Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Tbird analysis: The utilization of Murphy, Dunleavy, and Diogu

  1. #1

    Default Tbird analysis: The utilization of Murphy, Dunleavy, and Diogu

    Prepare yourselves Pacers digest readers, this is going to be a long, rambling post, since Im writing it with little prep time.

    First of all, let me talk about what I assume was the front office and RC's thinking on Al Harrington, and a possible timeline on how things might have started.

    I think the Pacers, like I did, thought JO and Harrington's game would mesh together better. At the beginning of the year I think they were using them offensively in the best most efficient way, which was when they played together to have JO play alot in the high post area, while Harrington played in the low post. This worked fairly well for Harrington, but not so much for Oneal, who didnt like being more outside and playing facing the basket as much. After the Boston game was when I think he made that clear to the coaching staff. I think primarily JO was correct in thinking that he'd be more effective as a low post player, although I do wish they'd gave that particular offensive strategy more time.

    Now, the Pacers had some problems. Apparently, Harrington is either uncomfortable playing the high post and couldnt just switch positions, or in the least the coaching staff didnt find him effective in that way. Add to that the need to insert Foster as a starter, further clogging the lane, led to Harrington being primarily a perimeter player, which isnt his strength, although he did do a fairly decent job at times out there. Most of us could see that while talented, our roster wasnt exactly fitting together well.

    My guess is, the Pacers have fairly recently decided, or been told, that Harrington would not accept a bench role, so they probably decided they had to move him. Then it just became an issue of who we could get, and who wanted him. Golden State, his other pursuer this past summer, was an obvious choice. The trade probably started smaller, and grew to become the 8 player deal we saw today. I doubt there were many teams who had as high of an opinion of Harrington as Golden State did. Thats what led us to the deal being made today.

    Now, lets talk about some of the ways the new players we acquired can help us in my view, both in what they bring to the table and what our other players may be able to provide us now.

    Troy Murphy: I think Murphy, while not as good as Harrington, fits in better with Oneal, and his game and personality are good long term fits for us.

    Most of you by now are aware of his perimeter shooting ability. He will be able to play the high post in a high/low motion game with JO, because he can not only shoot the perimeter shot, he is an excellent high post to low post feeder. He also is an excellent screener, particularly in short spaces, like inside the lane.

    He will excel for us offensively in a few more subtle ways that many of you havent thought of yet. He is an excellent back screener/face up type player. What I mean by that is that he can back screen for a cutter, then open up to the ball to create space for himself on the perimeter. Look for the Pacers to run many more "UCLA" cuts for their point guards, and for Murphy to have the ball at the top of the circle looking for cutters.

    Ive mentioned his screening above, but it bears mentioning again. Inside the paint or on the backscreens Ive described, Murphy is a good screen setter. He isnt the most bone jarring physical screener, but he is really well taught in that he gets great angles, and he is fundamentally sound at doing it. Because of his ability to screen, then open up to the perimeter and shoot, opposing bigs cant cheat off him, so that even makes his screening more effective. What this means is simple: The Pacers designed organized plays will be more effective and work better when Troy Murphy plays. Guys will get open better and get easier shots. In my opinion, Murphy starts for us very soon, and relegates Jeff Foster back to the bench.

    Murphy doesnt hurt our transition game, he helps it. He is a good solid rebounder, and he has in the past averaged 10 boards a night in this league. Now, playing here with the players we have around him, I think he'll project to about 14 pts and 8 rebounds, which Im happy with. Murphy helps our transition game alot, because he not only can rebound, but he can outlet the ball well. Murphy, who was well coached at Notre Dame, is good at making the 2 hand overhead outlet pass, which none of our current players are. Our lack of being able to outlet the ball to start a break often causes Tinsley to have to come back and recieve the ball via a short pass or even a handoff from one of our bigs, and Murphy I believe will not have to do that. Therefore, Tinsley can leak out, recieve a better pass from Murphy, and give us more productive running chances.

    Murphy also helps our running game by being a really good "trailer" on the secondary break. Murphy can catch the ball near the top as players run the floor, and either reverse the ball or take that open perimeter shot. His best area to shoot is the top of key area, so he is a real weapon because of this. The guy guarding him cant retreat to protect the rim, he has to get back and try and recover back up top to Murphy, leaving the lane clear for slashers and cutters. His presence out there can make it easier to score for others. Now, as far as JO goes on a secondary break, thats very interesting. He likes to trail also, so either the Pacers will simply have to make JO run the floor very hard and be the first post option, or change their break to a more unconventional "2 trailer" system. That can be done, Ive coached it that way, but it isnt my favorite way to do it. Ill be interested to see how that ends up coming about.

    Now to Dunleavy. Jay is right in the other thread that he does play alot like a "point forward" if he is asked to do so. To me, he is a big upgrade offensively for us too, because of various reasons.

    First of all, his ballhandling. This will allow the Pacers to not have to only pass the ball to Tinsley to start a break, as Dunleavy can handle the ball too. He also is really good at feeding the post, as he understands angles and how to move after he feeds it in there.

    Secondly, while he seems like a finesse player, he is a really, really good screener. He sets solid screens, and more importantly he sets them physically and gets great great screen angles. I cant tell you how important that is, and how poor some of the Pacers players are at that. RC has to be careful not to use Dunleavy too much as a passer, because he is a very good screener. He is the son of a coach obviously, and was very well taught at Duke.

    He also becomes our best cutter off screens as well. This was a strength of Peja and Reggie, and while Dunleavy isnt as good as those guys, he is great at reading the defense and making the appropriate play. Dunleavy plays with a high basketball IQ/

    A few more key points: Like Murphy, Dunleavy shoots free throws well. Thats important in close games, and its likely that the Pacers will play many of them in the next few years. Also, Dunleavy can be our inbound passer in crucial situations and end of game plays. That doesnt sound like a big thing, except the Pacers have been forced to use the very small Jamal Tinsley to do those things this year, and he isnt that good at it, nor is he bigh enough to always see the floor well if the opponent guards him with a bigger guy. Dunleavy, being 6'8, wont have those issues. Thats lets you either sub for Tinsley at the end of the game, or have him in the game being used in a different way. That'll be very handy for Carlisle to have.

    On to Ike Diogu. I dont know that I see the huge upside that some are projecting for him, but I do like his potential and style of play. Again, he is a strong screen setter, which we need. He is very enthusiastic and active. He has young legs and is eager to prove himself. I think this is a big chance for him to turn over a new leaf and become what I think his max potential is, which is a very good low post scorer and rebounder, even though he is undersized slightly by height. Diogy becomes likely our most physical player, strongest player, and player with a "mean streak" potential. I think he has more upside than Al Harrington because of his rebounding long term, and I think he'll be a good fit for us in the future. In the short term, I think he backs up Oneal as a low post primary option with the second unit, and plays a few minutes a game alongside JO as well.

    Now, to me its clear that on balance we got better offensively. Our plays will work better, we will now screen much better, we got a really good shooter in Murphy, and a decent midrange shooter in Dunleavy. Our players will pass the ball better, work better together, and in general be much much much more coachable. But, did we sacrifice too much defense in order to do that?

    My answer is, no way. I actually think our defense potentially got alot better too, even thought that goes against conventional wisdom. Why do I say this? 2 reasons mainly.....

    First of all, Sarunas departure means that either Marquis Daniels or Oriene Greene must play the back up point guard for Tinsley. (I dont like our 4th new player much, as his name escapes me as I type this). That will mean a huge defensive upgrade for approximately 20 minutes a game that we didnt have before. Now, Ive said before that I think point guard defense is our single biggest weakness, so anything we can do to improve that is a huge key to me. Im totally ok with the addition of the ballhandling and strong passing Dunleavy aboard, to play without Tinsley on the floor in order to improve our defense even more.

    Secondly, and I know not everyone agrees with me, I think our glut of front court players means Granger will play the "2" guard some, which I totally love from a defensive standpoint. Now, I dont really project Granger as a ballhandler, but Jackson wasnt either. Again, the addition of Dunleavy really helps hide that weakness for RC. Granger is a good offensive player moving off screens already, and with more intelligent higher IQ players playing with him I think his productivity can increase.

    In general, I think we can play a bigger lineup now, because we can play without Tinsley in the game. I like, as many of you know, the idea of a Daniels/Granger backcourt from a defensive perspective, and I think Dunleavy can help make my wish come true. I also like the thought of cutting Foster's minutes back some, and using him in a role better suited to his talent long term. I worry about his body breaking down playing the minutes he was being forced to play. Now, he can play about 20 minutes or so a night and hopefully stay healthy all season and on into the playoffs.

    Summary: The Pacers probably traded more talented players, but they got better today in many many ways. We are a better TEAM, with much more flexibility, and a team that fits together better. We are an infinitely more "coachable" and more fundamentally sound team, and one that is put together better to function on the floor. We became younger and deeper, and improved in a few different fundamental areas. I think we will be more fun to watch, easier for RC to impart his vision of playing the right way, and our roster is well stocked to make another major move next summer for a dynamic backcourt player if one comes available.

    I know many of you are worried about the cap ramifications, but I wouldnt if I were you. With a new TV deal, the internationalization of marketing, and the internet creating additional revenue, its likely that the cap will rise alot in the next few years anyway, and we arent smart enough or informed enough as fans to know the innerworkings of the league's business like the Simons are. I would guess the next CBA might raise the cap significantly, and Im sure this move was made today with that assumption in mind. The Pacers just got alot more watchable and likable today, whether or not you agree with me that we got much better on the floor or not.

    Bottom line: We got significantly better today. Can we win the Eastern Conference this year? I doubt it, but our chances got alot better, and we are still well set up for the future. Its a great day to be a Pacer fan!

    Just my opinion, of course.

    Tbird

  2. #2
    Smooth tadscout's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Greenfield
    Age
    28
    Posts
    2,838
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Tbird analysis: The utilization of Murphy, Dunleavy, and Diogu

    Great analysis... somebody finally nailed it on the head... we're a better TEAM now...


    Tbird
    "George's athleticism is bananas!" - Marc J. Spears

  3. #3
    Member odeez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Oakland, CA
    Posts
    3,776

    Default Re: Tbird analysis: The utilization of Murphy, Dunleavy, and Diogu

    Nice Post Tbird.

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Lifelong Indy-area resident
    Age
    62
    Posts
    4,654

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Tbird analysis: The utilization of Murphy, Dunleavy, and Diogu

    So, to basically sum up what you've said...

    Dunleavy and Murphy, although not known for their athleticism, are extremely knowledgeable, fundamentally sound players.

    Personally, I've always liked Ike Diogu. Although not real athletic himself, he's bulky and has very long arms for his height, enabling to play much bigger than he is. He's great in the low post, and I think he'll help out quite a bit under the boards. And another thing I like about him, he's under the boards a lot, he gets fouled a lot, and he is an 80% FT shooter.

    One writer, I forget who it was from another thread, is saying that this will be known as the "Ike Diogu" trade in 10 years.

    I believe McLeod will play more than what most of us originally think. He's a good defender, he's quick and is an excellent FT shooter as well as hits something like 40% from behind the arc.

    With Dunleavy's and Murphy's passing and shooting ability, I'm excited about the versatility that this trade gives the Pacers. And like you, I like the fact that Foster will have some real help from Murphy and Diogu in the rebounding department.

    I like Granger's defense, and I believe Diogu will be a great addition defensively in combination with JO. Those three players will be used at times together in the frontcourt, and I think it will provide us with the defensive trio that we thought that Danny-Al-JO would be.

    But, the bottom line is, you put two smart players in Dunleavy and Murphy who can both shoot and pass on the floor with JO, it will make JO's game that much better.

    I would make no secret from the fact that I am absolutely euphoric about getting rid of Jackson, but I'm also excited about the players that we have received. We lost out in athleticism, but we acquired some gamers.

    Now, with our present lineup, we can only assume that some sort of secondary trade is in the works to help balance the roster between frontcourt and backcourt, and to help resolve some of our backcourt weaknesses.

    Personally, I can't wait for the next trade to go down. Hopefully, before the February trade deadline.

  5. #5
    Pacer Junky Will Galen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    10,046

    Default Re: Tbird analysis: The utilization of Murphy, Dunleavy, and Diogu

    Quote Originally Posted by thunderbird1245 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

    I know many of you are worried about the cap ramifications, but I wouldnt if I were you. With a new TV deal, the internationalization of marketing, and the internet creating additional revenue, its likely that the cap will rise alot in the next few years anyway, and we arent smart enough or informed enough as fans to know the innerworkings of the league's business like the Simons are. I would guess the next CBA might raise the cap significantly, and Im sure this move was made to day with that assimption in mind. The Pacers just got alot more watchable and likable today, whether or not you agree with me that we got much better on the floor or not.
    Tbird
    Thanks TBird! I always enjoy your posts!

    Walsh said in the press conference that it didn't change our salary cap much for the next two years.

    Here's our new payroll.

    Player.............................2006-07
    Jermaine O'Neal...................$18,084,000
    Troy Murphy.......................$8.285,714
    Mike Dunleavy.....................$7,438,016
    Marquis Daniels...................$5,883.600
    Jamaal Tinsley....................$5,850,000
    Jeff Foster.........................$5,500,000
    Ike Dioqu...................... ....$2,137,200
    Danny Granger...... .............$1,417,800
    Darrell Armstrong.................$1,178,348 (1) $433,797 paid by NBA
    Shawne Williams..................$1,139,800 Rookie scale
    Keith McLeod......................$1,350,000
    John Edwards.....................$1,080,000 Guaranteed contract.
    David Harrison.....................$960,840
    Maceo Baston.....................$744,551
    Rawle Marshall....................$664,209
    Orien Greene......................$664,209
    Jimmy (Snap) Hunter...........$100,000 Received $100,000 guaranteed.

    Total...............................$63,844,490

    The luxury tax threshold is $65,420,000.

    The NBA salary cap for 2006/7 is $53,135,000

  6. #6

    Default Re: Tbird analysis: The utilization of Murphy, Dunleavy, and Diogu

    I am not at all sold on this trade from a defensive standpoint. I think the use of Granger in the backcourt defensively is interesting but our front court defense will suffer due to this trade.

    From the GS Fan: don't play two of Diogu, Murphy and Dunleavy on the court at the same time.

    I was skeptical, so I went to 82games to check out 5-man units.

    Of the Warriors 10 most common lineups, none contain both Dunleavy and Murphy. They're both healthy, so injuries aren't to blame here. The reason is team defense. And if Nelson doesn't like their tandem D, I doubt Carlisle will either. They're both 25 or so min/g guys, so we will essentially have one, but not both of these guys on the court at all times. Diogu will give us another 15 minutes a night to start, but he will primarily be paired up with O'Neal for defensive reasons as well. The fact of the matter is, no 2 of Diogu, Dunleavy, and Murphy were regularly on the court together for GS. If you add up their minutes (65), you realize we will have 2 of them on the court for almost 20 minutes a game, so something needs to give here. Which leads to a lot of defensive toggling/game playing. It reads like a bad LSAT question:

    -Whenever one of Murphy or Diogu is on the court, Granger will be as well.
    -Whenever Diogu is on the court, O'Neal will be beside him.
    So we'll see 12-15 or so minutes of Granger/O'Neal/Diogu a night.
    We'll also see another 20-24 minutes of Granger/O'Neal-Foster/Murphy

    That leaves about 13 more minutes.
    Which go to Dunleavy and some combo of O'Neal-Foster-Harrison-Baston
    More than likely, Granger will play some guard from the minutes above and we will pair Dunleavy and Murphy together for 6-10 minutes or so during a game.

    I'm waiting for the other shoe to drop on some form of a Magette-Dunleavy deal.

    He's kind of like Jackson--inconsistent, but with less baggage and more upside. If you can get him to play defense, his athleticism would be a nice cover for Tinsley. A core of Maggette, Granger, Murphy, Tinsley, O'Neal, and Foster doesn't look bad to me. Murphy and Granger's outside shooting would compensate a bit for Maggette's shooting deficiencies.

    I'm hoping anyway. Otherwise we're paying about $18-$22mm a year long-term to lock up less than 1.5 positions on the court at mediocre starter level w/ low flexibility.

  7. #7
    Fear my small avatar Gyron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    6,366

    Default Re: Tbird analysis: The utilization of Murphy, Dunleavy, and Diogu

    Well thought out analysis Tbird.

    Thanks from those of us that need a little "coaching" on the inner workings of the game.

  8. #8
    Member indyman37's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    906

    Default Re: Tbird analysis: The utilization of Murphy, Dunleavy, and Diogu

    Very good analysis Tbird. I think most people thought this was a one sided trade that was all in favor of GS. I have a feeling that we aren't done seeing Donnie and Larry making deals before the trade deadline though.

    On this page there is a link to a good analysis by David Aldridge:
    http://www.nba.com/news/tradereax_070117.html

  9. #9
    Hall of Famers FrenchConnection's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Age
    40
    Posts
    1,663
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Tbird analysis: The utilization of Murphy, Dunleavy, and Diogu

    Quote Originally Posted by ChicagoPacer View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I am not at all sold on this trade from a defensive standpoint. I think the use of Granger in the backcourt defensively is interesting but our front court defense will suffer due to this trade.

    From the GS Fan: don't play two of Diogu, Murphy and Dunleavy on the court at the same time.

    I was skeptical, so I went to 82games to check out 5-man units.

    Of the Warriors 10 most common lineups, none contain both Dunleavy and Murphy. They're both healthy, so injuries aren't to blame here. The reason is team defense. And if Nelson doesn't like their tandem D, I doubt Carlisle will either. They're both 25 or so min/g guys, so we will essentially have one, but not both of these guys on the court at all times. Diogu will give us another 15 minutes a night to start, but he will primarily be paired up with O'Neal for defensive reasons as well. The fact of the matter is, no 2 of Diogu, Dunleavy, and Murphy were regularly on the court together for GS. If you add up their minutes (65), you realize we will have 2 of them on the court for almost 20 minutes a game, so something needs to give here. Which leads to a lot of defensive toggling/game playing. It reads like a bad LSAT question:

    -Whenever one of Murphy or Diogu is on the court, Granger will be as well.
    -Whenever Diogu is on the court, O'Neal will be beside him.
    So we'll see 12-15 or so minutes of Granger/O'Neal/Diogu a night.
    We'll also see another 20-24 minutes of Granger/O'Neal-Foster/Murphy

    That leaves about 13 more minutes.
    Which go to Dunleavy and some combo of O'Neal-Foster-Harrison-Baston
    More than likely, Granger will play some guard from the minutes above and we will pair Dunleavy and Murphy together for 6-10 minutes or so during a game.

    I'm waiting for the other shoe to drop on some form of a Magette-Dunleavy deal.

    He's kind of like Jackson--inconsistent, but with less baggage and more upside. If you can get him to play defense, his athleticism would be a nice cover for Tinsley. A core of Maggette, Granger, Murphy, Tinsley, O'Neal, and Foster doesn't look bad to me. Murphy and Granger's outside shooting would compensate a bit for Maggette's shooting deficiencies.

    I'm hoping anyway. Otherwise we're paying about $18-$22mm a year long-term to lock up less than 1.5 positions on the court at mediocre starter level w/ low flexibility.
    Nellie is not concerned about defense in the least. He did not play them together because he wants most players on the floor at any given time to be able to create their own shot. Because of this, the list of players that have not fit Nellie's system is really long (Jason Kidd, Chris Webber, etc...).

    Lets go back to last season.
    http://www.82games.com/0506/0506GSW2.HTM

    Their most effective 5-man unit that saw significant minutes contained both Dun and Murph but lacked Baron Davis. So in a system more like the one that we run, the stats show that they can play together. And when you factor in having a real low-post presence in JO, I think that this could work. Murphy's problem has been that he has been asked to be the primary big on teams, a role he is not suited for. BTW, neither is Brad Miller. Both play well in the high post, something that Murphy will be doing a lot of here. Dun I am not so sold on, but we will see.

    (BTW, I know that this post has a high probably of being quoted on a GS board for humorous effect (we did this with Sacto posts rationalizing Ron Ron), but all I have to say is get back to us when Jack tries to shoot himself out of a slump in the fourth quarter of a close game. Also, Al is not going to like being a 3rd option. I hope you like chuckers. You just got two more to go with the two you already had.)

  10. #10

    Default Re: Tbird analysis: The utilization of Murphy, Dunleavy, and Diogu

    Quote Originally Posted by FrenchConnection View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    (BTW, I know that this post has a high probably of being quoted on a GS board for humorous effect (we did this with Sacto posts rationalizing Ron Ron), but all I have to say is get back to us when Jack tries to shoot himself out of a slump in the fourth quarter of a close game. Also, Al is not going to like being a 3rd option. I hope you like chuckers. You just got two more to go with the two you already had.)
    I don't think you realize I'm not a GS fan, but an Indianapolis native and Pacer fan. A realistic Pacer Fan, but no less of a fan than you.

    Quote Originally Posted by FrenchConnection View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Lets go back to last season.
    http://www.82games.com/0506/0506GSW2.HTM

    Their most effective 5-man unit that saw significant minutes contained both Dun and Murph but lacked Baron Davis. So in a system more like the one that we run, the stats show that they can play together. And when you factor in having a real low-post presence in JO, I think that this could work. Murphy's problem has been that he has been asked to be the primary big on teams, a role he is not suited for. BTW, neither is Brad Miller. Both play well in the high post, something that Murphy will be doing a lot of here. Dun I am not so sold on, but we will see.
    Secondly, their most effective 5-man unit that saw significant minutes did not contain both Dun and Murph, it contained: Davis, Fisher, Richardson, Murphy, Foyle. Look at the first chart in the link you provided. This is based upon win%, which is more relevant than unadjusted +/- stats.

    Of GS's 20 most commonly used rotations, 7 or them were over .500. These 7 lineups played a total of 447 minutes. Here are the frontlines of those seven lineups:

    Richardson-Murphy-Foyle
    Richardson-Dunleavy-Murphy****
    Richardson-Dunleavy-Foyle
    Pietrus-Dunleavy-Foyle
    Pietrus-Murphy-Biedrens
    Richardson-Murphy-Biedrens
    Pietrus-Murphy-Foyle

    Nearly 80% of the time, their most successful lineups did not contain any two of: Murphy, Dunleavy, or Diogu. Dunleavy and Murphy may be better suited to our style of play, but regardless, these guys are hardly going to be revelations for us. GS didn't match up Biedrens and Foyle for obvious reasons, just like they don't pair up Pietrus and Richardson. At least those guys play the same positions, so it makes sense they're not on the floor together. Dunleavy and Murphy don't play the same spot, yet they're still not on the floor together. And when they are on together, GS was less successful.

  11. #11

    Default Re: Tbird analysis: The utilization of Murphy, Dunleavy, and Diogu

    Thanks to all of you for the kind words. 2 more thoughts Ive had since last night:

    1. I don't want to trade Dunleavy for Maggette. Maggette to me isnt a good fit, due to his lack of outside shot. I especially dont like his injury prone nature or poorer attitude. He didnt get along that well with Coach K at Duke, and has been an attitude problem in Los Angeles. Let me reemphasize that: He has been involved in 2 winning programs, been an integral part of winning teams, and yet was unhappy enough to want to leave. That scares me.

    I think most people are underrating still the abilities of Dunleavy, and that most of you on this board will be suprised how much you like him and how he plays for us. Most people think he will be ab afterthought, but I actually like his game for us better than Maggette's, much better actually.

    2. I definitely think we need to spend the rest of the year deciding what we need to do in our backcourt for the future. We need to identify what Daniels and Granger can do before we make a rash decision too soon. We arent a championship contender yet, because we dont have the clear second banana to Jermaine yet. Lets reevaluate our players, see who can help us at what positions, and decide after the season whether we need to make a major move for a dynamic point guard, or a more traditional 2 guard.

    By the way, this trade does set us up for a big trade later in the summer nearer the draft, or perhaps in July. We will have 2 young players with big potential (Shawne Williams and Ike Diogu) to package with a bigger contract to make the money work. (Murphy, Dunleavy, or Daniels). Potentially, the Pacers have enough depth to make a 3 for 1 deal for a "B" level backcourt player. We just have to decide what type player we want that to be.

    So, for now, I think we need to see how this team develops, try and see which near all star level guard becomes available next summer, identify a couple of cheaper free agents we can sign to fill holes, and see what happens this season, with a solid eye toward the future.

    I can see us including Murphy, one of Williams or Ike, and Tinsley to Sacramento for Mike Bibby and filler, for example, but not until next summer. You could follow that up with signing a player like Darko Milecic to a MLE deal perhaps, and build your team in that way. This is just one example of many many more possibilities/prmutations that are possible.

    Just my opinion, of course.

    Tbird

  12. #12

    Default Re: Tbird analysis: The utilization of Murphy, Dunleavy, and Diogu

    TBird - good observations. I have some of the same feelings.

    1) This trade will help the perimeter defense. The Pacers have really suffered from poor perimeter defense (PG in particular). This forces Daniels, Granger, Williams, Green, and DA to play bigger roles (and possibly McLeod). Harrington, Jax, and Saras were killing us defensively.

    2) I remember last week we discussed Foster and the role of screener kept coming up. We didn't have good screeners. Murphy I know can help there (and I like the idea of the UCLA cut more often with Daniels...). I'm not aware of Dunleavy or Diogu's screening ability, but if they have it, great!

    3) I also mentioned yesterday when I first heard about the trade that it seemed we were doing two things: getting rid of problems, and building infrastructure for future moves. Now we have some marketable pieces. We have some big contracts and players who can fill roles. We'll need that with our young talent to get a top notch perimeter player. That is the missing piece. Today's NBA demands a guy who can penetrate, finish, and draw fouls. The Pacers need to go find one. I'm not sure if that is Maggette, but someone is out there on the radar.

  13. #13
    streets ahead
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    DC
    Age
    30
    Posts
    5,754

    Default Re: Tbird analysis: The utilization of Murphy, Dunleavy, and Diogu

    Quote Originally Posted by thunderbird1245 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    1. I don't want to trade Dunleavy for Maggette. Maggette to me isnt a good fit, due to his lack of outside shot. I especially dont like his injury prone nature or poorer attitude. He didnt get along that well with Coach K at Duke, and has been an attitude problem in ffice:smarttags" />lace w:st="on">Los Angeleslace>. Let me reemphasize that: He has been involved in 2 winning programs, been an integral part of winning teams, and yet was unhappy enough to want to leave. That scares me.
    fficeffice" />>>

    >>
    This is exactly what Iíve been thinkingÖ along with the fascination of people who like to complain about trades because we didnít get Lebron or Dwane, but is the amazement of people wanting to bring in a malcontent like Maggette after we just got rid of Jax. To me THAT move would be a trade for the sake of making a trade. We are just starting to get out of the gloomy Jax cloud and now everyone wants Maggette? That doesnít make a lot of sense to me. >>
    > >
    Personally, I would rather have Cuttino who is closer to 40% career for 3pt and as far as I know, doesnít have the locker room reputation that Maggette or his old pal Steve Francis have. Plus Cuttino, while he doesnít meet many shots he doesnít like, is more accurate and a better defender.>>
    This is the darkest timeline.

  14. #14

    Default Re: Tbird analysis: The utilization of Murphy, Dunleavy, and Diogu

    Another thing to add about our payroll, Dunleavy and Murphy's contracts shouldn't hurt us at all. Now if Ike and Danny end up living up the the expectations and get big extensions than yes in Dunleavy's and Murphy's last season or two of their contracts we will be hampered financialy unless the cap is raised or other moves are made.

    So this looked like a bad trade for us salary wise, it might not be that bad after all. Especially since this should improve our team.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •