PDA

View Full Version : Odd Thoughts: Home opener vs. the Kings



Peck
11-04-2012, 02:24 AM
If you’re a glass full kind of person you can hang your hat on the fact that had we made just two of the free throws we missed in Charlotte we could be 3-0. You could even make the point that you are still 2-1 with your best player out with injury and your starting point guard injured while you are trying to integrate several new players into your system.

If you’re a glass half empty person you will say that if it weren’t for a heroic effort by David West to lead a come from behind win you could easily be 1-2 with the one win being a double over time win vs. an 0-3 team. You could further state that the it wouldn’t matter how many people you were trying to work into the system because our offensive system is non functioning and is just a differing isolation play each time down the court.

You would be right either way and thus we have the state of the Pacers 3 games into the season.

I’m not going to lie, I see this as troubling. We have played some less than stellar teams so far & unless some miracle happens on Monday I fully expect a beat down of biblical proportions from the Spurs. In fact if we lose and lose less than double digits I will probably consider it a victory.

Our offense is just a mess right now. There is no other way to say it, it is horrible & we are relying on one on one greatness to get us over the hump. Or at best we are trying to run a two man pick & roll game which other teams have scouted and are denying. Also it doesn’t help that we don’t really have any great one on one players out there either.

I don’t want to belay the obvious but we miss Danny Granger far more than I ever dreamed we would. I mean he makes us a totally other team or at least he makes the starting five a different team.

Can’t say that I’m thrilled with Frank so far this year. I want him to do well so bad that I am really going out of my way to not be overly critical but his offensive system is just abysmal so far.

Also I know they are new and all but are Sam Young & Gerald Green the two single dumbest passers you’ve ever seen? I mean between Green throwing it between the players legs and Young thinking that an opponents arm & hand being in the way is no reason not to pass into an area we have been treated to some of the dumbest passes I’ve ever seen. EVER!

Ok Paul George had a very good statistical game & yes he played superb defense to close out the game. But am I the only person who wonders if maybe he would play just a little better every now and then if he got angry? I mean in all of the games he’s played I’ve never seen him get upset about anything and I think it would do him a world of good to every now and then get offended by a hard foul or something. I mean Danny enters a game ready to fight, David West looks like someone spit on him every single min. he is on the floor even Roy on occasion gets fed up & gets emotional in a game. There just never appears to be any real fire there, maybe it’s just me. I mean I love the fact that he is rebounding at a very high level but I guess I just thought with Danny out he would somehow get his points up to the mid 20’s, maybe that’s just not his game and it may never be.

Mahinmi played a total of 09:53 in a double overtime game. Not sure what I should think about that.

Even more puzzling to me was that Gerald Green played a total of 24:18 in double over time when he appeared to be finally getting over the hump? He was taken out for Lance and never came back. This is kind of puzzling.

Before I move on let me just say that Marcus Thornton is a far more sedate human being than I would be. If it were me & I hit that big three pointer in the corner with a man running at me to send the game into a second over time I'm afraid I would have have to tell everyone in the arena about it and do some form of dance at the mid court circle. Dude just ran off like it was nothing, he blew a real chance to self promote there and who would have blamed him.

Anyway let’s just do grades tonight and move on.

Gerald Green: C+

He finally scored from the field after he decided to quit settling for the jumper and driving the baseline. But defensively he was having trouble & was getting into foul trouble. He did cut down on the dumb turnovers tonight. Not really sure why he was relegated to the bench for good in the beginning of the 4th quarter but I have a feeling Frank was testing the water to see how Lance fit in with the starters. Honestly I can’t say he was any better or any worse than Gerald but I think Gerald does not fit real well with the starting five. Not sure if Frank will make the switch but I wouldn’t be surprised either.

David West: A

Atrocious from the field for most of the night but once again when it counted he hit some big shots. But the most important thing he did all night long was block a three point shot attempt by Marcus Thornton sometime in the 2nd overtime. Also he took over the glass, which he should do on far more occasions than he does (no I don’t expect 18 every game but 10 would be nice). Very decent game from him.

Roy Hibbert: B+

Frank has got to figure out a way to get Roy some more shots. Dude was 6-11 from the field and whenever he put a move on Cousins it was more often than not a success. Also 6 blocked shots is huge but I don’t think he played as well defensively as he could have against Cousins.

Paul George: A

Again I am going to give him an A for the actual game he played but once again he has yet to show that he can impose his will on a game on the offensive end. In fact he played the entire 1st quarter without scoring a point. But I don’t want to be unfair either. Anytime you grab 17 rebounds and your team wins you have done a good job. Also he did play killer defense to close out several Kings breaks in the over time periods. BTW I’m not trying to be unfair to Paul, I just think that we are looking for him to show us he is the next alpha male not just another good/great player on a very good team.

George Hill: A-

I can’t fault him for our lack of offensive cohesion because he is running the plays Frank is calling from the sidelines. He played much better tonight than he did vs. the Bobcats and while he may have gone over board with the shooting attempts in the O.T. periods what I like about him is that he has the mind of a killer, if not the talent of one. He is not afraid of big moments and frankly I can’t say that about all of our players. He didn’t let Isiah Thomas abuse him with speed like I was afraid he would either.

Sam Young: F

Just horrible all night long. Bad shot selection, stupid idiotic passing and defense that was some combination of tae kwon do and convulsions. Honest to God he passed the ball inbounds directly to a King player and acted surprised when he didn’t pass it along to the Pacer he intended to pass to. I want to like Sam but nights like this make it very hard.

Tyler Hansbrough: B

Why is it that Tyler is the one player this season who has not disappointed me? I think it’s because I had such low expectations of him that if he comes into the game and doesn’t proceed to throw his own defecation at his team mates I am happy with him. However not only has he not done that he’s been surprisingly active on defense and rebounding this year. His offense is about the same but God love him for making his free throws.

D.J. Augustin: C-

Meh, I’m not sure what to say about him. I guess at least he isn’t A.J. Price (sorry Sookie) but I’m not sure what else to say. He only merits 13:21 in a double over time game? Makes me think that Frank doesn’t have a lot of faith yet.

Ian Mahinmi: D

Ugh, this is not what I saw in pre-season at all. Frank obviously lost all faith in him tonight and went back to his security blanket of David West at the 5 for awhile. This is not good, not good at all because isn’t that what people wanted to eliminate from last year? At least he hit his free throws but that’s about all he did.

Lance Stephenson: B+

Watching Lance & Evans play against each other was fun to watch because he is the person I most closely associate Lance with body wise and even somewhat skill wise. I wonder if Lance isn’t being set up to move into a role with the front five? This really scares me because that might mean that Danny is out for a long time but if he is I’m not sure if I don’t think Lance wouldn’t be better with that unit where he can facilitate the offense and not be forced to try and be it with that second unit. He had a nasty habit of cherry picking on defense tonight creeping back to try and get a fast break when everyone else was still defending. It cost us a couple of rebounds probably but he did manage to get one break out of it.

Ok one more overall complaint I have before I go and this one comes from Diamond Dave who complained the entire game about this.

Our team sets faux screens & picks and other teams have this scouted and stop the action almost every time.

In other words Tyler or David will come out and set a pick and then immediately slip the pick to get into shooting position without ever making contact with the defender and thus never giving the ball handler the clear space he needs to make a play. We need to just go out & set a solid pick and then see if they can get into position after contact has been made.

Again I’m not going to complain to much several teams have lost to other teams that they weren’t expecting to so far this year. But we have to be very careful if we want to win the central because we have a very limited room for error because even though the Bulls lost tonight I don’t think they will fall to far and I still believe Rose will be back sooner than we think and if we don’t have a cushion between us I would be very afraid of what they will do once he is healthy.

Oh well off to the Alamo to face Tim Duncan and Davey Crockett


<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/QAVN_n0PljQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

cgg
11-04-2012, 03:28 AM
I'm just happy that Tyler doesn't slip on EVERY SINGLE pick anymore.

clownskull
11-04-2012, 03:28 AM
"In other words Tyler or David will come out and set a pick and then immediately slip the pick to get into shooting position without ever making contact with the defender and thus never giving the ball handler the clear space he needs to make a play. We need to just go out & set a solid pick and then see if they can get into position after contact has been made"
i know what you are talking about with those useless fake screens and picks. i don't like them and think they are a waste of time. if you go out and set a screen- then do it. otherwise there isn't much of a point.
thinking about augustin, i hope his shooting touch sharpens up or else he may make aj price look like a true sharpshooter.
he has been laying bricks and not much else.

Sandman21
11-04-2012, 03:36 AM
Someone superglue Danny's knee together and lets go.

McKeyFan
11-04-2012, 07:57 AM
He was taken out for Lance and never came back. This is kind of puzzling.
Not to me. We went on an 8-0 run when Lance was subbed in the 2nd quarter.

He has a +34 for the season. The closest to that is Hibbert at +17. Everyone else is around or below 0.

colts19
11-04-2012, 08:29 AM
I seem to be the only one that was amazed by Paul George last night. I thought he imposed his will rebounding and with his defense. I thought for a lot of the 2nd half and overtime, his defense was artest like.

Speed
11-04-2012, 09:53 AM
New big screen A++++++++++++++++++++++++

Ace E.Anderson
11-04-2012, 10:11 AM
I agree with most except for Roy. He held Cousins to 9-27 from the field! But I agree he needs more FGA. And West needs less.

Also it's funny that you said that about Paul. On his fadeaway J in the second OT, Thornton kept grabbing his jersey (leading to a no call of course) and sitting court side you could tell PG was annoyed. He simply made up his mind that he was gonna score, and score he did.

Sparhawk
11-04-2012, 10:16 AM
I don't understand how the Pacers can be the worst screen/pick setting team. So disappointing. The ball handler always has to dance his way out of a double team almost every time they try and set a pick. Good lord, how is it that hard??? Teams do it to us and look like geniuses cause we can't figure it out half the time. Can't they just watch the tape of other teams on how to set proper picks? F***!

xIndyFan
11-04-2012, 10:43 AM
Not to me. We went on an 8-0 run when Lance was subbed in the 2nd quarter.

He has a +34. The closest to that is Hibbert at +17. Everyone else is around or below 0.

yeah, me neither. Lance gives another good ball handler. Gerald had a nice game, but he is a turnover waiting to happen. Putting Lance in the game allows Hill to post Thomas and Brooks. And let Lance run the offense. Thought Lance did a nice job of game management when he ran the offense.

It may just be me, but right now it looks like Frank really only trusts 5 guys right now. and Lance is one of them.

vnzla81
11-04-2012, 10:53 AM
Also it doesnít help that we donít really have any great one on one players out there either.

How many times and years we have been saying the same thing? yep another year without a shot creator, Crawford and Mayo are looking good so far by the way.

vnzla81
11-04-2012, 10:55 AM
yeah, me neither. Lance gives another good ball handler. Gerald had a nice game, but he is a turnover waiting to happen. Putting Lance in the game allows Hill to post Thomas and Brooks. And let Lance run the offense. Thought Lance did a nice job of game management when he ran the offense.

It may just be me, but right now it looks like Frank really only trusts 5 guys right now. and Lance is one of them.

It looks to me like Vogel decided to go with Lance because he trust that he is not going to throw the ball away unlike Green.

beast23
11-04-2012, 10:57 AM
I totally agree with your point about picks.

However, a fake pick is an excellent play and usually successful, if used correctly. And that would be after setting 3-4 good, hard picks first. If used as one out of every 4-5 picks set, a false pick is very useful and takes the opponent by surprise.

But using a false pick on nearly every pick set is just plain lazy and bad basketball.

Ace E.Anderson
11-04-2012, 10:57 AM
How many times and years we have been saying the same thing? yep another year without a shot creator, Crawford and Mayo are looking good so far by the way.

Yeah no kidding. I bet had we known that Danny would be out for some time, we would've opened our wallets a little more and paid one of those guys in order to get more creativity in our offense

rel
11-04-2012, 11:45 AM
Vogel could make his life easier on his self by just printing your 'Thoughts' and taping it to everyone's locker...

Suaveness
11-04-2012, 11:59 AM
What I hate the most is that the team completely ignores Hibbert in the 4th. Even though he's the guy who you can rely on to score easy buckets, not fadeaway jumpers. Ugh.

imawhat
11-04-2012, 12:09 PM
I thought we picked up right where we left off last season at the beginning of training camp? So far, this is the worst we've looked to start a season in years.

I'm concerned about the offense. It's been bad for a long time. We were very predictable last season too.

Brinocerous
11-04-2012, 12:10 PM
Man, it's great to hear someone else disgusted with our Charmin style picks. Am I wrong for wanting to see one of our so-called smashmouth players parking a defender on his can with a pick just once? It's not like we don't have guys capable of setting some effective picks. I just don't get it.

kester99
11-04-2012, 12:16 PM
The offense is problematical at this point, for sure.

But, a couple of bright spots: We lead the East in Opp FG% and in Total and Off. Rebound %. I hope that indicates fundamental defensive strength that will stick with us and shore us up as we address the offense and wait for Danny's return.

imbtyler
11-04-2012, 01:00 PM
I'm still high on this team, and all the players involved. We're three games into the season, and missing our lead scorer. Gerald Green will benefit from being the first scoring option off the bench, instead of 5th scorer with the starters (as Paul experienced last year). Yeh, we shouldn't have had that much trouble beating the Kings last night, after having such a good lead at the half. But we're only going to get better.

As always, Peck, your Odd Thoughts on this game are awesome.


Ok Paul George had a very good statistical game & yes he played superb defense to close out the game. But am I the only person who wonders if maybe he would play just a little better every now and then if he got angry? I mean in all of the games he’s played I’ve never seen him get upset about anything and I think it would do him a world of good to every now and then get offended by a hard foul or something. I mean Danny enters a game ready to fight, David West looks like someone spit on him every single min. he is on the floor even Roy on occasion gets fed up & gets emotional in a game. There just never appears to be any real fire there, maybe it’s just me. I mean I love the fact that he is rebounding at a very high level but I guess I just thought with Danny out he would somehow get his points up to the mid 20’s, maybe that’s just not his game and it may never be.

This is all true. I've said it before, when Paul plays with a bit more confidence, swagger, and emotion, he really gets in the zone. But I wonder if he fears getting too emotional, at the risk of making bad plays, turnovers, etc. It would be nice if Paul could get someone to yell at before the game, a la David Benner. Maybe that can be Gentle Ben's bench role.

Justin Tyme
11-04-2012, 01:23 PM
Offensively the Pacers are lost. They are averaging 90 points in regulation games. Then only 15 extra points with 10 min of OT. This pathetic offense produced an anemiic 16 ASTS in 58 game minutes. Terrible, absolutely horrible.

Granger is out, but he's not the reason this team is so bad on offense. The reason is poor shot selection, relying on 3 pt shooting too much, and too little scoring in the paint. Better offensive plays from Vogel would be a definate improvement along with better execution by the players. Both Vogel and the players had training camp to work on the offense going into this season, so that can't be used as an excuse this season.

PGisthefuture
11-04-2012, 02:26 PM
Our offense is just a mess right now. I like Vogel and all, but he is once again confusing me with his tactics... Last year I felt like we would try to feed the ball into Hibbert, this year it feels like we are barely doing that. In fact I feel like Hibbert barely ever gets the ball. Our substitution methods are still weird as ever too. Vogel always seems to take guys out when they are doing good, why he does it beats me... He did it with Gerald and also with Lance if I remember correctly. Which brings me to another point. I mentioned it in the game thread... Lance should be starting. I am willing to give Gerald a little more of a chance with the starters, but I think he would benefit coming off the bench. Lance looked good with the starters and has looked pretty good so far all around.

As for Paul, I really do wish he would show more emotion. I think he is the type of person who doesn't want to get in anyone's way. He doesn't want to offend anyone on the team by trying to take over a game or whatever. I would love to see for him to just call for the ball and shoot it without hesitation. I get so flustered when he is wide open and does a little shot fake and passes it or drives and misses a contested layup or short-range jumper. If he is open, he should shoot it, simple as that. I have seen him take offense to a hard foul before, but he doesn't really do anything about it. I don't know if Paul will ever develop this into his game.

gummy
11-04-2012, 04:07 PM
I totally agree with your point about picks.

However, a fake pick is an excellent play and usually successful, if used correctly. And that would be after setting 3-4 good, hard picks first. If used as one out of every 4-5 picks set, a false pick is very useful and takes the opponent by surprise.

But using a false pick on nearly every pick set is just plain lazy and bad basketball.

Yep. And I don't think the coaching staff wants them to set those fake picks that often. They did drills in camp where the players were getting smacked with big pads to let them get a sense of what a good pick feels like. Vogel talked about wanting the bigs to set good, hard screens. Tyler did in the first two games, and then...

It puzzles me with Tyler in particular. I know he's anxious to get into potential shooting position. But this guy loves contact, I'd expect him to really take to setting hard screens. :shrug: It was disappointing to see him go back to the fake screen last night.

Derek2k3
11-04-2012, 04:27 PM
Regarding Lance's PT:

I think Frank is rewarding a guy that the organization has worked with for several years. Lance's jumper/decision making is greatly improved, and Frank is rewarding him with PT. The chemistry with Lance/PG/Hill/Hibs/West is so much better than with Green.

It's clear to me this team is still finding it's way, the offense is non-existent. It's crazy that Roy can dominate like he did and rarely get a play run for him.

For all the complaints about GH3, he really asserted himself in the OT's. When everyone is shying away from the ball, he makes things happen. When he gets to 100% the offense will really improve, IMO.


EDIT: Big shoutout to Tyler, by the way. For a guy that was absolutely terrible last season, he's actually looked to make some passes/go inside. He isn't as reliant on the jumper, his defense has improved, and he's rebounding.

Unclebuck
11-04-2012, 07:47 PM
My guess as to why Green played as little as he did even though his stats were pretty good is this. I watched him very closely last night and he makes more mistakes consistently than any Pacers player that I can remember. I hate to make a knee- jerk judgement, but his bb IQ and overall feel for the game is really poor. He doesn't know how play.

He is a great athlete, and a pretty good shooter, but his passing is horrible, his team defense is really bad.

Lance makes a lot of mistakes, and his ball IQ isn't so good either, but his feel for the game is much, much better than Green's



and let me also say that Hayes is a great defender. He defended West as well one on one that I have seen. JVG always said that Hayes was one of the best defenders in the NBA and now I agree

Ace E.Anderson
11-04-2012, 08:51 PM
Really doesn't matter but impresses me nonetheless.

Paul is currently averaging 14pts, 13 rebs, and 5 assists/game!

If he gets to the FT line just 2 more times a half, he's not too far from some crazy season averages such as 16pts, 8 rebs, 5 assists. Those are some GOOD numbers. And the fact that we think he's just playing okay, kinda tells you that he could easily meet those numbers at some point--THIS YEAR.

Ace E.Anderson
11-04-2012, 08:52 PM
Really doesn't matter but impresses me nonetheless.

Paul is currently averaging 14pts, 13 rebs, and 5 assists/game!

If he gets to the FT line just 2 more times a half, he's not too far from some crazy season averages such as 16pts, 8 rebs, 5 assists. Those are some GOOD numbers. And the fact that we think he's just playing okay, kinda tells you that he could easily meet those numbers at some point--THIS YEAR.

Forgot to mention his 1blk, and 2 steals that he brings as well!

imawhat
11-04-2012, 08:58 PM
Also I know they are new and all but are Sam Young & Gerald Green the two single dumbest passers you’ve ever seen?

No. Solomon Jones was the worst, and it's possible that Lou was worse than Sam and Gerald, but they're the worst wing passers so far.

Sparhawk
11-04-2012, 09:09 PM
The bright side, once the light switches on for the team and they start clicking on offense while keeping that defensive mentality, I think only the Heat can beat them.

We can only hope that they get there.

Naptown_Seth
11-04-2012, 09:45 PM
Hmm, I must be some kind of glass overflowing type of guy because I think the team looks great. I honestly do.

First off, so far we've seen teams AGGRESSIVELY TRIPLE TEAM Hibbert, and even West. I mean as in full on jailbreak caution to the wind attacking. It's partially worked on pure audacity, just the balls to even try it catching the Pacers off-guard from what they normally might encounter.

They also have faced 2 teams with noteworthy physical and capable bigs. Cousins might very well be a top 3 center in the NBA and this was discussed with a fair amount of agreement at the last PD party. Charlotte just stuffed the lane with a zone about 60% of the game which is nuts for most NBA teams.

So you have a team built on feeding David and Roy and then working off that, and teams are flat out saying "no, we refuse to lose that way even if it means shooters will be wide open". Some of this might be the lack of Granger giving these teams the confidence to bail on the perimeter, some of it might just be the pure fear Roy and West put into them on offense. Either way it's clear the Pacers will have to make the open outside shots they are getting.

And the other thing they must do, something we saw with the Bobcats at times, is to regroup on the playbook and counter-attack the low block aggressiveness these teams have shown. If 2 guys are going to leave to go after Roy, then those other 2 players need to set up the rotation with their own back picks. This will get Roy his outlet pass and get the ball rotation to the weakside going again. We saw a couple of dunks on the weakside baseline doing just this.

The problem appears to be that they just have playbook set to deal with standard doubles to the post, and with the style of defense they've seen in each game they haven't been able to fully grasp how to overcome it.


Also it's obvious that these 3 opponents were playing overly physical and somewhat out of control, which has played perfectly into the hands of Tyler and Lance. This is what you want, balance and variety that allow you to compete every night no matter what. Ian has suffered the most due to his bizarre inability to draw any fouls no matter the extreme level of contact/"defense" played on him.



The reason I love where the team is at is because they've shown that their length, physicality and athleticism on defense can really blow up what the opponent is trying to do. The total lack of scoring by the Kings late was specifically due to this, to the level of hard play the entire game that wore them down (and the Pacers a bit too). This team is defending the paint and rim at a much higher level than last year and it doesn't appear to be just luck or low competition.



Green is fine, Young is fine. They have both made more positive plays than negative and have shown terrific effort from end to end. I don't see anyone drifting, getting lazy, etc. What I see is just offensive confusion due to some unexpected defensive looks that caught them off guard. As they learn how to work together to deal with these looks, as they develop that offensive chemistry a bit more, these things will disappear and you'll see the full power of the outstanding mix of talent IMO.

It's clear that both Roy and West can score in the post, that Paul has a greatly improved offensive game and that Green and Hill can physically attack off the dribble and hit enough shots to keep teams honest. All they do is adjust the plays to more effectively punish the "no low block at all costs" defenses and it's going to be game over for most teams.

Scoring on this group of Pacers is going to require some outstanding long jumper shooting and a lot of long rebounds.


Ian will start getting calls, Green already started looking more settled into the offense last night, Lance has his confidence up as does Tyler and both seem to have a better sense of how they can positively contribute.




But then again where would we be without a "first 5 games freakout", and no offense Peck but I'd definitely expect you to be dead center in the middle of one of those. ;)

Personally I'm blown away by the total improved physicality and athleticism of this team. I've yet to feel like "oh boy, that guy does not belong out there", even when guys have "struggled". All I've seen is some things not quite clicking and a bit of confusion, two things that can be fixed during the season and typically improve with playing time.

Naptown_Seth
11-04-2012, 10:08 PM
Frank has got to figure out a way to get Roy some more shots. Dude was 6-11 from the field and whenever he put a move on Cousins it was more often than not a success. Also 6 blocked shots is huge but I don’t think he played as well defensively as he could have against Cousins.
Holy...what in the world?!?

I'm wondering just how many times Cousins gets at least 2 of his shots at the rim stuffed back in his face and shoots 33%. Probably all the time apparently.

GET A FREAKING GRIP PECK, SERIOUSLY!

Cousins gets his a** handed to him and it's "I think Roy could have done better" when what you should have said is that it's the 2nd most missed shots of Cousins entire career (18, he missed 19 going 9-28 3/22 vs Utah last year and he had 18 boards that night).



Green scored 17 on 9 shots, but Lance's 10 points on 12 attempts with 1 assist (a pass on a transistion bucket) saved the day? Green had 2 TOs to 2 STL. So for all the bad decisions he was making he somehow didn't really throw the ball away or ruin the game. I'm not saying he was dialed in, I'm just saying that it's funny how one man's great game is another man's bad game.


If Thornton and Brooks don't go 7 of 17 from 3 then the Kings lose this game by 10. They literally shot better from 3 than they did from inside the arc. Paul went 2-7 from 3 and the rest of the team went 2-15 (and again, Green only took 2 of those himself). That's the only thing that kept this game close at all.

If DJ, or Green, or Young, or Hill, or Lance get going from 3 the team is going to flat out murder people. Just 35% would do it. DJ and Lance each make 1 more than they did and you win by 6-8 in regulation.

pacer4ever
11-04-2012, 10:14 PM
Holy...what in the world?!?

I'm wondering just how many times Cousins gets at least 2 of his shots at the rim stuffed back in his face and shoots 33%. Probably all the time apparently.

GET A FREAKING GRIP PECK, SERIOUSLY!

Cousins gets his a** handed to him and it's "I think Roy could have done better" when what you should have said is that it's the 2nd most missed shots of Cousins entire career (18, he missed 19 going 9-28 3/22 vs Utah last year and he had 18 boards that night).



Green scored 17 on 9 shots, but Lance's 10 points on 12 attempts with 1 assist (a pass on a transistion bucket) saved the day? Green had 2 TOs to 2 STL.


If Thornton and Brooks don't go 7 of 17 from 3 then the Kings lose this game by 10. They literally shot better from 3 than they did from inside the arc. Paul went 2-7 from 3 and the rest of the team went 2-15 (and again, Green only took 2 of those himself). That's the only thing that kept this game close at all.

If DJ, or Green, or Young, or Hill, or Lance get going from 3 the team is going to flat out murder people. Just 35% would do it. DJ and Lance each make 1 more than they did and you win by 6-8 in regulation.

In fairness to Lance I counted at least 3 shots that he missed that were basically assists. Where he drew 2-3 defenders and missed a short shot that left an easy cleanup for a wide open big. I don't count those misses as bad plays they were good shots. Westbrook has a ton of those most games(shots he probably know there is little chance to make but bigs should get the rebound) and im sure the coaching staff is happy when that kind of play happens.

Naptown_Seth
11-04-2012, 10:24 PM
I seem to be the only one that was amazed by Paul George last night. I thought he imposed his will rebounding and with his defense. I thought for a lot of the 2nd half and overtime, his defense was artest like.
I agree. He's the MVP so far for this team. Freaking everywhere and whatever is needed. He's trying to push his offensive moves a bit beyond what they really are, but I'm fine with him pushing his boundaries given how much general improvement he's shown in his offensive skills.

And a lot of those rebounds aren't chump change, he's in traffic using his length and hops to get stuff out of the reach of others.


BTW, we lost a lot of long rebounds and scrap plays due to LEAK OUT PLAYERS. Lance often, I think Paul and Green as well though I need to look at the tape. I assume this is 100% by design, but if you aren't getting possessions then the leak out doesn't have a benefit. They might want to dial that all-star breakout style down just a bit.



But, a couple of bright spots: We lead the East in Opp FG% and in Total and Off. Rebound %. I hope that indicates fundamental defensive strength that will stick with us and shore us up as we address the offense and wait for Danny's return.
Yep, physical and athletic. Defensive and rebounds wins titles, and yet here we are in a thread full of "oh no, we are doomed".

Does no one remember the game in Sacto last year? Here's the link to that rebounding insult where the Pacers let them pull down 30 of 65 possible offensive boards, a horrifying 46% rate allowed (NBA leaders last year were 32% Bulls for perspective). This year the Pacers only allowed the Kings to grab 26% of the possible offensive boards.
http://espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?gameId=320118023

Naptown_Seth
11-04-2012, 10:27 PM
In fairness to Lance I counted at least 3 shots that he missed that were basically assists. Where he drew 2-3 defenders and missed a short shot that left an easy cleanup for a wide open big. I don't count those misses as bad plays they were good shots. Westbrook has a ton of those most games(shots he probably know there is little chance to make but bigs should get the rebound) and im sure the coaching staff is happy when that kind of play happens.
I can concede that and I didn't think Lance was a big mess or anything. I just didn't think Green was ruining the game either. At one point Lance was in and what he was doing in combo with the other 4 was working, period. So you do that and knock out a big +/- number and help the team win.

But the idea that Green was just tossing around TOs when he only had 2 and shot a very nice rate, including the highlight rebound, drive and monster dunk is just wrong. The crowd literally gasped a 2nd time during the freaking replay of that dunk, and it was made off of a long baseline rebound where Green made an aggressive dribble drive to the rim, not just some token unchecked flying rebound dunk.

ECKrueger
11-04-2012, 10:44 PM
http://www.sbnation.com/chorus_images/2668631/standard/medium_709/1352082907

vnzla81
11-05-2012, 12:21 AM
I can concede that and I didn't think Lance was a big mess or anything. I just didn't think Green was ruining the game either. At one point Lance was in and what he was doing in combo with the other 4 was working, period. So you do that and knock out a big +/- number and help the team win.

But the idea that Green was just tossing around TOs when he only had 2 and shot a very nice rate, including the highlight rebound, drive and monster dunk is just wrong. The crowd literally gasped a 2nd time during the freaking replay of that dunk, and it was made off of a long baseline rebound where Green made an aggressive dribble drive to the rim, not just some token unchecked flying rebound dunk.

Yep Seth officially has a mancrush on Green, Green is officially the new Mcbob. :laugh:

vnzla81
11-05-2012, 12:26 AM
=Naptown_Seth;1521830]Holy...what in the world?!?

I'm wondering just how many times Cousins gets at least 2 of his shots at the rim stuffed back in his face and shoots 33%. Probably all the time apparently.

GET A FREAKING GRIP PECK, SERIOUSLY!

Cousins got stuffed like 3 times, the rest of the times was him shooting fadeway jumpers.


Cousins gets his a** handed to him and it's "I think Roy could have done better" when what you should have said is that it's the 2nd most missed shots of Cousins entire career (18, he missed 19 going 9-28 3/22 vs Utah last year and he had 18 boards that night).


Cousins missed a lot of shots because he was shooting a bunch of jumpers.



Green scored 17 on 9 shots, but Lance's 10 points on 12 attempts with 1 assist (a pass on a transistion bucket) saved the day? Green had 2 TOs to 2 STL. So for all the bad decisions he was making he somehow didn't really throw the ball away or ruin the game. I'm not saying he was dialed in, I'm just saying that it's funny how one man's great game is another man's bad game.

We get it Green is amazing.......


If Thornton and Brooks don't go 7 of 17 from 3 then the Kings lose this game by 10. They literally shot better from 3 than they did from inside the arc. Paul went 2-7 from 3 and the rest of the team went 2-15 (and again, Green only took 2 of those himself). That's the only thing that kept this game close at all.

If DJ, or Green, or Young, or Hill, or Lance get going from 3 the team is going to flat out murder people. Just 35% would do it. DJ and Lance each make 1 more than they did and you win by 6-8 in regulation.

Yep if Roy Hibbert makes a 3 pointer the Pacers win, yep I can play the IF game all day long......

Derek2k3
11-05-2012, 12:31 AM
To be fair, Lance was forced to jack up at least 3 shots to beat the SC. Guys were dribbling it down to 2/3 seconds then passing it to Lance.

Dece
11-05-2012, 12:47 AM
I wish I could feel all that optimism, Seth, but it's hard to find it credible when you say things like "young has been more positive than negative." Pick your battles for your optimism because when you say things that no one actually watching the game can buy you lose credibility. Dude was 1 for 5 with 4 turnovers in 11 minutes. He was a huge, monster, no other way to look at it, negative.

aamcguy
11-05-2012, 01:12 AM
Honestly, watching the game I had no idea our frontcourt was dominating the boards so much. I mean, there were a lot of missed shots, but I honestly don't remember West's rebounds. I did notice PG was consistently taking boards away from Kings. Especially when he did it to Cousins, there were several times I noted he just stole the ball from that massive human being high in the air.

vnzla81
11-05-2012, 01:21 AM
I wish I could feel all that optimism, Seth, but it's hard to find it credible when you say things like "young has been more positive than negative." Pick your battles for your optimism because when you say things that no one actually watching the game can buy you lose credibility. Dude was 1 for 5 with 4 turnovers in 11 minutes. He was a huge, monster, no other way to look at it, negative.

He loses credibility when he is telling us what an amazing job Roy did because of Cousins shooting percentage, not only that but he is also telling us that Cousins is the 3rd best center in the NBA, only a crazy person believes that.

Edit: I'm not saying that Roy didn't do well all I'm saying is that Cousins shooting percentage is low regardless he just takes stupid shots not matter who is guarding him.

cgg
11-05-2012, 01:27 AM
So Cousins shooting jumpers had nothing at all to do with Roy Hibbert's defense?

vnzla81
11-05-2012, 01:42 AM
So Cousins shooting jumpers had nothing at all to do with Roy Hibbert's defense?

That's not what I meant, he still took the dummest shots I have seen any player take and it wasn't because Hibbert was there, it was because Cousins is not that smart of a player.

cgg
11-05-2012, 01:47 AM
It's how he reacted to Hibbert being there because he is not a smart player. It's because of both.

Goyle
11-05-2012, 02:25 AM
That's not what I meant, he still took the dummest shots I have seen any player take and it wasn't because Hibbert was there, it was because Cousins is not that smart of a player.

Yeah, Hibbert played Cousins well, but how many times did Cousins catch it at the elbow and just shoot it after holding it for a few seconds? That was among the poorest shot selections I've ever seen, tbh.

Anthem
11-05-2012, 07:56 AM
Cousins got stuffed like 3 times, the rest of the times was him shooting fadeway jumpers.
Which is what guys do when their shot at the rim gets crushed a few times.

It's hard to get a lot of blocks in the NBA, because once you block a couple then people start trying to find ways to keep it away from you (usually lowering their percentage in the process).

McKeyFan
11-05-2012, 08:01 AM
Lance makes a lot of mistakes, and his ball IQ isn't so good either, but his feel for the game is much, much better than Green's


I know we go back and forth on what "bball IQ" means, but help me out here. Apparently you have different categories for being mistake-free, high bball IQ, and good "feel for the game." I would probably combine at least two of these three. I think Lance has a high Bball IQ but maybe I'm using a different definition.

Unclebuck
11-05-2012, 08:51 AM
I need to make a few comments about Sam Young. Look, I love hard nosed defensive players as much as anyone, in fact more than most, but he needs to make some serious adjustments to his game or I don't think he should be playing. Why does he think he is a capable shooter outside 10 feet? He's not at all. I don't have a problem with poor offensive players, but I have a real problem when poor offensive players seemingly don't realize they are poor offensive players. Maybe he needs to watch film of Jeff Foster

Eleazar
11-05-2012, 09:16 AM
Wow, Sam Young goes from playing well in game one, to making a great play in game two that unluckily also caused him to be injured and miss the rest of the game, then has a bad game. So now Young is suddenly a crap player. Short memories indeed.

cgg
11-05-2012, 09:18 AM
Wow, Sam Young goes from playing well in game one, to making a great play in game two that unluckily also caused him to be injured and miss the rest of the game, then has a bad game. So now Young is suddenly a crap player. Short memories indeed.

You are assuming that Unclebuck liked him in the first two games.

Eleazar
11-05-2012, 09:33 AM
You are assuming that Unclebuck liked him in the first two games.

That wasn't specific to Uncle Buck I have seen other similar comments.

cgg
11-05-2012, 09:46 AM
That wasn't specific to Uncle Buck I have seen other similar comments.

It takes a lot of tracking to see if it's really the same people making conflicting statements.

Unclebuck
11-05-2012, 09:50 AM
I know we go back and forth on what "bball IQ" means, but help me out here. Apparently you have different categories for being mistake-free, high bball IQ, and good "feel for the game." I would probably combine at least two of these three. I think Lance has a high Bball IQ but maybe I'm using a different definition.

I think there is a difference between BBall IQ and feel for the game. For example I thought Tinsley had a great feel for the game, but his Bball IQ was not very good. I suppose bball IQ is something that can be learned or practiced, while feel for the game you are born with. That is why I think they are different. Although often times they go hand in hand.

Lance right now IMO has a great feel for the game, but his IQ isn't very good, he needs a lot of experience.

Green IMO is bad in both areas.

Mistake free isn't something I make a big deal out of. It is probably part of both IQ and feel for the game. But some alltime high feel for the game type players - Mark Jackson, Jason Kidd were always high in turnovers, where as some other point guards who had no point guard skills were low in turnovers, but in those case they really didn't create anything for teammates

Unclebuck
11-05-2012, 09:52 AM
Wow, Sam Young goes from playing well in game one, to making a great play in game two that unluckily also caused him to be injured and miss the rest of the game, then has a bad game. So now Young is suddenly a crap player. Short memories indeed.

I've not been impressed with him overall. He seems to think he is a capable offensive player.

Speed
11-05-2012, 10:16 AM
We have played some less than stellar teams so far & unless some miracle happens on Monday I fully expect a beat down of biblical proportions from the Spurs. In fact if we lose and lose less than double digits I will probably consider it a victory.



Thanks for saving me the trouble of writing this. I almost dread watching it tonight.

picasso
11-05-2012, 10:42 AM
We are 2-1.. If we were a bad team we would be 0-3.
The Lakers are 1-3 The Celtics have struggle, Way too early.
Some of you like myself are extremely frustrated. But the 3 teams
we have played have been in full power, We are going thru an injury
to our best player. Danny means much more to this team then any
one of us could have imagined. Remember last year where we lost
without Granger? Yes I do too! Danny's 3 point shooting opens the paint
letting Hibbert and West do work. Teams now don't worry about our 3 point
shooting. While our offense has been bad, It can only get better. It's way too
early in the season and you get Wins any way you can. 2-1 >>>>1-2(0-3).
Our team is just beyond sloppy, Things should get cleaned up. No way we play
like this all season. Plus George Hill is going thru injuries, He's clearly not 100%.

As for Paul getting mad. It's the nature of the beast..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8x525Tk7KpI
Rage makes few sloppy and stupid. Paul plays under control,
and I have no Issue with that. Granger doesn't play mad. Granger
like Artest looks for ways to get turned up. He's looking for a fight,
Sometimes it works(Wolves) and sometimes it doesn't(Heat game).
But to say Granger plays mad all the time is a lie, Sometimes he looks
complaisant. I wish George would be more aggressive offensively. He's
just a huge mismatch, But again it's just way too early in the season.
His defense has been world class.

Paul George defensive rating thru 3 games is at 88..

To put that in perspective here are the top 26 in nba history..

1. Ben Wallace 87.48 2003-04 DET
2. Elvin Hayes* 87.60 1974-75 WSB
3. David Robinson* 87.94 1998-99 SAS
4. Bob Lanier* 87.99 1973-74 DET
5. Wes Unseld* 88.24 1974-75 WSB
6. Tim Duncan 88.50 2003-04 SAS
7. Elvin Hayes* 88.61 1973-74 CAP
8. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar* 88.76 1973-74 MIL
9. Clifford Ray 89.13 1973-74 CHI
10. Bill Walton* 89.50 1977-78 POR
11. George Johnson 89.81 1975-76 GSW
12. Bobby Jones 89.91 1976-77 DEN
13. Ben Wallace 89.99 2002-03 DET
14. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar* 90.01 1975-76 LAL
15. Marcus Camby 90.56 2000-01 NYK
16. Dave Cowens* 90.61 1973-74 BOS
17. Nate Thurmond* 90.66 1974-75 CHI
18. Dave Cowens* 90.71 1974-75 BOS
19. Curtis Perry 91.01 1973-74 MIL
20. Elvin Hayes* 91.06 1975-76 WSB
21. Bill Walton* 91.20 1976-77 POR
22. Patrick Ewing* 91.27 1998-99 NYK
23. Tim Duncan 91.50 1998-99 SAS
24. Sam Lacey 91.52 1974-75 KCO
25. Elmore Smith 91.56 1973-74 LAL
26. Kevin Garnett 91.61 2003-04 MIN
27. Jerry Sloan 91.62 1973-74 CHI

Pacer Fan
11-05-2012, 10:43 AM
Hmmm.....

Why so surprised, It's been 3 games with all the same staff minus Danny.
Assist numbers will always be low till the coaching changes or is gone. It wasn't DC's fault for his low assist and it isn't Hill's fault.

imawhat
11-05-2012, 10:54 AM
Which is what guys do when their shot at the rim gets crushed a few times.

It's hard to get a lot of blocks in the NBA, because once you block a couple then people start trying to find ways to keep it away from you (usually lowering their percentage in the process).

As good as Hibbert was, that's Cousins' normal shot selection. It's reflected in his unnecessarily low FG% and drives me (and probably Kings fans) nuts.

HC
11-05-2012, 11:14 AM
Paul is amazing right now, and Lance is playing really well also. Just clean up the turnovers, and this team is looking good.

Derek2k3
11-05-2012, 11:37 AM
I think another thing to consider: No real sense of urgency. Last year they had something to prove after losing a series they thought they deserved to win/Vogel/shortened season. This year there just isn't the same sense of urgency, likely due to having a lot of success last season (top 10 record, pushed the eventual champs to 6 etc). Frank needs to get them focused again, or we may end up seeing a lot of subpar outings early on.

Since86
11-05-2012, 11:56 AM
As good as Hibbert was, that's Cousins' normal shot selection. It's reflected in his unnecessarily low FG% and drives me (and probably Kings fans) nuts.

It may have been his normal shot selection, but it wasn't his normal FG%. The guy shot 33% from the field, after he started out on fire. He had 7 out of their first 12 I do believe.

Do you have to hold a guy under 20% shooting to get props on defense?

Pacer Fan
11-05-2012, 12:02 PM
I think another thing to consider: No real sense of urgency. Last year they had something to prove after losing a series they thought they deserved to win/Vogel/shortened season. This year there just isn't the same sense of urgency, likely due to having a lot of success last season (top 10 record, pushed the eventual champs to 6 etc). Frank needs to get them focused again, or we may end up seeing a lot of subpar outings early on.

I don't see a lack of effort or urgency at all. They are playing hard. They just don't have a quality offensive game, which is nothing new. The newbs on the team are exactly that, they need time to gel. The offensive play list is generic and the same. The road games was 2 teams that didn't want to lose and knew how to play against the Pacers. Coach needs to implement some new offensive plays.

Derek2k3
11-05-2012, 12:13 PM
I don't see a lack of effort or urgency at all. They are playing hard. They just don't have a quality offensive game, which is nothing new. The newbs on the team are exactly that, they need time to gel. The offensive play list is generic and the same. The road games was 2 teams that didn't want to lose and knew how to play against the Pacers. Coach needs to implement some new offensive plays.

I don't mean to insinuate/state that the players aren't playing hard. Just that the laser sharp focus isn't there (As indicated by the absurd turnovers/terrible FT shooting the first two games). That's what I mean, that Frank needs to get the guys locked in like they were last year.

Ace E.Anderson
11-05-2012, 12:14 PM
It may have been his normal shot selection, but it wasn't his normal FG%. The guy shot 33% from the field, after he started out on fire. He had 7 out of their first 12 I do believe.

Do you have to hold a guy under 20% shooting to get props on defense?

I was at the game, and Cousins was completely frustrated with Roy's defense in the paint. He got stuffed about 3 times, right in front of the rim, was getting pushed off his spots, etc.

THAT'S when he started shooting those jumpers from the outside. Roy was a big part of that.

Ace E.Anderson
11-05-2012, 12:16 PM
I think another thing to consider: No real sense of urgency. Last year they had something to prove after losing a series they thought they deserved to win/Vogel/shortened season. This year there just isn't the same sense of urgency, likely due to having a lot of success last season (top 10 record, pushed the eventual champs to 6 etc). Frank needs to get them focused again, or we may end up seeing a lot of subpar outings early on.

I think we're playing hard. Players are diving on the ball for loose balls, and we're dominating teams on the boards--all signs of activity. If anything, we're playing a bit TOO hard and simply not smart enough.

Derek2k3
11-05-2012, 12:16 PM
It may have been his normal shot selection, but it wasn't his normal FG%. The guy shot 33% from the field, after he started out on fire. He had 7 out of their first 12 I do believe.

Do you have to hold a guy under 20% shooting to get props on defense?

Well, last year he shot 45% on 15 shots a game. Hibbert held him to 33% on 27 shots. That's excellent defense.

Also, the argument that Cousins was taking all jumpers doesn't work to discount Roy's defense. Roy was harassing him, preventing him from getting deep position. Therefore, DeMarcus was forced outside because of Roy's defense.

Derek2k3
11-05-2012, 12:18 PM
I think we're playing hard. Players are diving on the ball for loose balls, and we're dominating teams on the boards--all signs of activity. If anything, we're playing a bit TOO hard and simply not smart enough.

Ah, good point. My original post was poorly worded.

I should have said, "The team needs to improve their focus."

Eleazar
11-05-2012, 12:29 PM
It takes a lot of tracking to see if it's really the same people making conflicting statements.

You going too deep here. It was a general comment about the general feeling of the board, that was sparked by UB's comment.

ThA HoyA
11-05-2012, 12:30 PM
something i noticed and it may be because its early but all 3 teams played hard, with the success of last year teams are going to come ready to play hard and want to beat the pacers. i expect the competition to play us tougher and harder because the pacers are a good team

McKeyFan
11-05-2012, 12:32 PM
I think there is a difference between BBall IQ and feel for the game. For example I thought Tinsley had a great feel for the game, but his Bball IQ was not very good. I suppose bball IQ is something that can be learned or practiced, while feel for the game you are born with. That is why I think they are different. Although often times they go hand in hand.

Lance right now IMO has a great feel for the game, but his IQ isn't very good, he needs a lot of experience.

Green IMO is bad in both areas.

Mistake free isn't something I make a big deal out of. It is probably part of both IQ and feel for the game. But some alltime high feel for the game type players - Mark Jackson, Jason Kidd were always high in turnovers, where as some other point guards who had no point guard skills were low in turnovers, but in those case they really didn't create anything for teammates

Good answer.

I guess when I think of IQ (as in intellect) I think of innate ability and not something that can be developed. Not sure if I am right about that. Anyway, I seem to translate that sense over to BBall IQ. I think Lance has a lot of innate sense about the game, but still quite a bit to develop. Regardless of the semantics, you and I seem to be agreeing.

Eleazar
11-05-2012, 12:41 PM
Good answer.

I guess when I think of IQ (as in intellect) I think of innate ability and not something that can be developed. Not sure if I am right about that. Anyway, I seem to translate that sense over to BBall IQ. I think Lance has a lot of innate sense about the game, but still quite a bit to develop. Regardless of the semantics, you and I seem to be agreeing.

You are right. IQ is measuring your natural ability to learn quickly, see patterns, and think logically, not about how much knowledge you have accumulated. Basically the higher your IQ the less effort you have to put in to learning new skills or information. Usually though the average person associates IQ with amount of knowledge you know. While it is usually true that those with higher IQ's know more, it isn't a one to one correlation, as someone who has a lower IQ can be just as knowledgeable that person just might need to work harder to get to that level.

docpaul
11-05-2012, 01:19 PM
I hadn't seen this mentioned anywhere, but after the game on FSMW, they interviewed Paul George. He made a comment on the side that caught my attention. Something to the effect of: "I felt as if my play kept us from winning the game outright in regulation, because they have me cheating towards the block to pick up rebounds vs. out on the perimeter."

He said it in the context of Thorton torching us from downtown time after time after time.

He also said it in a way where you could have construed it as a tiny misgiving with coach's plan.

I for one have never, ever liked our perimeter defense plan... for some reason, we feel the need to stack the box... when it seems as if in crunch time we could simply put Mahinmi and Hibbert and allow George to naturally guard his position out in the perimeter.

What are people's thoughts on this?

oz_pacer
11-05-2012, 01:25 PM
I just want to say our defensive rebounding in that game was terrible.
it was like the preseason to me both teams trying combinations and lineups awful game to watch

McKeyFan
11-05-2012, 01:28 PM
I hadn't seen this mentioned anywhere, but after the game on FSMW, they interviewed Paul George. He made a comment on the side that caught my attention. Something to the effect of: "I felt as if my play kept us from winning the game outright in regulation, because they have me cheating towards the block to pick up rebounds vs. out on the perimeter."

He said it in the context of Thorton torching us from downtown time after time after time.

He also said it in a way where you could have construed it as a tiny misgiving with coach's plan.

I for one have never, ever liked our perimeter defense plan... for some reason, we feel the need to stack the box... when it seems as if in crunch time we could simply put Mahinmi and Hibbert and allow George to naturally guard his position out in the perimeter.

What are people's thoughts on this?
I heard it. I did not take it that way.

I thought he was simply saying that his play (offensively, I thought) didn't provide what the team needed and kept them from winning in regulation. I'd have to hear it again, though.

xIndyFan
11-05-2012, 01:43 PM
It is something you might try in specific end of game situations. David is really playing well, imo, and taking him out doesn't make much sense generally. So logically it follows the wings need to cheat inside to help protect the rim. No one would be happier than me to see a guy like Dale Davis at the 4. But that isn't the case.

It seems from comments that Frank has given during the off-season/training camp, the Pacers give very high priority to protecting the front of the rim. In doing that you have to give up some outside shooting. :shrug: I have to believe the decision is one based of some kind of analysis of the most effective way to defend. It is easy to over react when a guy hits some shots on you. Especially if it's you that is the guy in the highlights rushing to cover the open guy. Paul is doing a really really great job doing what he's doing. With Danny out, his shotblocking/rebounding is needed more than normally. Thorton hit some shots, stuff happens. Unless it keeps happening game after game, it's not a big deal.


I hadn't seen this mentioned anywhere, but after the game on FSMW, they interviewed Paul George. He made a comment on the side that caught my attention. Something to the effect of: "I felt as if my play kept us from winning the game outright in regulation, because they have me cheating towards the block to pick up rebounds vs. out on the perimeter."

He said it in the context of Thorton torching us from downtown time after time after time.

He also said it in a way where you could have construed it as a tiny misgiving with coach's plan.

I for one have never, ever liked our perimeter defense plan... for some reason, we feel the need to stack the box... when it seems as if in crunch time we could simply put Mahinmi and Hibbert and allow George to naturally guard his position out in the perimeter.

What are people's thoughts on this?

Peck
11-05-2012, 01:52 PM
Wow, Sam Young goes from playing well in game one, to making a great play in game two that unluckily also caused him to be injured and miss the rest of the game, then has a bad game. So now Young is suddenly a crap player. Short memories indeed.

I'm not sure if I'm one of the ones you are referring to but in my defense my statement was a game review not an overall review of his play. In fact I like players like Sam a lot but like U.B. said he does need to know his limitations. But I can't lie either, that one individual game he sucked. Now that doesn't mean tonight he won't merit an A+.

Also I did make an overal comment about his passing & I will admit that I may be jaded because one of the inbound plays he threw in was right in front of me so I had the exact same angel he had and I just knew there was no way he was going to try and pass it in to Green because there was a Kings player with his arms extended standing right there. Much to my surprise & chagrin he did.

But your point is well taken in the overall sense. It's only 3 games and he hasn't been this bad in all of them, but my God was he bad in that game.

Also as a side note to everyone else, thanks for making this thread a real on topic basketball discussion thread. It has been a joy to read.

Unclebuck
11-05-2012, 02:01 PM
Good answer.

I guess when I think of IQ (as in intellect) I think of innate ability and not something that can be developed. Not sure if I am right about that. Anyway, I seem to translate that sense over to BBall IQ. I think Lance has a lot of innate sense about the game, but still quite a bit to develop. Regardless of the semantics, you and I seem to be agreeing.

Maybe I am using the terms incorrectly, but I do believe there are differences in basketball between god-given ability vs things that can be learned. I don't think any player can ever learn or practice enough to become a passer like Magic, Bird, Jackson, Kidd, Stockton. But in other cases hard work and practice can improve a players shooting, and other skills.

As an example of a player who was smart, but not with god given ability I would cite Chuck Person - I felt everything he became was learned

docpaul
11-05-2012, 02:06 PM
I heard it. I did not take it that way.

I thought he was simply saying that his play (offensively, I thought) didn't provide what the team needed and kept them from winning in regulation. I'd have to hear it again, though.

Yeah. Again, what I took as notable from the interview was his specific mention about how his focus within the post hurt the outcome of the game from his perspective.

Perhaps that was just Paul being Paul, but it was the first and only time I remember a player alluding to not being totally onboard with the style of play since Vogel's been coach.

We'll see if it plays out any further than that.