pass, or because the other team doesn't have an offensive threat in the post, isn't the same as doing it simply to have more outside shooters on the court.

Miami crushed OKC because Ibaka and Perkins were ineffective, and not just in scoring but rebounding as well. Perkins had a groin tear which might explain part of it. But if Ibaka blocks 5-6 lane drives per game and then Perkins picks up the rebound from it to the tune of 16 a night over the smaller Heat players then OKC wins the series. OKC lost because they got beat at their own strength.

They let smaller players play more physically and more vertical than them, period. Not because those players were smaller.

Naptown_Seth
06-22-2012, 07:18 PM
Let's see, if I had to trust the opinion about another human being which person would I put more faith in to give me that opinion:
Antoine Walker or Roy Hibbert?

Of course Walker was a 3ball addict and JOB was his complete enabler whereas Roy was JOB's whipping boy.
"Your honor, my heroin dealer is the paradigm of integrity and an all-around great guy, I consider him family."


The topic is JOB's small ball theory though, not whether a guy he virtually "paid off" with playing time and style liked him for it or not.