Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456
Results 126 to 141 of 141

Thread: A question for the OB haters

  1. #126
    Whale Shepherd cdash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    The Sprawl
    Age
    29
    Posts
    17,301

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: A question for the OB haters

    Quote Originally Posted by Since86 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    So 15 games erases 3 years of poor coaching?

    Jim is doing the things that we've been pleading for him to do for years now. And just suddenly, magically, he does it? Does anyone else not think that if Troy doesn't get traded, Josh doesn't see the floor? I know I do.

    Jim's hand was forced. He already plays Posey at his max, atleast IMHO, and if he had another player just like Troy, he would be getting the PT. This isn't what decisions Jim made, this is about the options that Larry took away from him.

    We still see TJ closing out games, with Posey right there next to him.

    I'm not confident that these "changes" are permanent ones. I think he just has no other options. Sure, I'm happy to see the new Pacers, but I don't think it will last if Jim is given other options. 15 games doesn't erase 3years of ****ty decision making.

    You can call it blind "hate," but it's reality whether you like it or not.
    No, 15 games does not erase the last three years. I am still leery of JOB, but whatever is going on right now is working. If things start taking a turn for the worse and the players start giving half assed efforts like they did most of last year, then I will reevaluate things then.

    For what it's worth, I don't think he could have played the way he wanted in the past. Roy Hibbert made a dramatic change in his body and conditioning. He is doing things now that he simply couldn't have done in the past. Fouling wasn't the only issue. His conditioning and mobility are allowing him to be dramatically better on defense, as well as letting him log bigger minutes.

  2. #127
    Shooting for the Moon Day-V's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    SoBro
    Age
    26
    Posts
    4,307
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: A question for the OB haters

    Quote Originally Posted by cdash View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I am still leery of JOB, but whatever is going on right now is working.
    No Troy Murphy is what's working.

  3. #128
    Whale Shepherd cdash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    The Sprawl
    Age
    29
    Posts
    17,301

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: A question for the OB haters

    Quote Originally Posted by Day-V View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    No Troy Murphy is what's working.
    It's really easy to blame everything on Murphy, but he's not the whole reason things are different this season. Don't get me wrong, he is a major reason why we are so much better, but not the only reason.

  4. #129
    Member Since86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Muncie
    Posts
    21,072

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: A question for the OB haters

    Quote Originally Posted by cdash View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    No, 15 games does not erase the last three years. I am still leery of JOB, but whatever is going on right now is working. If things start taking a turn for the worse and the players start giving half assed efforts like they did most of last year, then I will reevaluate things then.
    And like I said a few posts ago. Is it Jim changing or is it due to Troy being pulled away from him?

    I know if I was on that team, I would have a hard time giving my full effort knowing that I'm stuck playing with a player/players that don't have the ability to do what they need to do. (or even the desire to do it.) I can pretend and say that I would be the definition of professional, but after a year or two, it's got to start weighing you down and really break your spirits. It just has too. You can only bang your head against a wall so many times before you start questioning why you're doing it in the first place.

    I say all this with confidence because I see the way he uses Posey. Mackey is 100% dead on, IMHO, about how he's scared James will come in and hit his first few shots because that means Jim will stick with him longer than he should. It's the same trend, but he can't play Posey 30mins a game. Posey is unable to go that long, especially playing PF, so Jim has to go with the other options, as he should. I just wish he was making that decision himself, not being forced into it by circumstance.

    If Troy was still on the team, and some how DC was a Pacer, and we were seeing these lineup's, I would feel a lot better about JOb. But unfortunately, I think if Troy was here along with DC, Troy would still be playing 30mins a game, and even more people would be considered "anti" JOb.


    Quote Originally Posted by cdash View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    For what it's worth, I don't think he could have played the way he wanted in the past. Roy Hibbert made a dramatic change in his body and conditioning. He is doing things now that he simply couldn't have done in the past. Fouling wasn't the only issue. His conditioning and mobility are allowing him to be dramatically better on defense, as well as letting him log bigger minutes.
    All very true. But it's a progression. You don't wake up one day and learn all life's secrets. Roy needed last year in order to know what he needed to work on last offseason. Just like I expect him to work this offseason on one or two focused areas and come back even better next season.

    Progress comes in waves, not all at once. But Roy is the one who gets the credit for it, not Jim.

  5. #130

    Default Re: A question for the OB haters

    Quote Originally Posted by Since86 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    First off, you're combining arguments/ideas from different posters and trying to fit everyone in a nice little square box. Sorry, but it doesn't work that way.
    Well keep in mind... as I'm sure other O'Brien supporters can attest to, when you defend O'Brien you are essentially fighting a 15-front war. Notice after my reply to Eleazar I added the caveat that I wasn't necessarily directing my point there to him/her, but in general based on a lot of common criticisms of JOB I see. My fault for not adding a similar line after your quote, but I think it's clear I'm speaking in general terms here... "So sometimes the O’Brien bashers will point to our 104-142 record during his 3 year tenure as coach, and say he didn’t win enough, didn’t make the playoffs, etc. so he needs to go. But then when it gets pointed out that we could have easily been 70-176 given our lack of talent and injuries to key players, then the rationale for wanting him gone… is not that he won too few, but too many games!!"


    Quote Originally Posted by Since86 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Very few posters actually think Jim should have won more games with this roster. Talent is/was lacking. There's no denying it.
    (Heh, so it's ok for you to speak in general terms about other posters? )

    But wow, really? That is a very bold statement coming from someone who hasn't been an O'Brien supporter (I'm assuming it's accurate to label you anti-JOB?). Based on my experience on the IndyStar forums I can tell you that many would disagree with you over there. People point to three losing seasons, no playoffs, 104-142, as an overall indictment of O'Brien's coaching ability and proof that his systems were flawed. I'm relatively new on this forum so I don't know how others feel. But as I see it, this statement (assuming you are correct that "there's no denying it") essentially makes irrelevant most of the common criticisms I've seen of O'Brien. People complaining about flawed systems, disagreements over lineups, etc. Well to me, I always thought what was implicit in these criticisms was that that if only we had done things a different way with a different coach we would have won more games... But you're now saying that's not the case?

    I mean sure, all fans will have philosophical disagreements with a head coach about this or that--but it's a very different thing entirely if we're admitting that no matter what we did, it wouldn't have mattered in wins/losses. I felt we overachieved the past 3 years based on lack of talent and injuries to key players, and others may say we finished right about where we should have finished all things considered.

    But really I think this is a bit much if I can be honest. Look at vnzla81--he's giving you props for your comment--maybe he just meant that for the second half of it. But if he's co-signing your view that we got as many wins as possible then there is obvious double-speak. Earlier in this thread he's talking about how O'Brien cost us games last year by playing Murphy at center. Well, we were 3-4 in the games where Murphy started at center, and on balance I fail to see how this hurt us. I've already reviewed these games elsewhere so I won't rehash all of that.


    Quote Originally Posted by Since86 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Or we can dive back into the discussion on how he treated AJ last year, giving him DNP-CDs, then getting some minutes due to injuries/sickness/personal time only to play well, and then go straight back to the bench with the quote "Now we know what he has blah blah blah?"

    I don't give a **** about entitling anyone. I think you make decisions based on need, or based on ability. I don't care if AJ was picked in the 2nd round, or the 10th round. If he deserves to play, he should play. If a player is injured, he should play.

    The whole idea that just because he shouldn't play, because he was a 2nd round pick is as stupid as saying PG should play, because he was the 10th pick. You don't earn your spot by where you were drafted. You also don't get demoted because of where you were drafted.
    Well again I'll say that I think making a big issue out of A.J. Price's playing time from a year ago is a compliment to Jim O'Brien. You say that just because a player is picked in the 2nd round, doesn't mean that he should sit on the bench? Well that begs the question--how did his playing time compare to that of other second rounders?

    31. Jeff Pendergraph—39 G; 10.4 MPG; 405 total minutes
    32. Jermaine Taylor—31 G; 9.8 MPG; 303
    33. Dante Cunningham—63 G; 11.2 MPG; 707
    34. Sergio Llull—
    35. DaJuan Summers—44 G; 9.2 MPG; 405
    36. Sam Young—80 G; 16.5 MPG; 1321
    37. DeJuan Blair—82 G; 18.2 MPG; 1494
    38. Jon Brockman—52 G; 12.6 MPG; 654
    39. Jonas Jerebko—80 G; 27.9 MPG; 2232
    40. Derrick Brown—57 G; 9.4 MPG; 535
    41. Jodie Meeks—60 G; 12.0 MPG; 719
    42. Patrick Beverley—
    43. Marcus Thornton—73 G; 25.6 MPG; 1872
    44. Chase Budinger—74 G; 20.1 MPG; 1488
    45. Nick Calathes—
    46. Danny Green—20 G; 5.8 MPG; 115
    47. Henk Norel—
    48. Taylor Griffin—8 G; 4.0 MPG; 32
    49. Sergiy Gladyr—
    50. Goran Suton—
    51. Jack McClinton--
    52. A.J. Price—56 G: 15.4 MPG; 865
    53. Nando de Colo—
    54. Robert Vaden—
    55. Patty Mills—10 g; 3.8 MPG; 38
    56. Ahmad Nivins—
    57. Emir Preldzic—
    58. Lester Hudson—25 G; 5.2 MPG; 131
    59. Chinemelu Elonu—
    60. Robert Dozier—

    Only 5 other second rounders received more playing time than Price, and Price was first in playing time among players picked in the last half of the second round. However unrealistic, I guess if your preference was for Price to start every game and receive 30 minutes a night then you're probably not pleased with how it worked out. But it's like I mentioned to Sookie in another thread--there is a middle ground here in acknowledging that O'Brien played the guy more than your typical second rounder. He responded to the reality that he was better than 52. At different times he even benched a guy who was making 16 times time more in salary than Price in favor of giving him playing time.

    So Price played 56 games--most of his dnp's came prior to Christmas. Tell me, how many second rounders not named Landry Fields are playing meaningful minutes THIS season so far? Hey, welcome to life in the NBA rookies, your playing time is going to be inconsistent and sporadic at times. That's life. This isn't even an issue.

    Quote Originally Posted by Since86 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    You want to talk about entitlement? How about how TJ didn't even play 7minutes of preseason, due to a hamstring injury, ut yet was magically the back-up PG with AJ not even dressing. Or how about how when DC came back from his ankle injury, only to reinjure in the that game, but AJ was still sitting on the sideline in street clothes?
    So let's talk about T.J. Ford. On the season his assist to turnover ratio ranks 30th in the NBA. But over the past 11 games? A solid 47 to 14, or 3.3571, good enough for 7th best in the NBA. And at the end of the Lakers game we have to acknowledge his poise and play-making--our final 3 FG's T.J. had a direct role in all of them, 2 pretty assists to Hibbert and a driving layup. Isn't it interesting--in general I find people making the charge how O'Brien won't play you if you're not a good 3 point shooter. Well, then why is he playing T.J. ahead of A.J.? A.J. is the better outside shooter--But T.J. has more experience, he's a better play-maker, and probably most importantly--he's been solid on the defensive end. And in saying this, I hope no one miscasts me as a fan of Ford's--he has his flaws but he's certainly proven himself to be an acceptable backup point guard option. I know that sucks for Price right now since he's the odd man out, but you can play this game with any team--look at how that deserving 3rd stringer is getting shafted and treated unfairly! Again, this isn't even criticism of Jim O'Brien. I like A.J. and all, but his time will come--if not this season then next.


    Quote Originally Posted by Since86 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Yeah, you're right. I'm sure those last 22 games completely changed their self-identity that was established from the prior 60 games.
    If your entire teams identity is shaped, because of 22 games, then there are a lot bigger problems going on.
    Well you seem to overlook/forget that O'Brien's Pacers, on balance, have played hard throughout the past 3 years. This season is just a continuation of that trend. Our coach's persistent DNA is all over this team, and this is a huge positive. As fans we should be appreciative of this.

    Quote Originally Posted by Since86 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    And if you actually take a look at some of the box scores from those 22 games, I think you'd be interested to see who was actually playing.

    Here is just some random sampling.

    3/30 vs. Kings
    Josh McRoberts - 14:17
    AJ Price - 12:58 - 3

    3/12 vs Celtics
    Josh McRoberts 22:12
    AJ Price 16:16

    4/9 vs Cavs
    Josh McRoberts 19:35
    AJ Price 14:41


    I can continue, but I think my point is clear. YOUNGER PLAYERS!!! Younger players that are actually on the team this year getting minutes!!!!

    No, I'm not saying AJ Price and/or McRoberts makes or breaks the team. I'm saying this season is just a continuation of what started last season.

    The 12-10 finish is closer to the infamous 5 game winning streak, and what is happening this year. You know, the EXACT things we *****ed and moaned about, saying Jim should be doing when Josh/AJ was planted on the bench.

    That 12-10 record proves MY point. Not yours.
    Well, I've demonstrated that your general point about how Price should have received consistent starter's minutes was an unrealistic one, but he did play more than your typical second rounder. Brandon Rush led our team in minutes played last season. I've gone on the record as saying Hibbert would not have played 25 minutes per game on most teams. And look at Chris Mannix's tweet yesterday after talking with a scout:

    ChrisMannixSI

    Scout on Roy Hibbert: "I wondered all last season why the hell they kept throwing the ball into this kid. Now I know why." about 23 hours ago via web

    Quote Originally Posted by Since86 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

    Progress comes in waves, not all at once. But Roy is the one who gets the credit for it, not Jim.
    Well, we agree on about 80% of this. Sure, give Roy most of the credit for putting in all of the hard work. But I will repeat my view: 90% of why we are a much improved defensive team this year can be directly attributed to Roy's improved agility--leading to better rebounding and challenging of shots--and this is due to his dropping from 14% to 8% body fat. And I fail to see how that drop from 14% to 8% would have happened if we had more of a "player coach" in here who coddles and excuses and wasn't so direct. O'Brien had to have told him, "Hey Roy, we need you to get lean and mean. The status quo is unacceptable, you can't average 8.2 boards per 36 and expect to be a full-time starting center in this league. It doesn't work that way." That's my hunch. I'm sure Big Roy would have still worked hard, but he's not going to go to such extreme and obsessive measures to completely remake his body without direct prodding from the coach. Instead, people wanted it backwards--let's send the message to him that his current frame was acceptable, let's lie and pretend it was fine and let's enable him to remain as he was and revolve the entire offense around him, too much, too soon. Nevermind how he wasn't ready and didn't have the conditioning for it then. Even last night on FS LA--After 26 minutes of playing time the Lakers announcers noted the obvious: "Roy looks gassed." They later noted that O'Brien had done a good job of keeping him fresh for the final few minutes by spotting him 2 or 3 minutes here and there. Roy was not ready to handle the burden of being a consistent #2 option last year and there's no getting around that.

    We truly have a great example of player development here with Hibbert--there's a great chance a second Pacer in 3 years will win Most Improved Player Award--This guy was a project center when he came in... But if you're going to put your foot down and say the coach deserves no credit, then there's no point in having these discussions about whether or not the Coach has been successful at player development. When players perform below your expectations, blame the coach. When it's a success story, the coach deserves no credit. So there's no point to the debate then. It becomes futile. And even if you thought it was ugly how the sausage was made--how can you argue with where Hibbert is at right now? He is playing at an unbelievable level--he can even be a threat as a passer from the high post now thanks to O'Brien.

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

    When it comes to coaches you have to separate the play of individual players from the coaches, especially at the NBA level. Consider that Rush was never once in Indy or with anyone from the team all summer. How much affect do you think the coach can have if they are on opposite sides of the country? His improvement didn't happen under JOB it happened on his own away from the team.

    What you can judge a coach on is how he uses players, and which players he uses.
    Well, Rush led the team in minutes last season, yes? And I'm sure that O'Brien encouraged Rush to focus on his ball-handling and to improve his ability to drive to the basket. Yet others prefer to run with, "he lost the team." How could he have lost the team if all of these guys like Hibbert, McRoberts and Rush are having incredible summers? They understood that their preparation would have to be top notch, and I think it's fair to say that O'Brien played a pivotal role in instilling this ethic in the team. But again it goes back to the Hibbert example--there is no point in having these discussions with respect to a coach's ability at player development, if people won't give him credit when players make significant progress.


    And my overarching point on the 12-10 is that it happened after O'Brien said "Irrelevant, do it in a winning effort." In other words, he sent the message: with our preparation and approach, let there be no misunderstanding--We are playing to win these games. No coddling, no excuses, no 1-23 crap. We are going to build something positive headed into next season. And now we see how this "fight like wolves" mentality has carried over and we are enjoying the fruits of this mindset this season...

    Quote Originally Posted by Since86 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Please tell me how playing Troy Murphy 30+mins last year benefited THIS team, THIS year. It's impossible to do. Troy Murphy can't even get off the freaking bench in NJ but when he's here, he's dubbed the 2nd most valuable player on the squad.
    Last year we had Murphy, faults and all. But on a team anemic on the offensive end, we needed points to come from somewhere! And Murphy, like him or dislike him, was the better offensive player than McRoberts. Murphy He was 3rd best in the NBA in effective field goal % 08-09. And as I've noted before, we were tied for 4th best opponent two point field goal % last season, even with cumbersome Hibbert and Murphy. Our problem was rebounding, and this was Murphy's strength. And really-- how was O'Brien supposed to know that he wouldn't be here this year?? He's not psychic.

    And based on a common criticism I see of O'Brien, about how he doesn't adapt well to players... Hey, maybe it's Avery Johnson who is poor at adapting and utilizing Murphy's strengths . This Murphy example really speaks to how O'Brien is adept at getting more out of less. He nearly got a murphleavy ballclub to the playoffs for crying out loud, and would have succeeded if not for the injuries. And then you get into the hypothetical--if you don't keep Murphy's value as high as possible, there's no guarantee that we would have been able to pull off the trade for Collison. Hey, perhaps NJ would have preferred to keep Lee. Murphy's curb appeal would have surely been much lower without O'Brien getting the most out of him. It goes back to Mannix's 500 foot view of things:

    ChrisMannixSI

    Jim O'Brien has earned an extension in Indiana. Hibbert backbones a top-10 D and Indy proved in LA when healthy, they are tough to beat about 23 hours ago via web

    ChrisMannixSI

    The anti-O'Brien extension is puzzling. He took over a train wreck. Was decimated by injuries. Coached up Hibbert. Has team on right path. about 19 hours ago via ÜberTwitter




    And finally, did you hear what McRoberts said after we lost the OKC game?

    “When it comes right down to it, that’s what we’re out there for, to win ball games,” said forward Josh McRoberts, who had 13 points and eight rebounds. “We are confident that we can play with anybody. But that’s not enough. You’ve got to win against anybody.”

    Translation: Irrelevant--do it in a winning effort.

    Hmmm, where do you think he learned this from? The recent IndyStar article on McRoberts portrayed him as someone who came over with a bit of a bad attitude, inflated ego, etc, someone who needed to be broken down and built back up. And as I note in my Case for JOB, McRoberts did get an opportunity to START games early last season--how about the game at NY--he gets outrebounded by 5-9 Nate Robinson, and the team loses by 43 points. Bottom line--regardless of your feeling as to why, Josh McRoberts, at 23, is STARTING for us. How many other teams would Josh McRoberts be starting for right now? Not many.

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to DonSwanson For This Useful Post:


  7. #131
    Intuition over Integers McKeyFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Free Lance!
    Posts
    8,082

    Default Re: A question for the OB haters

    Quote Originally Posted by Since86 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Why should I give him praises when he's starting to do the things we've been *****ing and screaming for him to do for the past 3 years now?
    This.
    .

    .

    .

    .


    “People talk about how quiet he [McKey] is, but he’s really been helpful. He gives a lot of insight to players in how to guard certain teams and what their weaknesses are. The whole team listens to him, and it makes my job a lot easier. Having players like him is what pro basketball is all about for me.” —Larry Brown

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to McKeyFan For This Useful Post:


  9. #132
    Droppin' knowledge, yo. Mackey_Rose's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    The Dragon's Lair
    Posts
    4,102

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: A question for the OB haters

    DonSwanson,

    You may make many great points, but unless I'm getting paid to do it, or am being tested on it later in the semester, there is no way I'm going to waste my time reading such lengthy diatribes.

    Brevity is not a bad thing.

  10. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Mackey_Rose For This Useful Post:


  11. #133

    Default Re: A question for the OB haters

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

    Well again I'll say that I think making a big issue out of A.J. Price's playing time from a year ago is a compliment to Jim O'Brien. You say that just because a player is picked in the 2nd round, doesn't mean that he should sit on the bench? Well that begs the question--how did his playing time compare to that of other second rounders?

    31. Jeff Pendergraph—39 G; 10.4 MPG; 405 total minutes
    32. Jermaine Taylor—31 G; 9.8 MPG; 303
    33. Dante Cunningham—63 G; 11.2 MPG; 707
    34. Sergio Llull—
    35. DaJuan Summers—44 G; 9.2 MPG; 405
    36. Sam Young—80 G; 16.5 MPG; 1321
    37. DeJuan Blair—82 G; 18.2 MPG; 1494
    38. Jon Brockman—52 G; 12.6 MPG; 654
    39. Jonas Jerebko—80 G; 27.9 MPG; 2232
    40. Derrick Brown—57 G; 9.4 MPG; 535
    41. Jodie Meeks—60 G; 12.0 MPG; 719
    42. Patrick Beverley—
    43. Marcus Thornton—73 G; 25.6 MPG; 1872
    44. Chase Budinger—74 G; 20.1 MPG; 1488
    45. Nick Calathes—
    46. Danny Green—20 G; 5.8 MPG; 115
    47. Henk Norel—
    48. Taylor Griffin—8 G; 4.0 MPG; 32
    49. Sergiy Gladyr—
    50. Goran Suton—
    51. Jack McClinton--
    52. A.J. Price—56 G: 15.4 MPG; 865
    53. Nando de Colo—
    54. Robert Vaden—
    55. Patty Mills—10 g; 3.8 MPG; 38
    56. Ahmad Nivins—
    57. Emir Preldzic—
    58. Lester Hudson—25 G; 5.2 MPG; 131
    59. Chinemelu Elonu—
    60. Robert Dozier—

    Only 5 other second rounders received more playing time than Price, and Price was first in playing time among players picked in the last half of the second round. However unrealistic, I guess if your preference was for Price to start every game and receive 30 minutes a night then you're probably not pleased with how it worked out. But it's like I mentioned to Sookie in another thread--there is a middle ground here in acknowledging that O'Brien played the guy more than your typical second rounder. He responded to the reality that he was better than 52. At different times he even benched a guy who was making 16 times time more in salary than Price in favor of giving him playing time.

    So Price played 56 games--most of his dnp's came prior to Christmas. Tell me, how many second rounders not named Landry Fields are playing meaningful minutes THIS season so far? Hey, welcome to life in the NBA rookies, your playing time is going to be inconsistent and sporadic at times. That's life. This isn't even an issue. .
    1. That's not a credit to JOB, that's a credit to Price, and the fact that perhaps he shouldn't have been drafted where he was drafted as well as injuries to Ford.

    2. I think you keep missing this point.

    The Pacers, for much of last season, played Watson and Ford. And for much of last season, that PG rotation was terrible. (Watson started playing well towards the end) and desperatly needed a change.

    And then we saw Price play a game, when Watson was out, and he played well. And JOB came out with "he outplays the vets in practice"

    Which most logical people would go..."wait..hold on...our point guards are playing like crap, we have a point guard who is outplaying them in practice..and he's not getting any playing time because..?"

    no reason was ever given for that. Probably because there is no reasonable explanation.

    But after that first game, where Price and Hansbrough dug the team out of a hole and fans saw Price was pretty good, JOB came out with.
    "I'm going to start making sure I give AJ time because he's going to be a really good player really soon."

    So what happens...Price goes back to the bench for about three or four weeks. In fact, the very next game, the Pacers won in a blowout, and Price didn't see a minute of the court.

    So we have, Pacer's pgs are playing terrible, Price is outplaying them in practice, when he got his opportunity, he outplayed Ford in the game..and yet he's still not playing.

    So January rolls around, and Price does get his shot. And he plays quite well. JOB states he's the steal of the draft and could start for a .500 team..and then he does get his start, and TJ backs him up.

    TJ plays okay for two games..and TJ gets his spot back, with Price going to the bench until Ford injures himself. No reason for TJ to get his spot back, he didn't outplay Price, the Pacers were out of the playoffs so Pacers should have been playing guys that would have been there, and quite frankly, the team had a terrible record with TJ in the lineup anyway.

    So the point was never, "we should give AJ a shot because he's young" It was always "He's at least outplaying Ford, he's part of our future, and EARNED his minutes, he should be playing."

    So who cares where he was drafted, that shouldn't have mattered, so pointing out that he played more than other second rounders was irrelevant, he was, at worst, the second best PG on the team last season, and should have gotten his minutes.



    Quote Originally Posted by DonSwanson View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    So let's talk about T.J. Ford. On the season his assist to turnover ratio ranks 30th in the NBA. But over the past 11 games? A solid 47 to 14, or 3.3571, good enough for 7th best in the NBA. And at the end of the Lakers game we have to acknowledge his poise and play-making--our final 3 FG's T.J. had a direct role in all of them, 2 pretty assists to Hibbert and a driving layup. Isn't it interesting--in general I find people making the charge how O'Brien won't play you if you're not a good 3 point shooter. Well, then why is he playing T.J. ahead of A.J.? A.J. is the better outside shooter--But T.J. has more experience, he's a better play-maker, and probably most importantly--he's been solid on the defensive end. And in saying this, I hope no one miscasts me as a fan of Ford's--he has his flaws but he's certainly proven himself to be an acceptable backup point guard option. I know that sucks for Price right now since he's the odd man out, but you can play this game with any team--look at how that deserving 3rd stringer is getting shafted and treated unfairly! Again, this isn't even criticism of Jim O'Brien. I like A.J. and all, but his time will come--if not this season then next. .
    T.J. has more experience and is possibly being showcased, that's why he's playing.

    Price is better at pretty much everything except ball pressure and the midrange jumper (and Price's midrange jumper is nice)

    Which follows the pattern of last season, btw. Price was "the best player in preseason" TJ played 7 minutes. Price "never has a bad practice"

    Exactly how does AJ Price get playing time? Outplaying guys in practice doesn't get him playing time, outplaying guys in games doesn't get him playing time. To me, there's something wrong there..

    If Ford was simply given the backup spot because he's experienced, then that's just a terrible coaching decision. Ford should have had to earn the spot over AJ, and he never did, it was given to him.

    If he's being showcased, then doing things such as not playing Price at all and not playing Collison at the end of games is going to hurt the Pacers when Ford isn't here any longer.

    Regardless, with the Price situation, I'm not sure how anyone can really agree with the way JOB has jerked this kid around. And then I remember he did it to Josh, and Roy, and to a lesser extent Brandon..

  12. #134

    Default Re: A question for the OB haters

    I appreciate the reply, Sookie.

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

    So the point was never, "we should give AJ a shot because he's young" It was always "He's at least outplaying Ford, he's part of our future, and EARNED his minutes, he should be playing."

    So who cares where he was drafted, that shouldn't have mattered, so pointing out that he played more than other second rounders was irrelevant, he was, at worst, the second best PG on the team last season, and should have gotten his minutes.
    After Christmas, Price had 7 DNP's, Ford had 35--So it's not as though Price was just glued to the bench. Ford did not play the final month of the season. So you're right, I guess I'm not really seeing the big issue here. And I guess we'll agree to disagree on factoring in draft order/being a rookie. Sometimes it's best to take a step back and recognize that it's not always an easy thing to just bench a veteran in favor of a rookie. All coaches encounter this sort of thing and usually it's going to be a bit messy. Forget about second rounders for a minute... There are plenty of FIRST rounders this season who haven't even played in an NBA game. So Price not playing at the start of last season doesn't seem like a big issue to me either. It's pretty much standard fare.

    As for Ford playing over Price this season, I think it's a 50/50 call really. Mr. Mike Wells, who we can probably all agree is not a fan of O'Brien's, has voiced his support of O'Brien's decision that Ford should be playing ahead of Price. So while "showcasing" may be an ancillary benefit, let's also not overlook the positives that Ford has given us. All too often people just focus on the negatives.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sookie View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Regardless, with the Price situation, I'm not sure how anyone can really agree with the way JOB has jerked this kid around. And then I remember he did it to Josh, and Roy, and to a lesser extent Brandon..
    So are you displeased with where Josh, Roy and Brandon are at right now? I'm not sure how anyone can really find fault with where they are at presently in terms of their development. And unless these guys are just the biggest collection of thin-skinned players in the league (in which case we obviously would not want them anyway), I'm sure they were able to handle not getting consistent minutes right away. They seem like a resilient bunch.

  13. #135

    Default Re: A question for the OB haters

    Quote Originally Posted by DonSwanson View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I appreciate the reply, Sookie.



    After Christmas, Price had 7 DNP's, Ford had 35--So it's not as though Price was just glued to the bench. Ford did not play the final month of the season. So you're right, I guess I'm not really seeing the big issue here. And I guess we'll agree to disagree on factoring in draft order/being a rookie. Sometimes it's best to take a step back and recognize that it's not always an easy thing to just bench a veteran in favor of a rookie. All coaches encounter this sort of thing and usually it's going to be a bit messy. Forget about second rounders for a minute... There are plenty of FIRST rounders this season who haven't even played in an NBA game. So Price not playing at the start of last season doesn't seem like a big issue to me either. It's pretty much standard fare.

    As for Ford playing over Price this season, I think it's a 50/50 call really. Mr. Mike Wells, who we can probably all agree is not a fan of O'Brien's, has voiced his support of O'Brien's decision that Ford should be playing ahead of Price. So while "showcasing" may be an ancillary benefit, let's also not overlook the positives that Ford has given us. All too often people just focus on the negatives. .
    Price was benched after he started two games, until Ford got hurt. He played in some of them, because the Pacers were repeatedly blown out (and typically Price and Josh would make the game look more reasonable when they were brought in)

    I understand the possibility of it being "messy" but lets be honest, the team was messy anyway, a huge reason for that was the PG position, and then we hear the rookie was outplaying the two PGs in practice. I'm sorry, you play the rookie, it is a simple basketball decision. And if you compare team records with Price and team record without, seems like it was a pretty good idea.

    So I'll repeat, after playing well for a month, Price was benched for no reason, the only one given was "we liked what we saw so we benched him"

    This year, TJ has been mediocre (although he's had three pretty bad games in a row, with the exception of a few clutch plays) but Price was quite good in preseason, and quite good when he got his opportunity to play. Is that a young PG rotation, yea it is, but it will end up being better for the team.

    I don't think it's 50/50. Price is better. Price is younger. And Price is most likely part of our future. He's also earned minutes that he should be getting. When guys like Lance and Paul see Price play well, practice hard and well, and stay on the inactive list..I'm sure that's real motivating...

    now if we have to showcase TJ..we have to showcase TJ...but honestly, I feel like odds are TJ is being played because of his age.

    Quote Originally Posted by DonSwanson View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    So are you displeased with where Josh, Roy and Brandon are at right now? I'm not sure how anyone can really find fault with where they are at presently in terms of their development. And unless these guys are just the biggest collection of thin-skinned players in the league (in which case we obviously would not want them anyway), I'm sure they were able to handle not getting consistent minutes right away. They seem like a resilient bunch.
    Josh would be quite a bit better if he had played more last season. Roy and Brandon worked their butts off in the summer, but also, would be better if they had been given more opportunities. Josh would be able to avoid foul trouble, Roy probably would be less soft. (I've got no complaints about Rush right now though. But Rush got the fairest amount of minutes too..)

    But overall, I have a problem with the way the coach treated those players. (With possible exception of Brandon if JOB could tell Brandon wasn't sober..) They may be resilient, but they shouldn't have had to deal with it. Not when there was a bunch of no-defense poor playing vets on the team that were being awarded minutes without doing anything to deserve them.

    The Price situation specifically obviously bothers me, but it's also a bigger representation of the problems with JOB.

    1. He's poor at adjusting
    2. He thinks in the here and now
    3. He's stuck in theory and not reality. (In theory, a vet will win you games..ect..)
    Last edited by Sookie; 12-01-2010 at 01:41 AM.

  14. #136
    bleed Blue & Gold PacersPride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,245

    Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: A question for the OB haters

    i agree. i think price is the better player b/t ford and aj.. the one advantage ford has is experience.

    i think its best to hold onto ford, we are competing now and i dont wanna lose depth at the position. however, price is the better player so its certainly a conondrum... the bright side is pacers brass knows this, and will not let go of aj easily. DC, Price is our future backcourt no doubt.

    i fear dealing tj while competing just b/c if DC went down im not certain price could handle 30 minutes a game. so yes keep ford, but price is the better player, however, ford has the experience.

    everything has kinda changed now that the pacers are in the hunt.. deal dunleavy for a player like Iggy or b/u center.. tho solo has been getting it done.

    depth is a neccessity at pg.. if your challenging for a championship. i need to lay off the blue & gold kool-aid!
    Last edited by PacersPride; 12-01-2010 at 01:59 AM.

  15. #137
    Member Since86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Muncie
    Posts
    21,072

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: A question for the OB haters

    I continue to agree with Mackey on all fronts. There is no way I'm taking 30mins to read one post.

  16. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Since86 For This Useful Post:


  17. #138
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,150

    Default Re: A question for the OB haters

    Quote Originally Posted by LoneGranger33 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    This does not seem like a good idea for a thread.
    Guess you were wrong.

  18. #139
    Pacer Pride, Colts Strong Kid Minneapolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    4,470

    Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: A question for the OB haters

    Quote Originally Posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I've been a J'Ob detractor in the past, due to his decisions *at that time*. I don't dislike a person permanently; if they change their ways and improve, I'm all for that, and I honestly feel like he's made big strides this year as a coach. I still want to see consistency from this team. We've had a good stretch here, but we've had some off-stretches also... it remains to be seen if people are still in love with the new J'Ob a month from now. If they're still rocking out, though --- great. (editor's note: they're not) This is why we ***** and moan --- to stimulate either improvement or departure.
    Thought I'd bump this... back when this post was created, and we were experiencing a misleading ray of sunshine, and naturally the "J'Ob haters" got called out.

    At the time, I posted that I was happy with the changes thus far, and that I wanted to see consistency from this team, which has been the exact opposite of what we've seen since this post was originally started. Which is exactly why I wish to see a change at the coaching position.
    There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

  19. #140
    Droppin' knowledge, yo. Mackey_Rose's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    The Dragon's Lair
    Posts
    4,102

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: A question for the OB haters

    Quote Originally Posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    In Indiana recently, truer words have never been spoken.

    These wins are coming in spite of, not because of Jim. They tried to do it against OKC too, but Jim was just too detrimental.
    To reiterate this point, since this thread got bumped, the early season success came in spite of Jim, not because of him.

    He is a horrendous in-game coach, a worse judge of talent, and an insufferable dick with the media. Quite a combination.

  20. #141
    Jimmy did what Jimmy did Bball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    20,082

    Default Re: A question for the OB haters

    I'm sure I can speak for the 'haters' and say there's nothing we would have liked more than being wrong about O'Brien.

    He is what he is...
    Nuntius was right. I was wrong. Frank Vogel has retained his job.

    ------

    "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

    -John Wooden

  21. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Bball For This Useful Post:


Similar Threads

  1. OT- drinking question
    By Suaveness in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 02-25-2005, 07:27 PM
  2. Another question to Brunner on Artest possibly coming back.
    By Will Galen in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 02-22-2005, 06:03 PM
  3. A stupid question...
    By flying dutchman in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02-01-2005, 03:25 PM
  4. Game Management Kudos... And A Question
    By Bball in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 04-14-2004, 08:58 AM

Posting Permissions

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