Also why does him gaining any weight have anything to do with him playing shooting guard or not? You don't think that Dwayne Wade outweighs him right now?
You do realize that Magic Johnson played point guard weighing significantly more?
edit: where's the quote that they think he's more of a SG than a SF? Having him start at the 2 proves nothing. They're just putting the best 5 players on the court.
Last edited by CJ Jones; 02-16-2012 at 02:12 AM.
I am not sure what ails the team right now...
But I have my own theories..
I believe that the way this team is set up, is like a finely tuned machine...
When 1 or 2 of the important "cogs" to the team is out , that the whole machine starts to break down... offensively, and more important, DEFENSIVELY...
I mean come on, we were top 6 in the whole NBA on defense .. up untill the last 6 or 7 games... and moreso, ever since Hill got injured....
The other thing, since our "machine" has broken down,on the offensive end, everyone is playing scared , seemingly not trusting in each other, resorting to playing more "me ball" instead of making the extra pass , running the play to get a good shot..
As a result to all the above, AND this string of losses, I think what has happened is the proverbial "rookie wall" of sorts... But instead of it happening to a rookie PLAYER, it is happening to a rookie coach and a young team... Add in the psychological aspect, and I believe that is what we are seeing happen..
I truly believe we will get through this , and by the first week of March we will be able to put this string of losses behind us and get back to playing like we should be...
Regarding him getting bigger and been able to play the two, I think he could be fine at the two if we had a shot creator at the 3, the problem that we have right now is that neither Danny or Paul can create their own shot or create for others.
I could tell you that if we get a point guard that could create for others maybe neither Danny or PG would be need it to create their own shot so it wouldn't be such a problem.
The reason people think he should play SF is style of play. Especially offensively and I've stated plenty of reasons I think he'd be more useful defensively playing closer to the basket.
It's not all that crazy if you think about it.
Also can you really define the difference between a small forward and shooting guard?
Also why is he better closer to the rim when he has shown to be a very good perimeter defender against point guards let alone shooting guards?
If Hansbrough has strep throat why did he play and isn't it contagious? Seems silly to use one play at the risk of getting others sick, but at least it helps explain how he managed to missed 4 of 8 FT which should never happen.
My mind is still blown we gave Semih Erden a new career high in Points on just 8 shots and his 3rd most rebounds, if Roy was going to break out of his funk this was the game but no such luck. Pendergraph is a +18 the last two games all in garbage times and has just a TO and a foul on the stat sheet. We somehow managed just 4 assists from our starting 5.
The overall 9 assists were our second fewest of the year and we're now 2-7 if we get fewer than 15 and 0-5 when 12 or less. But with the lack of passing today we did have our season low in TO but oddly we have now lost our last 3 games committing 6 or less TO.
Obviously PG could play either spot if the fit is right. But that doesn't mean he wouldn't be a better SF. I think his quickness at SF would be a much greater advantage than his size at SG (which he rarely utilizes).
“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
Pacers just need to learn to finish around the basket. I keep seeing us miss layup after layup, contested or not, these are professionals who need to finish or try to draw the foul. Hibbert misses so many close shots it's pathetic.
I think we'll start hitting those close shots.
It's our D that's totally done a 180. I guess our guys thought the season was just 1 month. It's funny, cause we totally suck at PnR, but every team looks like a PnR genius against us. Pacers need to get better at initiating the PnR and defending it.
Last edited by Sparhawk; 02-16-2012 at 08:46 AM.
Lance + Starting SG = Awesome
Now really free Lance!
I've been working during this slide, but looking at the stats there is no way you can win shooting under 30% for a half. It's like we are trying to play like the spurs of 6-7 years ago without the d. And that is not good, at all.
But we still have some time to turn things around, I'm upset, but not ready to give up on our guys.
LoneGranger33 saidAgreed. As the members of Guns and Roses once said, "every rose has its thorn".
[QUOTE=Peck;1375167What about his style of play indicates he is a small forward instead of a shooting guard.
lack of ball handling, lack of play making, inability to use his height as an advantage on offense, inability to drive around smaller quicker players, thinking he's kobe and shooting too many jumpers...
There's some offensive reasons. I'd say the first 2 are the most important. Having a sg that can handle and create would help our offense. We rely too much on our pgs right now.
Depends on the roster, but typically your sg is quicker and a better ball handler than your sf. He's used to help initiate offense (run the PnR) with the pg. He's usually a good shooter. Normally he's not a good rebounder or shot blocker.Also can you really define the difference between a small forward and shooting guard?
Your sf typically is a good defender, good rebounder, and he's able to knock down spot up jump shots. If he can block shots that's a plus. Normally he's an average ball handler.
This is obviously just basic stuff here, and it all depends on your roster. They can be interchangeable if you got a ball handler/playmaker at sf, but there aren't many of those.
Here's some defensive reasons...Also why is he better closer to the rim when he has shown to be a very good perimeter defender against point guards let alone shooting guards?
rebounding, shot blocking, help defense, he'd be able to freelance for steals more because of less responsibility. Basically he could be our Lebron on defense.
All those things listed he is or will be better than Danny at.
Just because a player can guard sgs and pgs doesn't necessarily mean he should be a certain position. LeBron can guard 4 or 5 positions, but they don't put him at the sg. That's the type of impact I believe Paul will have eventually. I think he has 1st team defense type potential, and he'd better off closer to the rim as long as we had someone that can handle other teams sgs.
Now can someone please come up with a list of reasons why they think he's better suited for sg long term? (IMF maybe... since you think this opinion's stupid )
Last edited by CJ Jones; 02-20-2012 at 11:45 PM.
I mean I didn't want to bring this up. I personally was not going to mention this. But then you went there. Murphy has now been over McRoberts on 2 teams.
That said, Troy is fine as a 15 minute player, he's not so great as a 35 minute player.
Yeah Murphy wasn't meant to play that many minutes. I'm a fan of him around 25-20, but Then I didn't want him to play less than mcroberts.
I think the three is typically slower than the two, in the sense that the two has to switch off on defending the one sometimes, but the three switches off on the two and the four, so he sacrifices some of the speed for bulk and length. The extra speed on the two helps on the one, and the two doesn't need to be as tall. For instance, hill can get away as a two, but not a three. George can be a two, but if he loses speed he'd be better off as a three.
Tyler's reaction here is the same one I had over 4 quarters of the game and the 15 minutes I spent looking at the boxscore wondering how it happened to us.