PDA

View Full Version : Odd Thoughts: Fear the Deer



Peck
11-15-2012, 01:20 AM
Who knew I would be able to watch two episodes of American Horror Story on Wednesday night.

Look there is almost no reason to even review this game because honestly there is just nothing to take away from this. We are bad, in fact we are putrid, but we aren’t really this bad.

Right now talent be damned this is almost all mental. I mean for players who are actually dependable solid basketball players (David West) are missing wide open bread and butter shots for him while other players who may not be as mentally stable (Roy Hibbert) are missing equally easy shots for him.

A lot of their shots seemed rushed but beyond that after watching over the past few games I think we need to get them to maybe focus on just some fundamentally sound basketball shots and stop with the running one handed hook shots or one handed runners that both of them are just not getting to drop.

Maybe just focus on a straight up face up jumper from a couple of feet for a short time to see if that works.

Also with Roy I am now thinking we need to change up with him and stop trying to force him into scoring. I know it goes against everything any of us believe in because we want that low post thing working for us but maybe it’s time to pull Roy out of the deep post for a few possessions and let him work the exterior for awhile. I think right now Roy needs less pressure and every bunny he misses seems to send him deeper and deeper into a shame spiral.

I think we need to tell him to dominate on the glass and become that interior defensive force that he was last year and let the scoring come as it will.

Contract be damned at this point. If that is what it takes to get him back to at least being a serviceable center again then that is what I want.

Also is it my imagination or does Roy look like he has gained weight? Not saying he’s out of shape by any means but when I think about what he looked like last season he seems to be much thicker. Could just be me, I don’t know.

Also I always give a shout out to Scott Skiles whenever we play a team he is coaching. Even if he doesn’t have the players to play defense he somehow always manages to have a good defensive team.

I know we don’t need to talk about Danny Granger every game but I found this post game quote by David West telling.

“He’s the centerpiece to this offense. To kind of lose him right now where we are we thought that we could just fill in without him. It is taking us a while to adjust to him not being here but that’s not a reason to not go out and compete. We need to be able to make things happen for us.”

BTW, I agree with David there is no excuse for not competing but it does go one step further to state how important Granger is to our club. Sorry I keep bringing that stuff up but for the past 3 years we have been inundated with people telling us how poor Danny is or over the past couple of years how we should just move him so Paul George can move to his natural position so yes I’m making sure some of this gets brought to the for front.

Tyler has played well enough on defense this year that he deserves to have one of these garbage time big point games and nobody should hound him for it. I know the thought is that when the game no longer matters he is at his best but he has given us solid effort almost all of the time this year so he has earned a good offensive game.

George Hill got caught up in hero ball tonight, I can sympathize with him because nobody else could hit, but more often than not hero ball ends up with the results that we ended up with from him tonight. He’s played good ball almost all season so I’ll forgive him this game.

Now before I hit the bullet points I want to talk a min. about Donnie Walsh and what some of you newer posters need to understand about him.

If Donnie is in charge, which to be honest I am not sure how the front office is structured right now because I read one report saying Walsh was only here this year. But if he is in charge let me give you a cold shot of reality.

Donnie does nothing under pressure. In other words if you think he has to make a trade or fire a coach or make some move for the sake of making a move then you are in for a long protracted winter of discontent.

As long as Danny’s injury is out there they have a built in excuse to tell everyone to be patient. Now if they think Danny’s injury is worse than what they are letting on then they might be making a move (in fact if they make a significant move I am going to be really worried for Danny’s career).

But I’ve lived through this before and I can tell you Donnie is nothing if not patient. His sycophant Montieth will be more than happy to tell you that he doesn’t make trades for the sake of trade and he does not make knee jerk reactions. Now understand that everyone else in the free world might consider a trade the right move but in Donnie’s world it is knee jerk 9 out of 10 times.

Believe me when I saw he was coming back it was like groundhogs day for me, one nightmare just lived over and over.

Let’s hit the bullet points.

• Lance needs to shoot the ball more. In fact seeing as how he has the highest field goal % of any of our wings I would suggest we start looking to let him get his shot more often if we can.
• The 3 combined free throw attempts by our starting forward tandem is pretty disgusting.
• Gerald Green quietly put together a decent offensive game. He was burned on defense several times but when we are struggling so bad on the offensive end anyone hitting a shot should be cheered at this point.
• A good point made by the broadcast team tonight is that while the defense has been solid they are not creating turnovers like they did last season that led to the transition points we were getting.
• Paul George’s trade value will never be higher.
• Monta Ellis was finally able to get a win vs. the Pacers of course it took Danny not being there for him to finally do it but who’s counting.
• Mahinmi getting 7 min. in this blow out? I’m starting to wonder if Frank isn’t bucking at losing Lou. Remember last season he wouldn’t play Fez over Lou either so I think Frank really liked what Lou brought to the team.
• As another poster brilliantly stated I wonder if Agustin won’t be in the D league next year. Dude is just horrid.
• Sam Young had a decent game, he didn’t have to pass much so it worked out for him this time.

Look guys I’m as down as all of you are but even I will tell you to shake this one off. We are bad but we aren’t this bad. It’s just a combination of two bad games in a row making this look really bad. Every team has blow outs and this one was just ours.

I don’t know that they can right the ship to where we want to go but I think in the next week or two they should be playing at a higher level than this.

However to the eternal optimist out there I want to state one reason why some of us are so concerned. This was game 9 for the year & I have yet to see one good game from our team. We’ve had a couple of good quarters but not yet one good game. In fact we’ve had very few good quarters for that matter.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/u-g7yosMKdw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

cgg
11-15-2012, 01:36 AM
I miss Danny Granger.

vnzla81
11-15-2012, 01:39 AM
Yes I said in preseason that Roy looked a bit bigger and less cut, I think is possible that he is a bit out of shape I don't know though.

CableKC
11-15-2012, 01:49 AM
You know better than I do when it comes to Walsh.......but you have to wonder what Bird is thinking now. I'm not suggesting that he'd make a rash move if he were in charge.....but I can see him right now either being mad as h*ll that the Team is doing terribly now or laughing it off thinking to himself, "Wow....I'm glad I'm not dealing with that mess".

As for Lance......I'm all for giving him as many minutes as he can handle and to take the leash off of him when it comes to scoring.....if PG isn't willing to take over on the offensive end....then let Lance do his best impression of Dwayne Wade.

Another thing.....I liked what I saw from Plumlee at the end of the game. Last season...if Vogel preferred to play an athletic Big Man like Lou over Fez....then I'd have no problem giving Plumlee ( a super athletic Big Man that is super long ) just to see what he can do.

vnzla81
11-15-2012, 02:00 AM
but we aren’t really this bad.

I disagree.

Hypnotiq
11-15-2012, 03:05 AM
I disagree.

You think we hit our peak last year?

perhaps i dunno i dont think we can say that untill danny is back

Justin Tyme
11-15-2012, 06:20 AM
nother thing.....I liked what I saw from Plumlee at the end of the game. Last season...if Vogel preferred to play an athletic Big Man like Lou over Fez....then I'd have no problem giving Plumlee ( a super athletic Big Man that is super long ) just to see what he can do.


I agree. The team isn't winning with Roy or Ian, so give Plumjam an opportunity. I'd even go further and bench Augustin and let Ben Hans have his minutes.

I truly wouldn't mind seeing OJ get some PT. He can't be any worse as a shooter last night than

Hill @ 1-10
Lance @ 1-3
PG @ 5-17
DWest @ 3-9
DJ @ 1-4

Sollozzo
11-15-2012, 06:34 AM
You think we hit our peak last year?

perhaps i dunno i dont think we can say that untill danny is back


It's certainly possible that we hit our peak. We won 63% of our games, a playoff series, and took the Heat to 6 games. Any improvement on that would put us into very elite territory. If we won more regular season games than that then we'd have a super elite winning percentage. If we went a step further in the playoff series then that means we'd be in the conference finals. Right now, this team doesn't look like it is capable of any of that, though as you say, it's impossible to know for sure without Granger.

pogi
11-15-2012, 06:36 AM
Scott Skiles had some advice for his team before its 99-85 home-court victory over the Indiana Pacers on Wednesday night.

"It's something Coach was preaching before we went out there," Bucks guard Brandon Jennings said. "He said we've got to take it to them early and they'll shut down and that's basically what they did."

This is gonna be a looooonnng season

Speed
11-15-2012, 07:42 AM
• Paul George’s trade value will never be higher.


Curious about this statement?

Speed
11-15-2012, 07:43 AM
Scott Skiles had some advice for his team before its 99-85 home-court victory over the Indiana Pacers on Wednesday night.

"It's something Coach was preaching before we went out there," Bucks guard Brandon Jennings said. "He said we've got to take it to them early and they'll shut down and that's basically what they did."

This is gonna be a looooonnng season

Skiles called them the worse word for Sissies, funny.

Unclebuck
11-15-2012, 08:25 AM
I do wonder how many coaches say the same thing Skiles said about other NBA teams. Seems like a good motivating tool - get your team motivated to have a good start. I bet most coaches say that about most NBA teams. I don't read too much into Skiles comments

BillS
11-15-2012, 08:34 AM
I almost posted in the "bright side" thread that at least we wouldn't have to consider the Toronto game the worst game of the season any more...

If nothing else, last night showed just how good our defense has been to keep us in games. When the defense fails like it did last night, the blowout happens because the offense is still putrid.

I'm thinking the same as Peck, it is time to go back to fundamentals. Half our turnovers seem to be on attempts to throw for an alley-oop that is off on its timing, or on behind the body or over the head passes. The other half are on ball control against any kind of pressure defense - not even forced, just being so concerned about someone stealing the ball that we dribble it off a body part.

The truth is that we will be a long time coming to get easy points in the paint if no one can hit from more than 5 feet out. Every time someone gets the ball near the basket defenses just throw everyone at him - which both triple-teams a shooter and effectively steals any possible rebounding position. Unless we can force defenses to pay attention to us on the outside, I would venture to say no one other than a Shaq in his prime simply running over defenders with impunity would be able to be effective down low.

BillS
11-15-2012, 08:35 AM
I do wonder how many coaches say the same thing Skiles said about other NBA teams. Seems like a good motivating tool - get your team motivated to have a good start. I bet most coaches say that about most NBA teams. I don't read too much into Skiles comments

I wouldn't except for the fact the Pacers DO completely deflate if teams get a strong series against them. Doesn't have to be at the start of the game - as soon as someone begins a run we can't seem to cope.

Pacerized
11-15-2012, 08:44 AM
Great post, the only thing I might disagree with is that DW doesn't make trades for the sake of it. We needed to tweek our bench and the least we could have done with 10 mil in cap space would have been to upgrade our backup center. We didn't need to dump most of our bench for players that gave no clear upgrade and when you do that it hurts your chemistry. We should have offered Kaman a multi year deal and called it a day. I could have lived with Ian although I don't like his contract. Dumping DC, Jones and Barbosa so we could bring in AJ and Green never made sense to me. That is almost like making change for the sake of it. We'd have a winning record right now without those moves.

Ace E.Anderson
11-15-2012, 08:46 AM
Curious about this statement?

His all around game is very good, and would benefit a number of teams, but it isn't what this team needs from a player at that position. We need a shooter/scorer.

OlBlu
11-15-2012, 08:58 AM
Great post, the only thing I might disagree with is that DW doesn't make trades for the sake of it. We needed to tweek our bench and the least we could have done with 10 mil in cap space would have been to upgrade our backup center. We didn't need to dump most of our bench for players that gave no clear upgrade and when you do that it hurts your chemistry. We should have offered Kaman a multi year deal and called it a day. I could have lived with Ian although I don't like his contract. Dumping DC, Jones and Barbosa so we could bring in AJ and Green never made sense to me. That is almost like making change for the sake of it. We'd have a winning record right now without those moves.

No, we wouldn't. They aren't the problem. The problem is with the starters. Granger still would be out and the starters would still struggle to score... The problem is that some posters here were sold a bill of goods that some way out stats showed that we had the best starting unit in the NBA. We didn't and we have the same players minus Granger..... Those bench changes were minor and would not cause this melt down.....:cool:

Trader Joe
11-15-2012, 09:00 AM
When you start to think about all the things Granger is the "best at" on this team on offense, it gets a little daunting.

He is the best long ranger shooter, he is the best mid ranger shooter, he maybe the best finisher in traffic, he is the best guy at switching between half court and up tempo, he is the best guy off the basketball (both looking to score and looking to help people out), he might be the best person on the team at setting picks and screens.

It didn't become as clear til you see the dumpster fire Pacers offense without him, but yeah....

BillS
11-15-2012, 09:03 AM
We are bad, in fact we are putrid, but we aren’t really this bad.


I disagree.


The problem is that some posters here were sold a bill of goods that some way out stats showed that we had the best starting unit in the NBA. We didn't and we have the same players minus Granger..... Those bench changes were minor and would not cause this melt down.

So basically when we're bad we are just as bad as our record and play show us to be, but when our record and on-court play showed us as being good they were lying.

Seems a little inconsistent to me.

Unclebuck
11-15-2012, 09:03 AM
I wouldn't except for the fact the Pacers DO completely deflate if teams get a strong series against them. Doesn't have to be at the start of the game - as soon as someone begins a run we can't seem to cope.

yes, I have seen that in three of the first 9 games. All on the road - at SA, ATL and at MIL. it is always a problem, but it isn't a Pacers only problem - pretty common across the NBA

owl
11-15-2012, 09:11 AM
I agree. The team isn't winning with Roy or Ian, so give Plumjam an opportunity. I'd even go further and bench Augustin and let Ben Hans have his minutes.



Ben needs to be getting DJ's minutes. Put the players out there who are putting out the effort.
Ben is not great but he will produce better than DJ.

Cousy47
11-15-2012, 09:13 AM
Hindsight is a beautiful thing, eh? I'm not very smart, but I started to fear this in the preseason. All the exciement was about the top 10 dunks and alley-oops. All show all the time. This is he Eastern Conference where strength, will and the ability to take a hit still wins ball games.I thought the showoff fever would go away when Danny came back(an I still do). The kind of Iwork Tyler and Foster and Dale Davis give never make the highlight films, but they win ball games and hold teams together. I don't know if Plumlee and OJ could function in this period of time, but they might. They might just be ruined by the culture we are quickly building of lying down and quitting. I expect to see Dvid West slap some teammate at any given time. We are screwing up his last contract plans badly.

3rdStrike
11-15-2012, 09:13 AM
When you start to think about all the things Granger is the "best at" on this team on offense, it gets a little daunting.

He is the best long ranger shooter, he is the best mid ranger shooter, he maybe the best finisher in traffic, he is the best guy at switching between half court and up tempo, he is the best guy off the basketball (both looking to score and looking to help people out), he might be the best person on the team at setting picks and screens.

It didn't become as clear til you see the dumpster fire Pacers offense without him, but yeah....


West is using the Danny Crutch because his coach is. The coach rubs off on the players, that's what coaches do. Doesn't mean Danny Granger is was or will be anywhere near as good as people here would like to believe. He's a good shooter and plays with fire, but let's not allow excuses and romanticizing the past to cloud our judgement of the team: we did not lose John Wall, Kevin Love, Dirk Nowitzki, etc. And the teams we've played (or will have played as of tomorrow night) have had a more significant (franchise) player go down and they are playing a lot harder.

The Pacers aren't playing with intensity. They are not making adjustments. They are running terrible plays. That does not fall on an injured player, unless he's also the head coach. The Granger Clutch is old already. I'm not sure if I can put up with 3 more months of it, only for him to be 30 and coming off injury next year. Let's have some accountability and less grasping at straws.

Major Cold
11-15-2012, 09:14 AM
So basically when we're bad we are just as bad as our record and play show us to be, but when our record and on-court play showed us as being good they were lying.

Seems a little inconsistent to me.


Why bother? Really. I wouldn't even reply to those sentiments. If we are really this bad (bottom 4 of the league) then our bench last year was amazing. Danny Granger is a top 10 player. And Darren Collison was the most important player last year.

Now losing Darren hurts. But not this much. Losing Danny hurts, but not this much. And losing Lou doesn't really hurt at all.

Not getting Dragic, Stiesma, and Mayo hurts IMO. But not to the point that we are where we are at. That is crazy stupid talk. It is mental as well as other factors.

Trader Joe
11-15-2012, 09:17 AM
John Wall put in the same sentence as Dirk and Kevin Love while the poster is telling us not to overrate Danny Granger...just LOL

vnzla81
11-15-2012, 09:17 AM
So basically when we're bad we are just as bad as our record and play show us to be, but when our record and on-court play showed us as being good they were lying.

Seems a little inconsistent to me.

I don't care about the record I'm watching them play, yes they are this bad, making excuses is putting our heads in the sand.

vnzla81
11-15-2012, 09:19 AM
When you start to think about all the things Granger is the "best at" on this team on offense, it gets a little daunting.

He is the best long ranger shooter, he is the best mid ranger shooter, he maybe the best finisher in traffic, he is the best guy at switching between half court and up tempo, he is the best guy off the basketball (both looking to score and looking to help people out), he might be the best person on the team at setting picks and screens.

It didn't become as clear til you see the dumpster fire Pacers offense without him, but yeah....

Granger is not that good.

Trader Joe
11-15-2012, 09:22 AM
Granger is not that good.

Granger is THAT GOOD, when you look at the rest of our offensive players. Granger was tactically a very important piece of the Pacer puzzle. Now we should be better than we are even without Danny, but that doesn't change how important he was. It just illustrates how bad everyone else has been.

Since86
11-15-2012, 09:24 AM
I don't care about the record I'm watching them play, yes they are this bad, making excuses is putting our heads in the sand.

So Roy and West have regressed so much that they're worse than their rookie years?

Even I was so fed up last night that I turned off the game, but clearly the Pacers aren't actually THIS bad.

vnzla81
11-15-2012, 09:28 AM
By the way I think is amazing that Peck keeps repeating that he pretty much wants Paul George to be traded because "his value would never be this high", funny that I've been saying the same thing about Danny and I'm some kind of hater, even right now people are saying it and the Danny fan club are freaking out about trading him "because they need his leadership"....

Yeah let's trade a player that is only 22 years old and keep and broken down player because he has the "clutch gene" great idea....

vnzla81
11-15-2012, 09:33 AM
So Roy and West have regressed so much that they're worse than their rookie years?

Even I was so fed up last night that I turned off the game, but clearly the Pacers aren't actually THIS bad.

Roy is in his typical 3 months cocoon he is the only one that I expect to come out of it, West looks tired to me, maybe age is affecting him already? he is 32 going 33 so I don't expect him to play well all the time.

Green is Green, Ian is Ian, Augustine could get a little better, Paul George could probably improve a bit more, Tyler is Tyler, Hill is Hill, at the end of the day I just don't see it, where the improvement is going to come from? Yes they are probably not going to be this bad but that doesn't mean that they are not going to be a bad team.

Since86
11-15-2012, 09:36 AM
Roy is in his typical 3 months cocoon he is the only one that I expect to come out of it, West looks tired to me, maybe age is affecting him already? he is 32 going 33 so I don't expect him to play well all the time.

Green is Green, Ian is Ian, Augustine could get a little better, Paul George could probably improve a bit more, Tyler is Tyler, Hill is Hill, at the end of the day I just don't see it, where the improvement is going to come from?

Maybe the two guys you just mentioned that you expect will start playing better? Roy and West have been atrocious, but this isn't their normal.

vnzla81
11-15-2012, 09:50 AM
Maybe the two guys you just mentioned that you expect will start playing better? Roy and West have been atrocious, but this isn't their normal.

So is that really going to improve the Pacers so much that they are not going to look this bad? yeah I don't see it, maybe they move from out of the playoffs to 8th seed I think.

David West average is already high at 15 and 8, I think is a reach if we expect him to average more than that, Roy is the only out the two were I can see and improvement from 8 points to his normal 12ppg and from 8rpg to his normal 8.8, Roy's shooting percentage should also go up, ok let's say that all this happens, so is that enough to remove them from the "they are not this bad category"? my answer is no.

BillS
11-15-2012, 09:55 AM
By the way I think is amazing that Peck keeps repeating that he pretty much wants Paul George to be traded because "his value would never be this high"

No, Peck said PG's value would never be higher but never said to trade him. The one does not necessarily mean the other.

In your case you not only said Granger's trade value wouldn't be higher but every player that came along you suggested trading Danny for him. That was explicit.

No one got on your case for saying Granger's trade value wouldn't increase. They got on your case for wanting to trade him for every Tom, Dick, or Monta in the league.

Since86
11-15-2012, 10:00 AM
David West average is already high at 15 and 8

I notice you didn't point out that West is a career 49% shooter, and right now he's shooting about 41%. Roy is also shooting the lowest percentage of his career.

When you're entire team's identity is based around playing inside-out, and your inside players absolutely suck, it drags the entire system down.

vnzla81
11-15-2012, 10:02 AM
No, Peck said PG's value would never be higher but never said to trade him. The one does not necessarily mean the other.

I didn't know we had to check for players values once in a while, of course he means that he is open to trade him.



In your case you not only said Granger's trade value wouldn't be higher but every player that came along you suggested trading Danny for him. That was explicit.

No one got on your case for saying Granger's trade value wouldn't increase. They got on your case for wanting to trade him for every Tom, Dick, or Monta in the league.

I wanted to trade Danny for some value because I knew that his knees were not going to last this long, the guy has been having knee issues since college, I guess who was right after all? I bet we could have a better record with somebody capable of playing instead but nope let's don't do that.

vnzla81
11-15-2012, 10:07 AM
I notice you didn't point out that West is a career 49% shooter, and right now he's shooting about 41%. Roy is also shooting the lowest percentage of his career.

When you're entire team's identity is based around playing inside-out, and your inside players absolutely suck, it drags the entire system down.

West looks old to me I don't think he is going to get any better, I expect him to stay where he is right now, maybe his % goes up a bit but I still don't see it as a reason to say that the Pacers are somehow back into elite teams.

And also teams already know how to shut both guys down, they know how to push Roy out of position and they know how to remove the West ISO's.

Since86
11-15-2012, 10:13 AM
Can't say much more to someone that goes from saying that they expect Roy and West to play better just a few posts ago, to now saying that West won't play better, and that teams have figured out the secret recipe to completely shutting both of them down.

Trophy
11-15-2012, 10:18 AM
I never expected such a performance out of this team. After how much passion and pride was displayed just a season ago. Granger or not, there is no excuse for this.

A team coach by Frank Vogel and a Pacers team with these players. I really can't believe it appears they've accepted this. Guys who shared great chemistry last season almost look like they don't know what they're supposed to do out there. Pretty much throwing the ball to the other team. No one is in position to do anything offensively.

If this team were to at least give a damn, we would've won the majority of the games so far.

Each player better search DEEP and find themselves quickly because it's become such a disgrace. No team that wants to contend and can plays like this.

I'm really hoping we can get this turned around and not lose too much ground because it's still very early in the season, but honestly I'm not seeing the light at the end of the tunnel.

vnzla81
11-15-2012, 10:19 AM
Can't say much more to someone that goes from saying that they expect Roy and West to play better just a few posts ago, to now saying that West won't play better, and that teams have figured out the secret recipe to completely shutting both of them down.

I said that Roy is supposed to get better(if he comes out of his cocoon) from 8 and 8 to his normal 12 and 8 and regarding West I'm actually saying that he is producing at his highest at this point in his career I don't see an increase there.

And you like to hear it or not yes teams are learning to shut them down and to be fair I don't think is that complicated, the offense is just crap.

Note: Saying that somebody is probably playing better doesn't mean that that player goes from good to superstar or anything like that.

Trader Joe
11-15-2012, 10:23 AM
Right now here's what I see our biggest problem as. We have one guy in the starting lineup that can actually play the up tempo/half tempo mix we kind of played last year, Hill. PG and Lance or PG and Green are really better suited to up tempo, and Roy and West are really better suited to half court. Danny was another guy who can play both ways, but when it is just Hill the difference is startling.

In half court, our perimeter guys really struggle, PG can't beat his man off the dribble, Lance can, but often times settles for a bad mid range jumper instead of finishing the attack.

West and Hibbert flat out get completely gassed when we try to push the pace at all it seems like.

Ace E.Anderson
11-15-2012, 10:23 AM
What I'm wondering is why do we not have a counter for teams that shut down our inside players?! This is what coaching is, making adjustments when other coaches take away your first option. For whatever reason, our two starting bigs can't convert layups. Okay cool. LET'S DO SOMETHING ELSE! FT line extended curls for our wings, dribble hand-offs, SOMETHING. Quit spending 16 seconds trying to wait for Roy to NOT get position/miss a layup when he does get position.

Since86
11-15-2012, 10:25 AM
I said that Roy is supposed to get better(if he comes out of his cocoon) from 8 and 8 to his normal 12 and 8 and regarding West I'm actually saying that he is producing at his highest at this point in his career I don't see an increase there.

smh

Ace E.Anderson
11-15-2012, 10:26 AM
Right now here's what I see our biggest problem as. We have one guy in the starting lineup that can actually play the up tempo/half tempo mix we kind of played last year, Hill. PG and Lance or PG and Green are really better suited to up tempo, and Roy and West are really better suited to half court. Danny was another guy who can play both ways, but when it is just Hill the difference is startling.

In half court, our perimeter guys really struggle, PG can't beat his man off the dribble, Lance can, but often times settles for a bad mid range jumper instead of finishing the attack.

West and Hibbert flat out get completely gassed when we try to push the pace at all it seems like.

I think a big part of our lack of dribble penetration is the fact that Roy and/or West are pretty much around the basket at all times. When having two post players within the offense, it's hard to have proper spacing on the floor for dribble drives. It was able to work last year because Roy and West were hitting higher % of their FGA AND we had Danny in the corner or on the wing occupying a defender.

Since86
11-15-2012, 10:28 AM
I think a big part of our lack of dribble penetration is the fact that Roy and/or West are pretty much around the basket at all times. When having two post players within the offense, it's hard to have proper spacing on the floor for dribble drives. It was able to work last year because Roy and West were hitting higher % of their FGA AND we had Danny in the corner or on the wing occupying a defender.

Not only that but teams are just collapasing the inside daring the Pacers to beat them from outside, and they can't do it. If Danny was playing, and teams tried focusing squarely on clogging the middle, he'd drop 30 on them. That's what is missing, and that's why Danny is so important to the whole offensive flow.

Who puts fear in the opposing team? George Hill certainly doesn't.

Trader Joe
11-15-2012, 10:29 AM
Not only that but teams are just collapasing the inside daring the Pacers to beat them from outside, and they can't do it. If Danny was playing, and teams tried focusing squarely on clogging the middle, he'd drop 30 on them. That's what is missing, and that's why Danny is so important to the whole offensive flow.

Yep, no one on the perimeter commands the respect Danny did. Everyone knows that PG got most of his points last year off fast breaks. No one fears him in the half court.

BillS
11-15-2012, 10:30 AM
If this team were to at least give a damn, we would've won the majority of the games so far.

I'm never sure where things like this come from. If they DIDN'T give a damn we wouldn't be talking about their body language showing they are down and defeated, we'd be complaining about them laughing and joking while they get their rear ends kicked.

They clearly give a damn.

Trader Joe
11-15-2012, 10:30 AM
I'm never sure where things like this come from. If they DIDN'T give a damn we wouldn't be talking about their body language showing they are down and defeated, we'd be complaining about them laughing and joking while they get their rear ends kicked.

They clearly give a damn.

Eh, Roy's body language does suck.

Since86
11-15-2012, 10:32 AM
I'm never sure where things like this come from. If they DIDN'T give a damn we wouldn't be talking about their body language showing they are down and defeated, we'd be complaining about them laughing and joking while they get their rear ends kicked.

They clearly give a damn.


I don't think they did last night. :twocents:

Ace E.Anderson
11-15-2012, 10:33 AM
Not only that but teams are just collapasing the inside daring the Pacers to beat them from outside, and they can't do it. If Danny was playing, and teams tried focusing squarely on clogging the middle, he'd drop 30 on them. That's what is missing, and that's why Danny is so important to the whole offensive flow.

Who puts fear in the opposing team? George Hill certainly doesn't.

George Hill isn't going to consistently drop 30. 12-18? Yes. Danny will drop 30 and talk trash while he does it lol. You're right, that's what's missing from this team. And that's why Danny's value is so high--to THIS team. His game is suited perfectly for the inside/out game that Vogel wants to play, and then his intensity/"swag" gets other guys going.

The lack of confidence/intensity has been missing all season. I think that Danny brought a lot of that out of our team.

Since86
11-15-2012, 10:34 AM
And as far as making adjustments. There isn't a whole lot you can do when your post players are missing the open shots they do get and your backcourt isn't getting any production from the outside to make helping defenders worry about getting burned.

How can you make adjustments to get inside looks when the defense is having a pow-wow in the middle every time down the floor?

The biggest adjustment the Pacers need to make is to start hitting some damn shots.

Trader Joe
11-15-2012, 10:35 AM
George Hill isn't going to consistently drop 30. 12-18? Yes. Danny will drop 30 and talk trash while he does it lol. You're right, that's what's missing from this team. And that's why Danny's value is so high--to THIS team. His game is suited perfectly for the inside/out game that Vogel wants to play, and then his intensity/"swag" gets other guys going.

The lack of confidence/intensity has been missing all season. I think that Danny brought a lot of that out of our team.

That's sort of what I'm saying too. I think a lot of people are taking "This team misses Danny" to mean "Danny is the best player EVA", no, not that at all. He just happened to be a very good fit for the Pacers. Which is why last year's team was so cool, they were the ultimate "games are not played on paper" or "on a stat sheet" team.

Trophy
11-15-2012, 10:36 AM
I'm never sure where things like this come from. If they DIDN'T give a damn we wouldn't be talking about their body language showing they are down and defeated, we'd be complaining about them laughing and joking while they get their rear ends kicked.

They clearly give a damn.

I know they want to get this turned around mentally. Obviously no one's happy with this garbage, but at the same time, no one's looking like they want to improve. Things guys lived off of last season are what they aren't doing this season. No one is moving around offensively, no one's being aggressive. The team is simply giving away points that could've won us the majority of the games we've played.

I hope this mental frustration converts to improvement and desire on the court very soon because this team is better than this.

naptownmenace
11-15-2012, 10:42 AM
And as far as making adjustments. There isn't a whole lot you can do when your post players are missing the open shots they do get and your backcourt isn't getting any production from the outside to make helping defenders worry about getting burned.

How can you make adjustments to get inside looks when the defense is having a pow-wow in the middle every time down the floor?

The biggest adjustment the Pacers need to make is to start hitting some damn shots.

Actually, I think the biggest adjustment needed is to pick up the pace. They're playing at a much slower pace than last year's team and for some reason they seem to be getting slower and slower each game.

The team without Danny really needs to get into their offense quicker and give the defense less time to set up or go into a zone against them.

Ace E.Anderson
11-15-2012, 10:45 AM
Actually, I think the biggest adjustment needed is to pick up the pace. They're playing at a much slower pace than last year's team and for some reason they seem to be getting slower and slower each game.

The team without Danny really needs to get into their offense quicker and give the defense less time to set up or go into a zone against them.

IF we did that, we'd almost have to change-up the lineups a bit. It may sound silly, but I'd almost put either Roy or West (ROY!!) on the bench, and have them run with the 2nd unit, while having Mahinmi play with the starters. Mahinmi can run the floor, and hit the open 17 ft J all day, so he'd work well with a high low offense. He doesn't need the ball offensively, and is pretty good defensively.

Lance, Paul and George would benefit from the faster tempo. (as would DJ, Green, and Tyler for that matter)

Taterhead
11-15-2012, 10:57 AM
The problem with the Pacers is pretty simple and has been the same over the last 6-7 years at least. Our guards are the worst group in the league of all the playoff teams. It's the main reason I have wanted to trade Granger for the last few years now. We have to get a guard who can create offense, and we need a good one. All of our guards outside of Lance have NO GAME off the dribble. George Hill, Paul George and DJ Augustin will all settle for the jumpshot if you give it up, and none of them are good enough shooters to be effective doing that on a consistent basis.

Danny Granger's weakness is creating offense. He needs a good group of guards as much as anyone else. Not saying he doesn't do things well and wouldn't be a plus if he could play, but he's not that big of a difference maker. If he's the reason our team can't beat the Toronto Raptors or Milwaukee Bucks, then how good are we anyways.

I think what this year is showing is that the team hsa hit it's peak as constructed. I don't doubt that they can get some things together and improve as the year goes on becoming a middle of the road tough playoff team, but the sky is not the limit with this group.

Roy Hibbert was not paid to score 20 PPG. He is not a #1 scoring option in the post, I have said it for years. But people criticize him like he his. He is our most important defensive player, and our defense isn't the problem, he is doing his job well. If you replaced him with Kaman you would see us become an average defensive team instantly. David West might as well be 6' on the defensive end, he can't protect the basket and paired with Kaman it would be ugly. He needs a group of guards that can command the attention of the defense so he can pick his spots.

Paul George is a very good all around SF. I have also been saying that for years. He is not and never will be a scorer because he clearly doesn't want to be. And he damn sure isn't a guard. The wing positions are NOT interchangeable despite the bs that people say on here all the time. A guard needs to be able to handle the ball, and he can't. He needs to be a finisher, not a facilitator.

David West is not, and has never been a BAMF. It's stupid to claim he is. He averaged 12-6 last year. You can be scared of his scowl and bald head all you want, but I promise you a really good PF in the NBA won't be. He is a good post scorer, but that's it. He isn't good at anything else. He can't rebound consistently, he can't defend the rim, he can't defend P&R. and when his shot ain't falling he as useless as Josh McRoberts on a bad day.

You can't out execute everyone all the time. It puts way too much stress on your defense to be incredible. You need that one guy who can beat great defense, and we just don't have it. We can either waste a few more years with all these ridiculous hopes, or we can be aggressive and go out and assemble a better, more versatile basketball team. As constructed we are limited and predictable. You saw it last year in the playoffs. Once we got Miamis attention, they completely outclassed us 3 games in a row without their best big man, point blank. And guess what, they are even better this year, the gap has widened furthur.

This team is still a long ways away and this year, they need to use David West's expiring contract to add more young pieces to the core of Hibbert, George, Hill and Stephenson. And next year they need to do the same with Danny Granger. Believe it if you want.

Ace E.Anderson
11-15-2012, 11:09 AM
The problem with the Pacers is pretty simple and has been the same over the last 6-7 years at least. Our guards are the worst group in the league of all the playoff teams. It's the main reason I have wanted to trade Granger for the last few years now. We have to get a guard who can create offense, and we need a good one. All of our guards outside of Lance have NO GAME off the dribble. George Hill, Paul George and DJ Augustin will all settle for the jumpshot if you give it up, and none of them are good enough shooters to be effective doing that on a consistent basis.

Danny Granger's weakness is creating offense. He needs a good group of guards as much as anyone else. Not saying he doesn't do things well and wouldn't be a plus if he could play, but he's not that big of a difference maker. If he's the reason our team can't beat the Toronto Raptors or Milwaukee Bucks, then how good are we anyways.

I think what this year is showing is that the team hsa hit it's peak as constructed. I don't doubt that they can get some things together and improve as the year goes on becoming a middle of the road tough playoff team, but the sky is not the limit with this group.

Roy Hibbert was not paid to score 20 PPG. He is not a #1 scoring option in the post, I have said it for years. But people criticize him like he his. He is our most important defensive player, and our defense isn't the problem, he is doing his job well. If you replaced him with Kaman you would see us become an average defensive team instantly. David West might as well be 6' on the defensive end, he can't protect the basket and paired with Kaman it would be ugly. He needs a group of guards that can command the attention of the defense so he can pick his spots.

Paul George is a very good all around SF. I have also been saying that for years. He is not and never will be a scorer because he clearly doesn't want to be. And he damn sure isn't a guard. The wing positions are NOT interchangeable despite the bs that people say on here all the time. A guard needs to be able to handle the ball, and he can't. He needs to be a finisher, not a facilitator.

David West is not, and has never been a BAMF. It's stupid to claim he is. He averaged 12-6 last year. You can be scared of his scowl and bald head all you want, but I promise you a really good PF in the NBA won't be. He is a good post scorer, but that's it. He isn't good at anything else. He can't rebound consistently, he can't defend the rim, he can't defend P&R. and when his shot ain't falling he as useless as Josh McRoberts on a bad day.

You can't out execute everyone all the time. It puts way too much stress on your defense to be incredible. You need that one guy who can beat great defense, and we just don't have it. We can either waste a few more years with all these ridiculous hopes, or we can be aggressive and go out and assemble a better, more versatile basketball team. As constructed we are limited and predictable. You saw it last year in the playoffs. Once we got Miamis attention, they completely outclassed us 3 games in a row without their best big man, point blank. And guess what, they are even better this year, the gap has widened furthur.

This team is still a long ways away and this year, they need to use David West's expiring contract to add more young pieces to the core of Hibbert, George, Hill and Stephenson. And next year they need to do the same with Danny Granger. Believe it if you want.

Hit the head on the nail with this one. I don't agree with trading Danny next year, but it may be a case SOMEWHAT similar to Peyton Manning and the Colts. You don't want to see your fave player leave, but it may be the best thing for the player and the franchise.

Trader Joe
11-15-2012, 11:18 AM
I don't disagree with anything you say Taterhead, though I do think Danny is very important to the how team is built. I absolutely agree that Hibbert, Hill, George and Stephenson are alright to stay and can work, but we need to find a good scoring guard somehow and we need a real athlete in the front court who has a mid range jumper.

jtroub8
11-15-2012, 11:19 AM
I see what your saying vnzla, but i "kinda" disagree. Danny is good & would be a decent 2nd, great 3rd option on a contending team but he is VERY VALUABLE to the P's. It's very obvious right now. I'm not saying DG is on LB or KD's level or anything close to that but more of how much his value means to this "team".

naptownmenace
11-15-2012, 11:22 AM
This team is still a long ways away and this year, they need to use David West's expiring contract to add more young pieces to the core of Hibbert, George, Hill and Stephenson. And next year they need to do the same with Danny Granger. Believe it if you want.

If they continue to flounder and if Danny misses the entire season, they should just trade David West at the trade deadline and try to get a young player and/or a draft pick preferably from a team that owns a potential lottery team's pick. Maybe Oklahoma City would send up Perry Jones or Jeremy Lamb and one of Houston's draft picks for him.

I don't think they'll continue this slide so all of that is really a moot point.

vnzla81
11-15-2012, 11:34 AM
I see what your saying vnzla, but i "kinda" disagree. Danny is good & would be a decent 2nd, great 3rd option on a contending team but he is VERY VALUABLE to the P's. It's very obvious right now. I'm not saying DG is on LB or KD's level or anything close to that but more of how much his value means to this "team".

I think that if the Pacers front office if instead of signing Green and Young had signed Crawford or Mayo nobody would be missing Danny as much, the issue is not that the team misses Danny, the issue is that the Pacers have a bunch of scrubs to replace him.

In reality Paul George is doing a pretty good job in replacing Danny's numbers plus he is playing better D and rebounding at a higher rate than Danny, people love to think about the Danny of four years ago while forgetting that his productivity has been declining every year, last year was bad other than one month were he found a way to make his numbers look decent.

Right now the problem is not replacing Danny but replacing Paul George at small guard.

Edit: I'm not saying that signing either player could make the Pacers contenders either, their issues are deeper than missing an scorer.

Trader Joe
11-15-2012, 11:41 AM
Danny did a lot more than stats to make the offense run smoother. That's pretty evident at this point. Now maybe that's a failure in offensive design and not an endorsement of Danny, but it's true either way.

Taterhead
11-15-2012, 11:44 AM
I don't disagree with anything you say Taterhead, though I do think Danny is very important to the how team is built. I absolutely agree that Hibbert, Hill, George and Stephenson are alright to stay and can work, but we need to find a good scoring guard somehow and we need a real athlete in the front court who has a mid range jumper.

I'm not saying he's not. He's the guy that can hit shots any team will give to you, and that certainly helps when you can't get a better one. But at the end of the day he's a streaky low percentage field goal shooter and depending on him to fix it is not smart, JMO.

I just think our approach is flawed and as long as we depend on him to do things that aren't his strengths, we'll never get where we want to be. You just can't be the San Antonio Spurs without Manu Ginobli and Tony Parker in the back court. That is what we are missing, is the guard play. Bigs rely on the guards, and the shooters do too. And we either don't have them, or Frank Vogels offense puts handcuffs on them.

The problem with Vogel offense I see is it allows the defense to dictate what we do and I think it's a huge problem. The team approach where you don't know who's going to hurt you, works both ways. We don't know who's going to help us either. So how do you gameplan when that's the case? A great basketball team flows like water, but they can also pound you like a hammer when they need to.



If they continue to flounder and if Danny misses the entire season, they should just trade David West at the trade deadline and try to get a young player and/or a draft pick preferably from a team that owns a potential lottery team's pick. Maybe Oklahoma City would send up Perry Jones or Jeremy Lamb and one of Houston's draft picks for him.

I don't think they'll continue this slide so all of that is really a moot point.

That is the perfect trade with the perfect partner. West would fill a huge need for them with his post scoring as their 3rd big, and Lamb fits our needs and could be huge for us in a few years. If we could get a descent pick to boot, it is the kind of trade that can vault us to legit contender status

vnzla81
11-15-2012, 11:45 AM
Danny did a lot more than stats to make the offense run smoother. That's pretty evident at this point. Now maybe that's a failure in offensive design and not an endorsement of Danny, but it's true either way.

Explain? I remember that the offense looked the same last year with him on the team, the offense has been bad for a long long time with or without Danny.

Trader Joe
11-15-2012, 11:49 AM
Explain? I remember that the offense looked the same last year with him on the team, the offense has been bad for a long long time with or without Danny.

You think the offense looked the same? What how is that even possible? We averaged 10 more PPG, we had better movement. Roy and West got the ball in better spots because Danny spread the D. George was able to just be a spot up jump shooter and get easy buckets in transition. The offense this year looks like a skeletal version of the offense last year at best. It is the same system at its core, but it is not operating in any way, shape or form close to the same efficiency. Last year we also did a great job on the offensive rebounds, one of the reason this may have been the case was because Danny requires his man to stay home, it's harder to help on the defensive boards. Watch how Lance and Paul are defended. Their guys cheat off them all the damn time. Saying Paul is "replacing Danny's stats", well that may be true, but he is not replacing Danny's impact. The team is a lot easier to defend offensively without Danny. It's not an excuse, it's just true, it's an indictment of the coaching staff, the front office, and the rest of the players just as much as it is a support to Danny being a pretty dang good player.

Danny got to the free throw line more than anyone else on the team, 5 free throw attempts a game that are basically gone. Just poof. Paul is not replacing those right now. Paul is getting to the free throw line a whopping 1.9 times a game! That is a huge, huge detriment to the offense.

Stop looking at just the fact that Paul is averaging 14 and 8 and saying that is replacing Danny because it's not. It's not even close. Even with Danny's bad shooting last year, Paul is doing worse. Paul is turning the ball over more than Danny did.

But the free throws are a pretty big deal. That is pretty much 4 PPG that has just gone up in smoke. That's not even accounting the differences in Paul and Danny's game. Danny could play offense without the basketball in a half court set, Paul cannot. Paul can barely play offense with the basketball in a half court set. And I'm not trying to tip on Paul I like his impact on the team, but syaing the offense looks the same as last year? No way, it's just not even close, it's not nearly as open, it's way more clogged up. It's like if you took our offense last year and stuck it in a freezer and then put it in a blender. Yeah it's the same bits and pieces in general, but they aren't nearly the same.

Since86
11-15-2012, 11:50 AM
I just think our approach is flawed and as long as we depend on him to do things that aren't his strengths

Huh?

The things that we rely on Danny to do, like outside shooting, are most definitely his strengths. That's why he's so important, because what he does do, he does very well.

Ace E.Anderson
11-15-2012, 12:00 PM
I think that if the Pacers front office if instead of signing Green and Young had signed Crawford or Mayo nobody would be missing Danny as much, the issue is not that the team misses Danny, the issue is that the Pacers have a bunch of scrubs to replace him.

In reality Paul George is doing a pretty good job in replacing Danny's numbers plus he is playing better D and rebounding at a higher rate than Danny, people love to think about the Danny of four years ago while forgetting that his productivity has been declining every year, last year was bad other than one month were he found a way to make his numbers look decent.

Right now the problem is not replacing Danny but replacing Paul George at small guard.

Edit: I'm not saying that signing either player could make the Pacers contenders either, their issues are deeper than missing an scorer.

Paul can't replace Danny's presence, shooting, confidence, nor his clutch shot ability. Teams are daring PG to shoot right now, whereas teams rarely come off Danny within a spot up situation.

Taterhead
11-15-2012, 12:01 PM
Huh?

The things that we rely on Danny to do, like outside shooting, are most definitely his strengths. That's why he's so important, because what he does do, he does very well.

Some people are expecting him to facilitate offense. He is a finisher. He won't come in and turn our offense around, JMO. He will help.

I think this early season struggle has shined a huge light on our flaws as a team.

vnzla81
11-15-2012, 12:02 PM
You think the offense looked the same? What how is that even possible? We averaged 10 more PPG, we had better movement. Roy and West got the ball in better spots because Danny spread the D. George was able to just be a spot up jump shooter and get easy buckets in transition. The offense this year looks like a skeletal version of the offense last year at best. It is the same system at its core, but it is not operating in any way, shape or form close to the same efficiency. Last year we also did a great job on the offensive rebounds, one of the reason this may have been the case was because Danny requires his man to stay home, it's harder to help on the defensive boards. Watch how Lance and Paul are defended. Their guys cheat off them all the damn time. Saying Paul is "replacing Danny's stats", well that may be true, but he is not replacing Danny's impact. The team is a lot easier to defend offensively without Danny. It's not an excuse, it's just true, it's an indictment of the coaching staff, the front office, and the rest of the players just as much as it is a support to Danny being a pretty dang good player.

Danny got to the free throw line more than anyone else on the team, 5 free throw attempts a game that are basically gone. Just poof. Paul is not replacing those right now. Paul is getting to the free throw line a whopping 1.9 times a game! That is a huge, huge detriment to the offense.

Stop looking at just the fact that Paul is averaging 14 and 8 and saying that is replacing Danny because it's not. It's not even close. Even with Danny's bad shooting last year, Paul is doing worse. Paul is turning the ball over more than Danny did.

But the free throws are a pretty big deal. That is pretty much 4 PPG that has just gone up in smoke. That's not even accounting the differences in Paul and Danny's game. Danny could play offense without the basketball in a half court set, Paul cannot. Paul can barely play offense with the basketball in a half court set. And I'm not trying to tip on Paul I like his impact on the team, but syaing the offense basically looks the same as last year? I mean, maybe if you're applying a pretty liberal use of the word basically.

If I didn't know about who you are talking about I could think that you are talking about Lebron or something, Danny is(was) good but he is not that good, him jacking up shots and shooting under .400 from the field doesn't help as much as you think, there were many games last year were he was a huge negative to the team and was still jacking up shots.

Regarding the offense, yes the offense is the same cluster s***, maybe they scored more points it was the same bs.

I guess I'm going to try to leave you guys alone into thinking that if Danny was here everything would be OK, if that make you guys feel better inside so be it.

Since86
11-15-2012, 12:06 PM
Some people are expecting him to facilitate offense. He is a finisher. He won't come in and turn our offense around, JMO. He will help.

I think this early season struggle has shined a huge light on our flaws as a team.

Who? I think what people are saying, and what you're taking it as, are two seperate things.

Trader Joe
11-15-2012, 12:06 PM
If I didn't know about who you are talking about I could think that you are talking about Lebron or something, Danny is(was) good but he is not that good, him jacking up shots and shooting under .400 from the field doesn't help as much as you think, there were many games last year were he was a huge negative to the team and was still jacking up shots.

Regarding the offense, yes the offense is the same cluster s***, maybe they scored more points it was the same bs.

I guess I'm going to try to leave you guys alone into thinking that if Danny was here everything would be OK, if that make you guys feel better inside so be it.

Where have I ever said that everything would be OK? Where did I ever compare Danny to Lebron James? Do you ever just have a discussion without flying completely off into La La Land where you just overstate everything?

You made the statement that Paul is pretty much replacing Danny. I told you, that you are completely wrong. He doesn't move as well off the ball, he doesn't get to the free throw line as well, he turns the ball over, his defender does not treat him the same way Danny was treated. And you want to keep harping on Danny's percentages, Paul is shooting even worse than Danny did!

But all you can come back to me with is that I sound like I'm describing Lebron James, and that I'm just making myself feel good inside.

You always demand for everyone to back up their own position, but you never back yours. Pretty much ever. You just make outlandish comments.

So please tell me, how is Paul George replacing Danny Granger on offense? Not Lebron James, Danny Granger. Why are we even talking about Lebron James? Even in a world where Danny is as talented as Lebron they have completely different skill sets and styles. If anything the way we are trying to use Paul is like a way crappier version of Lebron.

BillS
11-15-2012, 12:08 PM
If I didn't know about who you are talking about I could think that you are talking about Lebron or something, Danny is(was) good but he is not that good, him jacking up shots and shooting under .400 from the field doesn't help as much as you think, there were many games last year were he was a huge negative to the team and was still jacking up shots.

Regarding the offense, yes the offense is the same cluster s***, maybe they scored more points it was the same bs.

I guess I'm going to try to leave you guys alone into thinking that if Danny was here everything would be OK, if that make you guys feel better inside so be it.

So, seriously, if everything was the same last year and Danny wasn't that good and the bench wasn't that important, how did we finish where we did? Was it a league-wide conspiracy to get Pacer fans' hopes up so they could be cruelly crushed?

I'll agree our offense was the same, but it was more effective for a reason - that reason was because we actually had some scoring from the outside from time to time. The fact that we struggled when we had no outside scoring (during Danny's slump at the beginning of the season) was why we went after Barbosa (who was reviled after the playoffs as being someone we shouldn't bring back and yet suddenly is one of the main guys we should have kept).

People who say we're essentially the same team as last year need to be able to explain exactly what it was that let us finish where we did, because "luck" doesn't cut it.

Since86
11-15-2012, 12:08 PM
I guess I'm going to try to leave you guys alone into thinking that if Danny was here everything would be OK, if that make you guys feel better inside so be it.

No one has argued that Danny will fix everything. Instead of purposfully distorting what people say, you should stick to what is actually said. You have a very bad habit of taking pretty much everything to the extreme.

Trader Joe
11-15-2012, 12:10 PM
No one has argued that Danny will fix everything. Instead of purposfully distorting what people say, you should stick to what is actually said. You have a very bad habit of taking pretty much everything to the extreme.

Yes and it's maddeningly frustrating after I put time into a post to explain my position, at his request, to get back crap that basically amounts to "Sounds like you're describing Lebron James, whatever makes you feel warm and fuzzy"

Ace E.Anderson
11-15-2012, 12:11 PM
NOBODY thinks Danny will fix everything. They just appreciate what he brings to the team, and do not feel that PG is doing that good of a job in replacing him.

vnzla81
11-15-2012, 12:13 PM
So, seriously, if everything was the same last year and Danny wasn't that good and the bench wasn't that important, how did we finish where we did? Was it a league-wide conspiracy to get Pacer fans' hopes up so they could be cruelly crushed?

I'll agree our offense was the same, but it was more effective for a reason - that reason was because we actually had some scoring from the outside from time to time. The fact that we struggled when we had no outside scoring (during Danny's slump at the beginning of the season) was why we went after Barbosa (who was reviled after the playoffs as being someone we shouldn't bring back and yet suddenly is one of the main guys we should have kept).

People who say we're essentially the same team as last year need to be able to explain exactly what it was that let us finish where we did, because "luck" doesn't cut it.

Luck and teams with a lot if injured stars, Howard doesn't get hurt the Pacers don't make it that far.

Trader Joe
11-15-2012, 12:14 PM
NOBODY thinks Danny will fix everything. They just appreciate what he brings to the team, and do not feel that PG is doing that good of a job in replacing him.

It's not even that I feel Paul is doing a "bad job". My point way back when we found out what the deal was with Danny, was that the whole team needed to step up. Not just one guy. Danny was asked to do a lot in Vogel's offense, not in the same way that Lebron is asked to do a lot for Miami, but in his own unique way that Vogel designed specifically for Danny. No one our team has Danny's combo of size, movement without the ball, and outside shooting. That doesn't compare him to Lebron in fact I can probably count the number of times Lebron plays without the ball offensively in Miami on my two hands, it just means that Danny was very important to how this offense was designed and clearly it functioned a lot better last year, so either everyone else just all of a sudden got way worse or the offense was way too dependent on Danny. That doesn't mean Danny is a superstar or even a star, it just means he was important to the offensive design of the Indiana Pacers.

Trader Joe
11-15-2012, 12:14 PM
Luck and teams with a lot if injured stars, Howard doesn't get hurt the Pacers don't make it that far.


This doesn't address the differences in the regular season at all. So please explain those.

Ace E.Anderson
11-15-2012, 12:17 PM
It's not even that I feel Paul is doing a "bad job". My point way back when we found out what the deal was with Danny, was that the whole team needed to step up. Not just one guy. Danny was asked to do a lot in Vogel's offense, not in the same way that Lebron is asked to do a lot for Miami, but in his own unique way that Vogel designed specifically for Danny. No one our team has Danny's combo of size, movement without the ball, and outside shooting. That doesn't compare him to Lebron in fact I can probably count the number of times Lebron plays without the ball offensively in Miami on my two hands, it just means that Danny was very important to how this offense was designed and clearly it functioned a lot better last year, so either everyone else just all of a sudden got way worse or the offense was way too dependent on Danny. That doesn't mean Danny is a superstar or even a star, it just means he was important to the offensive design of the Indiana Pacers.

Yeah don't get me wrong I think PG is good in his own way. His versatility is important to a team that has some established scoring around him (if he were on OKC or LAL, he'd be an absolute gem) I was just saying he's not able (yet?) to provide all the things DG provides the team with (a lot of which, you mentioned within your previous post)

bellisimo
11-15-2012, 12:18 PM
I wouldn't except for the fact the Pacers DO completely deflate if teams get a strong series against them. Doesn't have to be at the start of the game - as soon as someone begins a run we can't seem to cope.

which is the most annoying part of this season so far - last year after the half we would always be the team that would come out strong and have a great 3rd QT - no matter if we were down or up - this year it doesn't matter which quarter it is, there just doesn't seem to be any type of fire and willpower with the team and players...

vnzla81
11-15-2012, 12:23 PM
It's not even that I feel Paul is doing a "bad job". My point way back when we found out what the deal was with Danny, was that the whole team needed to step up. Not just one guy. Danny was asked to do a lot in Vogel's offense, not in the same way that Lebron is asked to do a lot for Miami, but in his own unique way that Vogel designed specifically for Danny. No one our team has Danny's combo of size, movement without the ball, and outside shooting. That doesn't compare him to Lebron in fact I can probably count the number of times Lebron plays without the ball offensively in Miami on my two hands, it just means that Danny was very important to how this offense was designed and clearly it functioned a lot better last year, so either everyone else just all of a sudden got way worse or the offense was way too dependent on Danny. That doesn't mean Danny is a superstar or even a star, it just means he was important to the offensive design of the Indiana Pacers.

What offense are you talking about? The pacers have not had an offense for ever, I don't think I was dreaming when I saw the same horrible offense last year, and the year before and the year before .....

vnzla81
11-15-2012, 12:26 PM
Yeah don't get me wrong I think PG is good in his own way. His versatility is important to a team that has some established scoring around him (if he were on OKC or LAL, he'd be an absolute gem) I was just saying he's not able (yet?) to provide all the things DG provides the team with (a lot of which, you mentioned within your previous post)

The only thing Paul George is not providing that Danny does is five more points per game and better shooting from outside that's all, Paul George rebounds better, pass the ball better and plays way better D.

Trader Joe
11-15-2012, 12:30 PM
The only thing Paul George is not providing that Danny does is five more points per game and better shooting from outside that's all, Paul George rebounds better, pass the ball better and plays way better D.

Paul is worse at handling the ball, he is worse at shooting from mid range, he is worse at shooting from long range, he is worse at moving without the ball, he is worse at setting screens and picks, he is worse at getting to the free throw line, he is worse at finishing on the break or in traffic (Finger roll baby!).

Trader Joe
11-15-2012, 12:32 PM
What offense are you talking about? The pacers have not had an offense for ever, I don't think I was dreaming when I saw the same horrible offense last year, and the year before and the year before .....

Our iso style offense is designed to take advantage of a team design that has 5 good players, so on any given night the idea is that 2-3 of those guys will have positional advnatages, in order for this offense to succeed you need spacing, you need at least one guy who can move well without the ball, you need a guy that is good at setting screens off the ball, the guy who does those 3 things better than anyone on our team isn't playing. So the offense is much worse than it was last year, or the year before, or the year before. If you don't like the offense, that's fine, but it doesn't change the fact taht Danny is an important piece of that offense and makes it run much smoother.

Ace E.Anderson
11-15-2012, 12:35 PM
The only thing Paul George is not providing that Danny does is five more points per game and better shooting from outside that's all, Paul George rebounds better, pass the ball better and plays way better D.

Paul isn't the "threat" that Danny is. Not even close. Paul isnt getting to the FT line like Danny. Paul doesn't give the other players on our team confidence the way Danny can. Paul isn't as clutch as Danny--which may have helped in some of these close games.

I'm not hating on PG, like I said earlier, his versatility is important.

CableKC
11-15-2012, 12:39 PM
Granger is not that good.


Granger is THAT GOOD, when you look at the rest of our offensive players. Granger was tactically a very important piece of the Pacer puzzle. Now we should be better than we are even without Danny, but that doesn't change how important he was. It just illustrates how bad everyone else has been.
Overall, Granger isn't that good....if you are looking at him on a standalone basis...when compared to other top Tier Players. But to the Pacers ( and to Trader Joe's point ), it is clear that Granger is "Good"......as in "Good" for the Team and what he means to how the offense operates given the makeup of the Starting lineup.

The best way to look at Granger is his value to this Team in particular.....his value to other Teams may not be anything more than the "Robin" on any other Playoff Team with an actual Franchise Player.....but to the Pacers....he's the best that we got when it comes to commanding attention on the offensive end......something that we are lacking now ( until Hibbert figures it out ). In the end....Granger may be considered "Robin" to other Teams....but to us....he's our "Batman".

vnzla81
11-15-2012, 12:40 PM
Paul is worse at handling the ball

Disagree, he is way better than Danny.


he is worse at shooting from mid range

maybe.


he is worse at shooting from long range

He was better than Danny last year but so far Paul George is sucking at this so I agree for now.


he is worse at moving without the ball

It's not like Danny is some kind of gazelle ala Dunleavy running around, maybe Vogel doesn't make Paul George move as much on offense? have you thought about that?


he is worse at setting screens and picks

I'm not sure how you know this, the guard on the Pacers don't set that many screens.


he is worse at getting to the free throw line, he is worse at finishing on the break or in traffic (Finger roll baby!).

Yes he needs to get better at getting to the the free throw line but let's not go crazy into thinking that Danny is somehow a great finisher, the guy is known for missing easy layups for not been able or not wanting to dunk on the run, they are both bad at it.

Hoop
11-15-2012, 12:45 PM
The only thing worse than the Pacers right now, is this forum. Some seem almost be happy we are falling a part. See you all in a month or 2 when it calms down some.

Trader Joe
11-15-2012, 12:45 PM
Paul's mid range game being worse than Danny's is not a maybe.

As far as Paul not being asked to move off the ball as much as Danny, hell yes he is not asked as much, because he's not as good at it! And it's one of the reasons we aren't as good! Green has actually been the one moving wihtout the ball on offense a lot of the time.

Defenders don't pay as much attention to Gerald, Paul, or Lance as they did to Danny. It doesn't make him a superstar. It just makes him a good offensive player that has earned the respect of NBA coaches.

vnzla81
11-15-2012, 12:45 PM
Paul isn't the "threat" that Danny is. Not even close. Paul isnt getting to the FT line like Danny. Paul doesn't give the other players on our team confidence the way Danny can. Paul isn't as clutch as Danny--which may have helped in some of these close games.

I'm not hating on PG, like I said earlier, his versatility is important.

Yes Paul George is not as good as Danny yet but to me the drop off is not as great as many of you think, now the drop off from Paul George at the 2 to Green and Young is as big as the Grand Canyon, there is were the problem is.

CableKC
11-15-2012, 12:46 PM
Granger is THAT GOOD, when you look at the rest of our offensive players. Granger was tactically a very important piece of the Pacer puzzle. Now we should be better than we are even without Danny, but that doesn't change how important he was. It just illustrates how bad everyone else has been.


West looks old to me I don't think he is going to get any better, I expect him to stay where he is right now, maybe his % goes up a bit but I still don't see it as a reason to say that the Pacers are somehow back into elite teams.

And also teams already know how to shut both guys down, they know how to push Roy out of position and they know how to remove the West ISO's.
Prior to this last game....West has been playing as I expected....if anything, he was the only Player ( outside of Hansbrough and GH ) that brought it every night. I can see what you are saying when it comes to him looking "old and tired"....but this could simply be due to fatigue. Because the 2nd unit has been atrocious since the start of the season....Vogel has been heavily relying on the Starting 5 to play more minutes. I agree that West may look tired and worn down....but he's also playing far more minutes than he should be.

Trader Joe
11-15-2012, 12:49 PM
Paul's mid range game being worse than Danny's is not a maybe.

As far as Paul not being asked to move off the ball as much as Danny, hell yes he is not asked as much, because he's not as good at it! And it's one of the reasons we aren't as good! Green has actually been the one moving wihtout the ball on offense a lot of the time.

Defenders don't pay as much attention to Gerald, Paul, or Lance as they did to Danny. It doesn't make him a superstar. It just makes him a good offensive player that has earned the respect of NBA coaches.

To add to this, whether you like it or not Vnzla, Danny is a guy with a 25 PPG season on his resume, you may not respect that, but I guarantee you NBA coaches have. Now that respect is probably going to change with this knee injury. I think they will make Danny prove he can score again, and I don't know if that will happen.

CableKC
11-15-2012, 12:50 PM
Right now here's what I see our biggest problem as. We have one guy in the starting lineup that can actually play the up tempo/half tempo mix we kind of played last year, Hill. PG and Lance or PG and Green are really better suited to up tempo, and Roy and West are really better suited to half court. Danny was another guy who can play both ways, but when it is just Hill the difference is startling.

In half court, our perimeter guys really struggle, PG can't beat his man off the dribble, Lance can, but often times settles for a bad mid range jumper instead of finishing the attack.

West and Hibbert flat out get completely gassed when we try to push the pace at all it seems like.
Of the remaining Wing Players....which are capable of playing in a Half-Court offense?

Would it benefit the GH, West, Hibbert if we switched up the rotations to run more of a half-court offense at times and then switch gears to play more up-tempo with DJ/Lance/PG/Hans/Mahinmi?

Is it possible to run 2 different types of offense given the lineups used?

Trader Joe
11-15-2012, 12:52 PM
Of the remaining Wing Players....which are capable of playing in a Half-Court offense?

If you consider Hill a wing, then him and only him for the moment. Lance has the ability to beat poeple off the dribble, but hsi tendency is to shoot as soon as his guy gets beat instead of finishing the play.

vnzla81
11-15-2012, 12:54 PM
Overall, Granger isn't that good....if you are looking at him on a standalone basis...when compared to other top Tier Players. But to the Pacers ( and to Trader Joe's point ), it is clear that Granger is "Good"......as in "Good" for the Team and what he means to how the offense operates given the makeup of the Starting lineup.

The best way to look at Granger is his value to this Team in particular.....his value to other Teams may not be anything more than the "Robin" on any other Playoff Team with an actual Franchise Player.....but to the Pacers....he's the best that we got when it comes to commanding attention on the offensive end......something that we are lacking now ( until Hibbert figures it out ). In the end....Granger may be considered "Robin" to other Teams....but to us....he's our "Batman".

And that is why this team is just no that good, if he is your Batman you are pretty much screwed.

Shade
11-15-2012, 01:29 PM
When you start to think about all the things Granger is the "best at" on this team on offense, it gets a little daunting.

He is the best long ranger shooter, he is the best mid ranger shooter, he maybe the best finisher in traffic, he is the best guy at switching between half court and up tempo, he is the best guy off the basketball (both looking to score and looking to help people out), he might be the best person on the team at setting picks and screens.

It didn't become as clear til you see the dumpster fire Pacers offense without him, but yeah....

Who knew that Danny Granger = Peyton Manning? :whoknows:

CableKC
11-15-2012, 01:32 PM
And that is why this team is just no that good, if he is your Batman you are pretty much screwed.
Are you saying that Granger isn't a Franchise Player?

Cuz we all know that he isn't one. That is not what any of us are saying. We also know that we don't really have a Player that is considered a Franchise Level Player ( like LeDecision, Wade, Kyrie or Kobe ).

Granger is the closest thing we have on our Team to "Batman". Unfortunately....PG ( as Dick Grayson ) isn't doing a good job of putting on the Cape and Cowl trying to pretend that he is the "Batman" ( I know...poor Comic Book analogy ).

We simply do not have anyone on this Team that draws as much offensive attention to allow the rest of the Starting Lineup to score the way that they did last year. PG maybe trying to fill that role....but I don't think that he has it in him. The closest one that should be drawing the attention on the offensive end is Hibbert....but he appears to be "wilting under the pressure". My hope is that he starts to get his confidence back and that he starts doing what he did last year....draw double-teams and then pass it out to someone that can score.

The whole point that many of us here are trying to point out is that we know that Granger isn't a top 15 Player in the League that should be leading ANY Team as the cornerstone of any Franchise. What we are saying is that the role that he played on this Team on the offensive end APPEARS to be the most important one given the way this Team is made up....not that he should be put on the same pedestal as LeDecision or Kobe.

Strummer
11-15-2012, 01:35 PM
• Lance needs to shoot the ball more. In fact seeing as how he has the highest field goal % of any of our wings I would suggest we start looking to let him get his shot more often if we can.


Right now Lance is doing a good job of showing that he's learned to be a team player. Even with things falling apart, he's still deferring to the vets and not been tempted to "freelance" and try to take over games by himself. I think that's what Frank wanted to see. So I expect Frank will start giving Lance the green light more often. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but soon and for the rest of the season.

Trader Joe
11-15-2012, 01:35 PM
Who knew that Danny Granger = Peyton Manning? :whoknows:

I didn't design the offense so take it up with Frank.

Strummer
11-15-2012, 01:38 PM
if he is your Batman you are pretty much screwed.

Seriously? When we had the 5th best record in the NBA last year, you felt screwed? Seriously?

Pacertron
11-15-2012, 01:40 PM
As for Lance......I'm all for giving him as many minutes as he can handle and to take the leash off of him when it comes to scoring.....if PG isn't willing to take over on the offensive end....then let Lance do his best impression of Dwayne Wade.


This. At least Lance is fearless, he really is. And that is something we need a LOT of right now. The results can't be any worse than they are now with our wings afraid to shoot.

Since86
11-15-2012, 01:40 PM
Seriously? When we had the 5th best record in the NBA last year, you felt screwed? Seriously?

He thinks last season's sample size of 66 games was luck, and this season's sample size of 9 games is closer to reality. I wish I was kidding.

Trader Joe
11-15-2012, 01:42 PM
Seriously? When we had the 5th best record in the NBA last year, you felt screwed? Seriously?

If Vnzla had to admit that Danny was this important to the team, he would be wrong and that would be a travesty he is not willing to face.

EDIT: The truth as always is in the middle, does Danny immediately make us the 5th best team in the NBA again? No. Are we probably 5-4 or 6-3 instead of 3-6? I think so.

Taterhead
11-15-2012, 01:45 PM
Who? I think what people are saying, and what you're taking it as, are two seperate things.

I think you are taking my comments out of context a little. I never said Danny wouldn't help the offense, just that he won't "fix" it.

Overall, even with Granger, I feel like our offensive problems are that we lack a facilitator (or two). And I have been very vocal about it even when we have been winning.

Danny suffers from our flaws as much as anyone, and his scoring average and shooting % has reflected that the last few years. The JOB teams HAD facilitators, Dunleavy is a player like I'm talking about. Tinsley is a player like that, hell TJ Ford is a player like that. Dunleavy, who I hate as a ball player, is strong in those areas. He is soft as butter and can't defend Betty White, but he can sure as hell handle the ball, make a good pass, get in the lane and facilitate. And Danny played his best next to him. The problem was that they were both SF's and neither could be an effective SG.

So my argument is that a guy like Granger really can't fix it. All we are seeing without him is a magnified version of our flawed team from an offensive standpoint.

Think about it......all these complaints are the exact same things that were said all of last year every time we had a slump or a bad performance. Roy can't play, Paul George lacks a killer instinct, George Hill ain't a PG, Augustin/Collison suck, and so on. And Danny coming back won't erase those things because there is some truth is each one of them.

Since86
11-15-2012, 01:47 PM
I think you are taking my comments out of context a little. I never said Danny wouldn't help the offense, just that he won't "fix" it.

Then you'll have no problem coming up with names of people who've argued that Danny is a great facilitator then, if I'm just merely taking you out of context, and not the other way around.

vnzla81
11-15-2012, 01:50 PM
He thinks last season's sample size of 66 games was luck, and this season's sample size of 9 games is closer to reality. I wish I was kidding.

And nothing so far is proving me wrong.

Trader Joe
11-15-2012, 01:51 PM
And nothing so far is proving me wrong.

LOL

Since86
11-15-2012, 01:52 PM
A legend in your own mind.

vnzla81
11-15-2012, 01:55 PM
I think you are taking my comments out of context a little. I never said Danny wouldn't help the offense, just that he won't "fix" it.

Overall, even with Granger, I feel like our offensive problems are that we lack a facilitator (or two). And I have been very vocal about it even when we have been winning.

Danny suffers from our flaws as much as anyone, and his scoring average and shooting % has reflected that the last few years. The JOB teams HAD facilitators, Dunleavy is a player like I'm talking about. Tinsley is a player like that, hell TJ Ford is a player like that. Dunleavy, who I hate as a ball player, is strong in those areas. He is soft as butter and can't defend Betty White, but he can sure as hell handle the ball, make a good pass, get in the lane and facilitate. And Danny played his best next to him. The problem was that they were both SF's and neither could be an effective SG.

So my argument is that a guy like Granger really can't fix it. All we are seeing without him is a magnified version of our flawed team from an offensive standpoint.

Think about it......all these complaints are the exact same things that were said all of last year every time we had a slump or a bad performance. Roy can't play, Paul George lacks a killer instinct, George Hill ain't a PG, Augustin/Collison suck, and so on. And Danny coming back won't erase those things because there is some truth is each one of them.

Amen to this, everybody here should think about reading this great post.

LoneGranger33
11-15-2012, 01:56 PM
A legend in your own mind.

I kind of think he's a legend too. Vnzla81 really is never wrong; when it seems that he is, it is simply because he has yet to be proven right.

vnzla81
11-15-2012, 01:58 PM
A legend in your own mind.

Don't hate.

Since86
11-15-2012, 02:01 PM
Think about it......all these complaints are the exact same things that were said all of last year every time we had a slump or a bad performance. Roy can't play, Paul George lacks a killer instinct, George Hill ain't a PG, Augustin/Collison suck, and so on. And Danny coming back won't erase those things because there is some truth is each one of them.

This just doesn't make much sense, IMHO.

If the problems of last year are the problems of this year, and last years team was good and this years team is bad, then what explains the difference?

You're arguing that it isn't Danny, yet him not playing is the only significant difference between last year and this year, besides the bench. Or do you just think the entire problem is the bench?

If the problems are the same this year as they were last year, then shouldn't we be able to expect similiar results as opposed to the direct opposite?

Neither you nor Vnlza has been able to provide any reasoning as to why this year is so different than last year, other than simply hanging your hat on last year being an aberration.

LoneGranger33
11-15-2012, 02:03 PM
Don't hate.

Pay him no heed. He's in what we call the reality-based community. That's not the way the board really works anymore. We're an empire now, you and I, and when we post, we create our own reality. And while they're studying that reality - judiciously, as they will - we'll post again, creating other new realities, which they can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're Pacers Digest's actors...and them, all of them, will be left to just study what we post.

vnzla81
11-15-2012, 02:07 PM
Pay him no heed. He's in what we call the reality-based community. That's not the way the board really works anymore. We're an empire now, you and I, and when we post, we create our own reality. And while they're studying that reality - judiciously, as they will - we'll post again, creating other new realities, which they can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're Pacers Digest's actors...and them, all of them, will be left to just study what we post.

:wtf: I have no idea wtf you are talking about, good try though.

CableKC
11-15-2012, 02:09 PM
If Vnzla had to admit that Danny was this important to the team, he would be wrong and that would be a travesty he is not willing to face.

EDIT: The truth as always is in the middle, does Danny immediately make us the 5th best team in the NBA again? No. Are we probably 5-4 or 6-3 instead of 3-6? I think so.
Another thing to note....even with Granger out.....if Hibbert didn't revert to his old self instead of the dominant Low Post scorer that he once was....then I can see us doing much better. Keep in mind...we lost at least 3 game where the difference on the offensive end was 3-4 points....the difference in Scoring average between Hibbert last year and this year.

As we have noted......Granger was the guy that kept the offense honest....Hibbert is capable of commanding double-teams ( at least he was last year ). If Hibbert can do the same and regain some attention on the offensive end...then I think that we can become an "average scoring" team instead of the worst scoring Team in the League.

Taterhead
11-15-2012, 02:18 PM
Then you'll have no problem coming up with names of people who've argued that Danny is a great facilitator then, if I'm just merely taking you out of context, and not the other way around.

I am arguing more that people over rate his contributions on offense, than that they misrepresent what he is about as a player.


This just doesn't make much sense, IMHO.

If the problems of last year are the problems of this year, and last years team was good and this years team is bad, then what explains the difference?

You're arguing that it isn't Danny, yet him not playing is the only significant difference between last year and this year, besides the bench. Or do you just think the entire problem is the bench?

If the problems are the same this year as they were last year, then shouldn't we be able to expect similiar results as opposed to the direct opposite?

Neither you nor Vnlza has been able to provide any reasoning as to why this year is so different than last year, other than simply hanging your hat on last year being an aberration.

Sports don't work like that. Every year is different.

Teams had no tape on Vogels offense last year. We weren't expected to be that good. Nobody knew exactly what kind of team we were gonna be. We played Orlando without Dwight Howard. We played Miami without Chris Bosh. All those things worked in our favor. We were healthy last year.

I don't think we were that great last year. 5th place is not my goal for the Pacers, it is a title.

I said we could be a good tough middle of the road playoff team this year. Coincidentally that is exactly what we were last year.

But, I am talking about the team going any further than that.

There seems to be a huge segment of the board that thinks that just because you were a good team one year, that you'll automatically progress forward. Too bad that didn't work out for Atlanta or Memphis.

CableKC
11-15-2012, 02:24 PM
I am arguing more that people over rate his contributions on offense, than that they misrepresent what he is about as a player.
Could it be without Granger that the flaws in the offense ( when it comes to the Starting Lineup ) are more exposed and therefore magnified?

Justin Tyme
11-15-2012, 02:25 PM
Granger is THAT GOOD, when you look at the rest of our offensive players.


LOL! That really doesn't say alot for Granger when you compare him to the rest of the players on the team at the present!

Trader Joe
11-15-2012, 02:27 PM
LOL! That really doesn't say alot for Granger when you compare him to the rest of the players on the team at the present!

And that's a valid opinion to have, but it doesn't change how important he is to the team.

vnzla81
11-15-2012, 02:30 PM
Could it be without Granger that the flaws in the offense ( when it comes to the Starting Lineup ) are more exposed and therefore magnified?

Yes they are magnified but they won't go away if he gets back, the Pacers still need a shot creator, a shooter and a passer.

Since86
11-15-2012, 02:32 PM
Some people are expecting him to facilitate offense. He is a finisher. He won't come in and turn our offense around, JMO. He will help.

I think this early season struggle has shined a huge light on our flaws as a team.


I am arguing more that people over rate his contributions on offense, than that they misrepresent what he is about as a player.


I'll quote you so I don't take you out of context.



Some people are expecting him to facilitate offense. He is a finisher. He won't come in and turn our offense around, JMO. He will help.

I think this early season struggle has shined a huge light on our flaws as a team.

So again I ask, who's been arguing that Danny is a facilitator? That's not what people said, nor implying. Danny isn't a facilitator, he's a finisher.




Sports don't work like that. Every year is different.

And yet you're arguing that the problems last year are the same exact problems as this year. I'll even quote you again.


Think about it......all these complaints are the exact same things that were said all of last year every time we had a slump or a bad performance. Roy can't play, Paul George lacks a killer instinct, George Hill ain't a PG, Augustin/Collison suck, and so on. And Danny coming back won't erase those things because there is some truth is each one of them.


So the problems are the exact same as last year, and the only difference this year is that Danny is out, but Danny playing again won't result like last year, because each year is different.

Gotcha.

Ace E.Anderson
11-15-2012, 02:38 PM
Yes they are magnified but they won't go away if he gets back, the Pacers still need a shot creator, a shooter and a passer.

NOBODY IS DISPUTING THIS FACT!!! lol.

Since he's been our main offensive option, our offense has NEVER looked THIS BAD. I mean even when we had Earl Freakin Watson as our starting PG, we were still able to score a lot of nights (yes it's because of JOB's bs system) with Danny at the helm. He was a good-great scorer on a bad team. As bad as our team is playing now, we don't even have anyone that can be a good to great scorer on a bad team lol.

We know we need more facilitators, shooters, and shot creators. Nobody can dispute that. If nothing else, then we definitely need a player that can do at least two of the three. Danny is only a shooter and a scorer. We know he won't solve all of our problems, but he's definitely been taken for granted for what he provides this team.

Taterhead
11-15-2012, 02:41 PM
Could it be without Granger that the flaws in the offense ( when it comes to the Starting Lineup ) are more exposed and therefore magnified?

I think it's both. It's not an either/or for me.

People I am not arguing Danny isn't a good offensive player. I am not arguing that he doesn't help the offense. This thread was originally about our problems as a team in regards to this rough start, and whether or not it's because Danny is out. I think it has something to do with it, mainly that it has thrust Paul George and Roy Hibbert into roles neither are comfortable with.

But, overall I feel like our lack of good guard play will hinder us regardless, no matter how strong Danny returns. And we won't build on last years success by going further into the playoffs. Once you get past the first round you are playing the ELITE teams. You can't get to the conference finals with George Hill and Paul George in the back court. JMO

gummy
11-15-2012, 02:43 PM
Pay him no heed. He's in what we call the reality-based community. That's not the way the board really works anymore. We're an empire now, you and I, and when we post, we create our own reality. And while they're studying that reality - judiciously, as they will - we'll post again, creating other new realities, which they can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're Pacers Digest's actors...and them, all of them, will be left to just study what we post.

:spitout: Political Science and History degree over here. Nicely done, very nicely done - and so, so appropriate. :worship:

Since86
11-15-2012, 02:43 PM
Well there's the disconnect.


No one is arguing that Danny is a solution good enough to make the Pacers an elite offensive team. Instead the argument is that Danny is a solution that will make the Pacers as good as last years offense.

Getting back to last years level would be a huge positive.

Ace E.Anderson
11-15-2012, 02:47 PM
I think it's both. It's not an either/or for me.

People I am not arguing Danny isn't a good offensive player. I am not arguing that he doesn't help the offense. This thread was originally about our problems as a team in regards to this rough start, and whether or not it's because Danny is out. I think it has something to do with it, mainly that it has thrust Paul George and Roy Hibbert into roles neither are comfortable with.

But, overall I feel like our lack of good guard play will hinder us regardless, no matter how strong Danny returns. And we won't build on last years success by going further into the playoffs. Once you get past the first round you are playing the ELITE teams. You can't get to the conference finals with George Hill and Paul George in the back court. JMO

Unless you have a Lebron James, Carmelo Anthony type of scorer at the SF. I agree with you 100% on this.

Taterhead
11-15-2012, 02:51 PM
I'll quote you so I don't take you out of context.




So again I ask, who's been arguing that Danny is a facilitator? That's not what people said, nor implying. Danny isn't a facilitator, he's a finisher.





And yet you're arguing that the problems last year are the same exact problems as this year. I'll even quote you again.



So the problems are the exact same as last year, and the only difference this year is that Danny is out, but Danny playing again won't result like last year, because each year is different.

Gotcha.

You are talking like what we did last year is the goal for this year. It's not, we are supposed to be better.

That says "expecting him to facilitate", not that they are arguing he is a great facilitator. If you want me to respond to your points, at least portray my view accurately. Our offense has never been great under Vogel, our defense has always carried us. So I am not sure how you can act like offense wasn't an issue even with Danny. I thought that was just common knowledge.

They are the same problems as last year. Did you not watch the Miami series or even the Chicago series the year before? When they finally started playing defense late in the series, we couldn't score. And we did nothing to correct it. We are coming with the same approach and talent level. The only difference is teams have a lot more tape and have played against Vogels scheme a few times. Not a recipe for growth, JMO.



Im not sure what you are arguing exactly.


Well there's the disconnect.


No one is arguing that Danny is a solution good enough to make the Pacers an elite offensive team. Instead the argument is that Danny is a solution that will make the Pacers as good as last years offense.

Getting back to last years level would be a huge positive.

I disagree. We are supposed to be growing, we are supposed to be better. All of my posts are about us reaching new heights.

vnzla81
11-15-2012, 02:51 PM
NOBODY IS DISPUTING THIS FACT!!! lol.

Since he's been our main offensive option, our offense has NEVER looked THIS BADI mean even when we had Earl Freakin Watson as our starting PG, we were still able to score a lot of nights (yes it's because of JOB's bs system) with Danny at the helm. He was a good-great scorer on a bad team. As bad as our team is playing now, we don't even have anyone that can be a good to great scorer on a bad team lol.

We know we need more facilitators, shooters, and shot creators. Nobody can dispute that. If nothing else, then we definitely need a player that can do at least two of the three. Danny is only a shooter and a scorer. We know he won't solve all of our problems, but he's definitely been taken for granted for what he provides this team.

I remember that the offense looked this bad a lot of times last year and the Pacers had to play "hero ball" a lot to beat teams.

Even this year they went to "hero ball" by going to either West or Hill non stop, I think that if you pay attention to other teams OKC runs the same crapy offense than the Pacers but the difference is that they have two superstars to get them over the hill.

Since86
11-15-2012, 02:58 PM
That says "expecting him to facilitate", not that they are arguing he is a great facilitator. If you want me to respond to your points, at least portray my view accurately.

Which isn't what I said either.


So again I ask, who's been arguing that Danny is a facilitator? That's not what people said, nor implying. Danny isn't a facilitator, he's a finisher.



Let me rephrase if it will help you.

Who expects Danny to facilitate?

Since86
11-15-2012, 03:00 PM
I disagree. We are supposed to be growing, we are supposed to be better. All of my posts are about us reaching new heights.

So unless the Pacers reach the ECF, this season will be a bust?

Ace E.Anderson
11-15-2012, 03:03 PM
I remember that the offense looked this bad a lot of times last year and the Pacers had to play "hero ball" a lot to beat teams.

Even this year they went to "hero ball" by going to either West or Hill non stop, I think that if you pay attention to other teams OKC runs the same crapy offense than the Pacers but the difference is that they have two superstars to get them over the hill.

We looked bad at times, but not this consistently bad. Guys missing 2 ft bunny layups, turning the ball over just because (we were one of the best in the league at nor turning the ball over), etc. Forget guys getting 20, guys are struggling to get over 15 right now. It may not have pretty last year, but I don't recall it being THIS bad.

OlBlu
11-15-2012, 03:07 PM
So unless the Pacers reach the ECF, this season will be a bust?

Not in my book but some here had overinflated expectations for this team.... I still think they will be a five or six seed and lose in the first round of the playoffs.....:cool:

Justin Tyme
11-15-2012, 03:16 PM
I think this early season struggle has shined a huge light on our flaws as a team.


I couldn't agree more. Then with Granger out it has just magnified those flaws.

Taterhead
11-15-2012, 03:25 PM
So unless the Pacers reach the ECF, this season will be a bust?

Yep, why don't you ask them? That is their expectations not mine, at least the way the team is constructed.

Read that again Since86, I never said people were saying, I said people expect Danny to facilitate offense. That is what is called an opinion. Not sure what else to say.

Anyone who thinks he's going to come back and the offense will magically be fixed, is expecting him to "facilitate " the offense.

Facilitate means "to make easier", per Merriams.

OlBlu
11-15-2012, 03:33 PM
Yep, why don't you ask them? That is their expectations not mine, at least the way the team is constructed.

Read that again Since86, I never said people were saying, I said people expect Danny to facilitate offense. That is what is called an opinion. Not sure what else to say.

Anyone who thinks he's going to come back and the offense will magically be fixed, is expecting him to "facilitate " the offense.

Facilitate means "to make easier", per Merriams.


I think right now they would say "we just want to win some games" and if they do that the rest will take care of itself.....:cool:

Since86
11-15-2012, 03:41 PM
Words have different meanings in different contexts. In the context of basketball, facilitate is more often used in terms of actually running the offense in general, or passing the ball, not just making the offense easier.



And all I was asking for is for some names that argued it. I've asked several times with no answer. I asked for names, because like I said, I think what other people have said and how you've taken it, are to different things.

If you're using the term facilitate to just mean Granger makes the offense easier to run, then yeah, he's a facilitator. Which is why the offense has bogged down. Without him on the court, defenses are left to lock in on clogging the middle making Roy and West ineffective as they normally are.

Taterhead
11-15-2012, 03:42 PM
I think right now they would say "we just want to win some games" and if they do that the rest will take care of itself.....:cool:

Right now youre right blu, thanks for sharing. But I heard a lot of talk about us taking the next step in the offseason and I'm gonna hold them to it. I stick by what I say, for the long haul, when I'm right I'm right and if I'm wrong I don't have a problem admitting that either. You should try it sometimes.


Words have different meanings in different contexts. In the context of basketball, facilitate is more often used in terms of actually running the offense in general, or passing the ball, not just making the offense easier.



And all I was asking for is for some names that argued it. I've asked several times with no answer.

C'mon man!

Since86
11-15-2012, 04:04 PM
Playbook: Hawes Facilitates High-low Offense

With center Andrew Bynum now serving as the Sixers' primary offensive target in the post, head coach Doug Collins envisions forward-center Spencer Hawes using his elite vision and passing ability to create opportunities for the former-Laker. In Los Angeles, Bynum played alongside Pau Gasol, whose style of play is very similar to that of Hawes.

http://www.nba.com/sixers/playbook-hawes-facilitates-high-low-offense

It's more commonly used as a synonym with distribute/create.

We were just using two different usages of the word. Danny doesn't distribute or create for others.



But yeah, Danny is a facilitator in this offense because he spaces the floor. There's no room to operate on the inside, because the defense doesn't have to worry about the wings killing them. There's no threat on the floor to hurt teams. Danny won't fix every single problem of the offense, but he would fix a lot of it.

The entire system is built around having complimentary players who use different strengths to cover up their teammates weaknesses. Danny is a very important part of that machine.

How do you beat double teams? By knocking down shots by the open man. The Pacers cannot do it right now, so the double stays and causes havoc for the offensive post player.

Since86
11-15-2012, 04:11 PM
It's just hard for me to understand how a teams best scorer can go down, and people not think that it's going to have a pretty substantial negative effect on the teams offense.

Pacers are a low scoring team, so taking out an automatic 20pts every night puts a lot of pressure on the rest of the squad. They rely on the spacing that Danny creates through pure defensive focus. It's 20% of the offense just gone.

McKeyFan
11-15-2012, 04:11 PM
Right now Lance is doing a good job of showing that he's learned to be a team player. Even with things falling apart, he's still deferring to the vets and not been tempted to "freelance" and try to take over games by himself. I think that's what Frank wanted to see. So I expect Frank will start giving Lance the green light more often. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but soon and for the rest of the season.

Freelance!

McKeyFan
11-15-2012, 04:15 PM
If Vnzla had to admit that Danny was this important to the team, he would be wrong and that would be a travesty he is not willing to face.

EDIT: The truth as always is in the middle, does Danny immediately make us the 5th best team in the NBA again? No. Are we probably 5-4 or 6-3 instead of 3-6? I think so.

5-4 against a pretty weak schedule.

McKeyFan
11-15-2012, 04:19 PM
This just doesn't make much sense, IMHO.

If the problems of last year are the problems of this year, and last years team was good and this years team is bad, then what explains the difference?

You're arguing that it isn't Danny, yet him not playing is the only significant difference between last year and this year, besides the bench. Or do you just think the entire problem is the bench?

If the problems are the same this year as they were last year, then shouldn't we be able to expect similiar results as opposed to the direct opposite?

Neither you nor Vnlza has been able to provide any reasoning as to why this year is so different than last year, other than simply hanging your hat on last year being an aberration.
I'll take a stab at that.

We squeezed as much out of last year's team as possible. Great hustle. Motivated coach. No injuries. Every single component had to work to accomplish what we did. Pull out one key component and . . . Kerplunk!

Taterhead
11-15-2012, 04:29 PM
http://www.nba.com/sixers/playbook-hawes-facilitates-high-low-offense

It's more commonly used as a synonym with distribute/create.

We were just using two different usages of the word. Danny doesn't distribute or create for others.



But yeah, Danny is a facilitator in this offense because he spaces the floor. There's no room to operate on the inside, because the defense doesn't have to worry about the wings killing them. There's no threat on the floor to hurt teams. Danny won't fix every single problem of the offense, but he would fix a lot of it.

The entire system is built around having complimentary players who use different strengths to cover up their teammates weaknesses. Danny is a very important part of that machine.

How do you beat double teams? By knocking down shots by the open man. The Pacers cannot do it right now, so the double stays and causes havoc for the offensive post player.

I think of a facilitator as someone who gets his teammates easy baskets either by breaking down the defense from the outside, or in the post. I don't think Danny really does that. Granger to me is the finisher, not the guy that starts out the process of a successful play.

Again, we DO miss Granger, a lot more than I thought we would when I heard he was out. I hoped Paul George would step up and fill his void as a shooter and provide us with more athleticism, making us a quicker team, opening up transition and providing us with more punch off the dribble. He might yet show that, but so far he's looked lost. I also hoped Lance would finally get his chance, and he has minutes wise, but he seems to be handcuffed out there by the coach.

I think we just were on two different pages here. I am not insulting Danny's importance to the team. For us to be the kind of team we were last year we need Danny's shooting, no doubt. But IMO for us to take that next step we gotta make a choice between DG and PG at the 3 spot.

McKeyFan
11-15-2012, 04:49 PM
So unless the Pacers reach the ECF, this season will be a bust?

You may be hitting at the heart of the controversy.

It's not a bust if we don't reach the ECF. It's a bust if we don't try.

Certain longtime posters have said for several seasons that we have a systemic flaw in the offense, and they don't believe TPTB have made the big moves necessary to fix that, and that TPTB have not attempted to. Some even believe Bird left for that very reason.

Peck
11-15-2012, 05:03 PM
You may be hitting at the heart of the controversy.

It's not a bust if we don't reach the ECF. It's a bust if we don't try.

Certain longtime posters have said for several seasons that we have a systemic flaw in the offense, and they don't believe TPTB have made the big moves necessary to fix that, and that TPTB have not attempted to. Some even believe Bird left for that very reason.

Raises hand.....

jtroub8
11-15-2012, 07:50 PM
I think that if the Pacers front office if instead of signing Green and Young had signed Crawford or Mayo nobody would be missing Danny as much, the issue is not that the team misses Danny, the issue is that the Pacers have a bunch of scrubs to replace him.

In reality Paul George is doing a pretty good job in replacing Danny's numbers plus he is playing better D and rebounding at a higher rate than Danny, people love to think about the Danny of four years ago while forgetting that his productivity has been declining every year, last year was bad other than one month were he found a way to make his numbers look decent.

Right now the problem is not replacing Danny but replacing Paul George at small guard.

Edit: I'm not saying that signing either player could make the Pacers contenders either, their issues are deeper than missing an scorer.

I agree with you here as I wanted Mayo but was "hopeful" Green would fullfil and there's still time, we shall see. I have NO problem what so ever with PG, yes his shot is off & needs to work on taking it to the rack with some authority but his rebounding & D are top notch. I think you misunderstood me, I agree with most that you said. I also think that DG really helped space the floor for us, you had to respect the 3 ball. I also like how he was ready to go toe to toe with the Heat (not saying anybody on the team wasnt, but DG was looking for it, I liked that). I know we have West but they really miss DG's leadership & toughness, traits that are hard to acquire/replace via FA's, esp lower tier/hoping for the moon type of guys. What I'm trying to say is sometimes stats arent the only defining measure of a players value to thier team.

I'm all for PG playing SF while DG is out but thats just my 2 cents & I sit on the couch....be nice to have a TRUE "shooting" guard. Lance had 3 shots last night in 30 minutes? Nobody is gonna respect that! More looks/shots from Lance?

Bball
11-15-2012, 08:18 PM
You may be hitting at the heart of the controversy.

It's not a bust if we don't reach the ECF. It's a bust if we don't try.

Certain longtime posters have said for several seasons that we have a systemic flaw in the offense, and they don't believe TPTB have made the big moves necessary to fix that, and that TPTB have not attempted to. Some even believe Bird left for that very reason.

:nod:

Ace E.Anderson
11-15-2012, 08:26 PM
I agree with you here as I wanted Mayo but was "hopeful" Green would fullfil and there's still time, we shall see. I have NO problem what so ever with PG, yes his shot is off & needs to work on taking it to the rack with some authority but his rebounding & D are top notch. I think you misunderstood me, I agree with most that you said. I also think that DG really helped space the floor for us, you had to respect the 3 ball. I also like how he was ready to go toe to toe with the Heat (not saying anybody on the team wasnt, but DG was looking for it, I liked that). I know we have West but they really miss DG's leadership & toughness, traits that are hard to acquire/replace via FA's, esp lower tier/hoping for the moon type of guys. What I'm trying to say is sometimes stats arent the only defining measure of a players value to thier team.

I'm all for PG playing SF while DG is out but thats just my 2 cents & I sit on the couch....be nice to have a TRUE "shooting" guard. Lance had 3 shots last night in 30 minutes? Nobody is gonna respect that! More looks/shots from Lance?

I think we should have tried harder to get Courtney Lee. I know he wanted to go to BOS, but had we ponied up an extra 2-3 mil a yr--as opposed to taking a risk on Green and Young, I think we would've been better off. No Lee can't create his own shot, but he's a very good 3pt shooter and defender. The defense wouldn't be leaving him too much.

Obviously hindsight is 20/20

MiaDragon
11-15-2012, 08:28 PM
So unless the Pacers reach the ECF, this season will be a bust?

Yes, is not the reason to play each year to win it all? Anything else is a failure.

OlBlu
11-15-2012, 08:31 PM
Yes, is not the reason to play each year to win it all? Anything else is a failure.

Then as a small market team, you may never succeed......:cool:

beast23
11-15-2012, 09:21 PM
Pay him no heed. He's in what we call the reality-based community. That's not the way the board really works anymore. We're an empire now, you and I, and when we post, we create our own reality. And while they're studying that reality - judiciously, as they will - we'll post again, creating other new realities, which they can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're Pacers Digest's actors...and them, all of them, will be left to just study what we post.
And... If you could merely go beyond creating new realities to constantly switching realities on the same issue, just think how far you could go. He'll, you could probably even run for some high office. Like president. Of course your new reality might be that you would lose. Oh, wait...

Trophy
11-15-2012, 10:34 PM
Then as a small market team, you may never succeed......:cool:

You are so full of it.

:troll::cool:

Naptown_Seth
11-15-2012, 10:39 PM
Pay him no heed. He's in what we call the reality-based community. That's not the way the board really works anymore. We're an empire now, you and I, and when we post, we create our own reality. And while they're studying that reality - judiciously, as they will - we'll post again, creating other new realities, which they can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're Pacers Digest's actors...and them, all of them, will be left to just study what we post.
That's some sweet sarcastic Rove-droppin' there pal. And yet somehow I like your version even better. It certainly is appropriate.

Peck
11-15-2012, 11:46 PM
You are so full of it.

:troll::cool:

Well sorry but there is ever so slightly the possibility that he is right here. Don't forget he did say "may" thus not saying it was impossible.

But one of the real things I had to come to grips with early last summer after a two man team beat our balanced 5 man roster. The NBA is now more than ever a large market star driven league and teams like the Pacers, Bucks, Wolves, etc. are going to have to compete a different way and that way may never work.

Don't get me wrong I don't like it any more than you do but the truth is there.

BRushWithDeath
11-16-2012, 12:02 AM
Raises hand.....
http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthread.php?72713-Bird-press-conference&p=1453185&viewfull=1#post1453185


If that is the 8-man core that we need to keep growing, we've got a second round ceiling. It's going to take a big move. It may even take a few big moves. But I know that sitting tight isn't the way to go. I think Bird knows that too. I always take everything he says in press conferences with a truckload of salt simply because I know his personality. I think he'll swing for the fences. We may strike out, but I'd rather give it the chance to get over the wall rather than being content with a bloop single. I assume Bird feels the same way.

I posted this after Bird's press conference to end the year when it was still generally thought he'd be back. I thought we were going to make some major moves because it was clear that we needed to. Obviously, that did not happen. I'm not going to say that Bird left because he wasn't going to have the chance to do what he wanted but the idea has plausibility. We certainly didn't try for the homer. We didn't really do anything but hope we could draw a walk like we did a season ago.

Last year, everything broke in our favor. And we still weren't a legit contender in any sense of the word.

For what it is worth, while I didn't think we were nearly as good as our record indicated last year, I don't think we are nearly as bad as we've looked so far this year. We'll still be in the playoffs. Depending on how the seeds bear out we'll still have a chance to win a series but the ceiling hasn't been raised.

D0NT SH0OT ME
11-16-2012, 06:18 AM
http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthread.php?72713-Bird-press-conference&p=1453185&viewfull=1#post1453185



I posted this after Bird's press conference to end the year when it was still generally thought he'd be back. I thought we were going to make some major moves because it was clear that we needed to. Obviously, that did not happen. I'm not going to say that Bird left because he wasn't going to have the chance to do what he wanted but the idea has plausibility. We certainly didn't try for the homer. We didn't really do anything but hope we could draw a walk like we did a season ago.

Last year, everything broke in our favor. And we still weren't a legit contender in any sense of the word.

For what it is worth, while I didn't think we were nearly as good as our record indicated last year, I don't think we are nearly as bad as we've looked so far this year. We'll still be in the playoffs. Depending on how the seeds bear out we'll still have a chance to win a series but the ceiling hasn't been raised.

I wonder if the reason Bird left was because he wanted to make a big move (aka shake up the starting unit) while TPTB only wanted to focus on improving the bench. If so, Bird is coming out of this looking like a genius, which may lead to him being back here next year.

Food for thought.

Sollozzo
11-16-2012, 06:28 AM
The Bird departure was strange, IMO. You don't go from saying in late May that you'd "do it today (come back) if Herbie was here" to outright leaving in June unless something big happens. Could it have been his health? Of course. But he had all year to evaluate his health and he seemingly felt fine in May, judging by his comments. I think something happened once he did finally meet with Herb.

I would have love to have seen what Bird could have done had he stayed here and had free reign to do whatever he wanted. I'm confident that he wouldn't have traded Collison for such a lame package. What's the over/under for how many points Collison lights us up for tonight?

Pacerized
11-16-2012, 07:47 AM
The Bird departure was strange, IMO. You don't go from saying in late May that you'd "do it today (come back) if Herbie was here" to outright leaving in June unless something big happens. Could it have been his health? Of course. But he had all year to evaluate his health and he seemingly felt fine in May, judging by his comments. I think something happened once he did finally meet with Herb.
I would have love to have seen what Bird could have done had he stayed here and had free reign to do whatever he wanted. I'm confident that he wouldn't have traded Collison for such a lame package. What's the over/under for how many points Collison lights us up for tonight?


I'm wondering when all the people that supported the trade as good for both teams will admit that Cuban flat out fleeced Walsh. Not even a pick out of the deal.

LoneGranger33
11-16-2012, 08:20 AM
And... If you could merely go beyond creating new realities to constantly switching realities on the same issue, just think how far you could go. He'll, you could probably even run for some high office. Like president. Of course your new reality might be that you would lose. Oh, wait...

The political undertones of your comment threaten to propel us both into a bit of a quagmire here. I don't do quagmires. If it's a legitimate political statement, the moderators have ways to try and shut the whole thing down - and I don't want to be involved. Fool me once, shame on...shame on you. Fool me...you can't get fooled again.

owl
11-16-2012, 08:33 AM
Well sorry but there is ever so slightly the possibility that he is right here. Don't forget he did say "may" thus not saying it was impossible.

But one of the real things I had to come to grips with early last summer after a two man team beat our balanced 5 man roster. The NBA is now more than ever a large market star driven league and teams like the Pacers, Bucks, Wolves, etc. are going to have to compete a different way and that way may never work.

Don't get me wrong I don't like it any more than you do but the truth is there.

And this is why many clammer for tanking. It may be the ONLY way a small market team ever has a chance to get that Superstar. And even that requires some luck. See San Antonio and Oklahoma.

BillS
11-16-2012, 10:28 AM
Yes, is not the reason to play each year to win it all? Anything else is a failure.

I agree that the team and management have to look at it that way. They are the professionals, it is their job.

Having such an all-or-nothing attitude as a fan strikes me as extremely counterproductive. As fans, we're in this for the joy of it, and to deny yourself any feeling that your team has accomplished anything if they aren't the one team of 30 to win the championship seems like a road to bitterness, not a way to enjoy oneself.

I mean, when there's a team as dominant as Miami out there, why bother being a fan at all (except of Miami) until the situation changes?

Hicks
11-16-2012, 10:55 AM
I'm wondering when all the people that supported the trade as good for both teams will admit that Cuban flat out fleeced Walsh. Not even a pick out of the deal.

If I thought it was a trade made for the purpose of talent acquisition, sure, he got fleeced. My understanding is that they felt they had to make a financial cut, and that's how they opted to do it.

Eleazar
11-16-2012, 11:13 AM
If I thought it was a trade made for the purpose of talent acquisition, sure, he got fleeced. My understanding is that they felt they had to make a financial cut, and that's how they opted to do it.

I don't really buy the financial cut part, not that it wasn't considered a plus. None of the players involved are making that much, and neither Collison or Jones had long term contracts left. In fact I think they both were on the last season. To me it seems more likely that Collison wanted out.

BRushWithDeath
11-16-2012, 11:50 AM
I agree that the team and management have to look at it that way. They are the professionals, it is their job.

Having such an all-or-nothing attitude as a fan strikes me as extremely counterproductive. As fans, we're in this for the joy of it, and to deny yourself any feeling that your team has accomplished anything if they aren't the one team of 30 to win the championship seems like a road to bitterness, not a way to enjoy oneself.

I mean, when there's a team as dominant as Miami out there, why bother being a fan at all (except of Miami) until the situation changes?

This is, and has been, my problem with the club. I don't get the sense that they have been taking steps towards that one goal. A team looking to go "all-in" doesn't use their expansive cap space to overpay their own guys (I'm not including Hibbert in this, while he was overpaid I felt and still feel that matching was a necessity) and sign bargain bin guys who are a wash with what was lost.

We had a chance, however small it may have been, to make the next step. We stood pat. That, as a fan, is disappointing.