Page 10 of 11 FirstFirst ... 67891011 LastLast
Results 226 to 250 of 268

Thread: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

  1. #226
    Future Finals MVP? boombaby1987's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Bloomington
    Posts
    3,938

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

    If the Pacers won 55 games a year and were contenders for 15 years, yes, we would have the fan support the Spurs do. I know your not from the US, but I kind of get offended when people criticize our team in attendance who are in another country. Yes we have **** poor attendance, but a lot of teams BS their attendance a whole lot worse than we do. If everyone was honest, the Pacers would be in the 17th-18th range in attendance. I wish some news outlet would do a story on this cause it really pisses me off how other teams are able to make up insane numbers and report them to the league.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to boombaby1987 For This Useful Post:


  3. #227
    All Hail CJ Watson! Nuntius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Somewhere in Southern Europe
    Posts
    16,991

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

    Quote Originally Posted by Dece View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I guess someone should have told New York, New Jersey, Chicago, and Houston that. If this isn't captain hindsight I don't know what is. We had THE DECISION hour long special, but it was 100% for sure always going to happen.
    Of course, it is hindsight.

    I said it in my post:

    Give the fact that we NOW know.

    If that isn't a clear indication that I'm going to say is in hindsight then I don't know what it is.

    But fact is, that most things that are talked about in this thread are in hindsight. It's just that I'm admitting it while others don't

  4. #228
    All Hail CJ Watson! Nuntius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Somewhere in Southern Europe
    Posts
    16,991

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

    Quote Originally Posted by BillS View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Otherweise, you are saying the only "risk" is when you trade for a star
    Yes, that's exactly what they are saying.

  5. #229
    Member aamcguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    West Lafayette
    Age
    23
    Posts
    2,336

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

    Quote Originally Posted by Nuntius View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Yes, that's exactly what they are saying.
    Oddly enough, when you trade for a star there is actually far less risk unless you gut your team doing it. And then it's only marginal risk. But most stars these days don't get traded for even close to equal value, they normally get traded for unproven players and cap space.

    It's just a misrepresentation of the true meaning of "risk."

  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to aamcguy For This Useful Post:


  7. #230
    All Hail CJ Watson! Nuntius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Somewhere in Southern Europe
    Posts
    16,991

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

    Quote Originally Posted by boombaby1987 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    If the Pacers won 55 games a year and were contenders for 15 years, yes, we would have the fan support the Spurs do. I know your not from the US, but I kind of get offended when people criticize our team in attendance who are in another country.
    Exactly. Thank you for making my point

    Currently, we have a team that can win 55 games a year for a long time. We can finally build our fan base again. The Pacers can retake parts of Indiana that belong to other teams (South Bend etc.) and make it theirs once more.

    If the Pacers swing for the fences and get burned (and we probably will if we go for the star approach without having Durant or LeBron) then we may never have the chance again to regain the fan base. This is their chance. This is why it's important for them to play it safe and be a great team for a long time.

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


  9. #231
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Little Rock, AR
    Age
    28
    Posts
    1,201

    Default Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

    Quote Originally Posted by Nuntius View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Yes, that's exactly what they are saying.
    Stars win championships, I'm ok with that being how you characterize this. Adding or subtracting Ian from a team never turns a championship team into not one.

  10. #232
    All Hail CJ Watson! Nuntius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Somewhere in Southern Europe
    Posts
    16,991

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

    Quote Originally Posted by Dece View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Stars win championships, I'm ok with that being how you characterize this. Adding or subtracting Ian from a team never turns a championship team into not one.
    Adding or subtracting Tyson Chandler does, though

    PS: No, I'm not saying that Ian is as good as Tyson is. I'm just saying that some times there are some key non-star signings that can put a team over the top.

  11. #233
    Member aamcguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    West Lafayette
    Age
    23
    Posts
    2,336

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

    Quote Originally Posted by Dece View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Stars win championships, I'm ok with that being how you characterize this. Adding or subtracting Ian from a team never turns a championship team into not one.
    But if they don't have the advantage that a guy like Ian gives them, they have an advantage that another role player gives them. If nobody with Ian's talent level or lower played in the NBA, each team would only have 3-6 players total.

  12. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to aamcguy For This Useful Post:


  13. #234
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Little Rock, AR
    Age
    28
    Posts
    1,201

    Default Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

    Yea, I guess that's the flaw with the word star, I guess I more clearly mean difference maker: Ian is not a difference maker, while Tyson is. Tyson should be an all star, but even all star isn't what I mean. Adding Jason Terry to your team might put you over the hump but he's never been more than a really good 6th man, he IS a difference maker. (or was a few years ago, I haven't watched him play this season)

    This team needed a difference maker, we got DJA, Green, and Ian... none of those guys will ever be called difference makers, although I can see some people thinking that perhaps DJA or Green could have been, and theoretically could still be, though I'd bet against it.

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to Dece For This Useful Post:


  15. #235
    Member aamcguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    West Lafayette
    Age
    23
    Posts
    2,336

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

    Quote Originally Posted by Dece View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Yea, I guess that's the flaw with the word star, I guess I more clearly mean difference maker: Ian is not a difference maker, while Tyson is. Tyson should be an all star, but even all star isn't what I mean. Adding Jason Terry to your team might put you over the hump but he's never been more than a really good 6th man, he IS a difference maker. (or was a few years ago, I haven't watched him play this season)

    This team needed a difference maker, we got DJA, Green, and Ian... none of those guys will ever be called difference makers, although I can see some people thinking that perhaps DJA or Green could have been, and theoretically could still be, though I'd bet against it.
    I agree. But Chandler was playing on a 6 year, 75 million dollar contract. He played above expectations for Dallas and earned a 4 year, 58 million dollar contract the next year. Ian is playing on a 4 year, 16 million dollar contract.

  16. #236
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Little Rock, AR
    Age
    28
    Posts
    1,201

    Default Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

    Quote Originally Posted by aamcguy View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    But if they don't have the advantage that a guy like Ian gives them, they have an advantage that another role player gives them. If nobody with Ian's talent level or lower played in the NBA, each team would only have 3-6 players total.
    The truth in the NBA is: only your best 3-6 players matter in this league. Yea, you need full rosters to play the game, but the 7-15 guys? They aren't difference makers. No team out there right now is saying to themselves, "man, if we had Ian Mahimi we'd have a real shot at winning it all this year." Someone (us for example), might be saying that about Luis Scola, OJ Mayo, Jamal Crawford... as just some examples of really solid players, guys who would be among your top 3-6 players and could make a real difference, versus just another warm big body that rounds your team out.

  17. #237
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Age
    32
    Posts
    28,142

    Default Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

    Quote Originally Posted by aamcguy View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    But if they don't have the advantage that a guy like Ian gives them, they have an advantage that another role player gives them. If nobody with Ian's talent level or lower played in the NBA, each team would only have 3-6 players total.
    I call bs on that.

  18. #238
    All Hail CJ Watson! Nuntius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Somewhere in Southern Europe
    Posts
    16,991

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

    Quote Originally Posted by Dece View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Yea, I guess that's the flaw with the word star, I guess I more clearly mean difference maker: Ian is not a difference maker, while Tyson is. Tyson should be an all star, but even all star isn't what I mean. Adding Jason Terry to your team might put you over the hump but he's never been more than a really good 6th man, he IS a difference maker. (or was a few years ago, I haven't watched him play this season)
    I can certainly agree with it.

    Personally, I think that a good bench would be a difference maker. That's why we went after Ian, Green and DJA. They wanted to create a good bench. A bench that can give our starters some rest without losing the lead constantly.

    That was the plan, I believe.

  19. #239
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Little Rock, AR
    Age
    28
    Posts
    1,201

    Default Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

    The deepest team in the league has never been how I've ever heard someone describe any of the NBA champions, ever. I've heard best starting 5, I've heard best player, I've heard about the Big 3, Hall of Fame duos... never has anyone said, at least within my ear shot, "that team won it all because they were the deepest team in NBA."

  20. #240
    Member aamcguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    West Lafayette
    Age
    23
    Posts
    2,336

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

    Quote Originally Posted by Dece View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The truth in the NBA is: only your best 3-6 players matter in this league. Yea, you need full rosters to play the game, but the 7-15 guys? They aren't difference makers. No team out there right now is saying to themselves, "man, if we had Ian Mahimi we'd have a real shot at winning it all this year." Someone (us for example), might be saying that about Luis Scola, OJ Mayo, Jamal Crawford... as just some examples of really solid players, guys who would be among your top 3-6 players and could make a real difference, versus just another warm big body that rounds your team out.
    Not a bad assessment, but your best 3-6 players dictate the rest of the players you fill your squad out with. Ian is a very good player for us because our starting center, who makes a huge impact on the defensive end, also has stamina issues. So we brought in a guy who can fill that role for longer periods than an out of position PF can do.

  21. The Following User Says Thank You to aamcguy For This Useful Post:


  22. #241
    Member aamcguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    West Lafayette
    Age
    23
    Posts
    2,336

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

    Quote Originally Posted by Dece View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The deepest team in the league has never been how I've ever heard someone describe any of the NBA champions, ever. I've heard best starting 5, I've heard best player, I've heard about the Big 3, Hall of Fame duos... never has anyone said, at least within my ear shot, "that team won it all because they were the deepest team in NBA."
    Last season our starting 5 was one of the top units in the league. And that was with either Collison or Hill. With Collison, it led the league in 5 man +/-. With Hill, they had an even better +/- per minute. They kept what worked and attempted to work over the bench. Keeping Collison or Hill on the bench wouldn't work because our bench was still terrible last year.

    Maybe you don't agree with what they decided to do, but they're doing it in an acceptable way of how you view great teams.

  23. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to aamcguy For This Useful Post:


  24. #242
    Member aamcguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    West Lafayette
    Age
    23
    Posts
    2,336

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

    Quote Originally Posted by vnzla81 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I call bs on that.
    That's valid, but there are many who have a higher opinion of Ian than you do. I am one of those.

  25. #243
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Little Rock, AR
    Age
    28
    Posts
    1,201

    Default Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

    Quote Originally Posted by aamcguy View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Last season our starting 5 was one of the top units in the league. And that was with either Collison or Hill. With Collison, it led the league in 5 man +/-. With Hill, they had an even better +/- per minute. They kept what worked and attempted to work over the bench. Keeping Collison or Hill on the bench wouldn't work because our bench was still terrible last year.

    Maybe you don't agree with what they decided to do, but they're doing it in an acceptable way of how you view great teams.
    And that's exactly why this off season was so frustrating. We have FIVE really good players. Hill, George, Hibbert, West, Granger. We have 5. We have the assets to increase this to 6. With that 6th player, a difference maker, we would have had a shot at the title. Especially important for us to have SIX because one of our five, Hibbert, can only play 30 good minutes a night, instead of the 40 you can get out of your usual top 5. Guys, it's not that I think we have a bad team, it's never been that, I've said over and over, we're good, we're a 50 win club. But without another difference maker we WILL NOT win a title. We had SO many assets this off season to acquire one with, or to give up one of our 5 to get 2 back (5-1+2=SIX!), and instead we said no, this 5 is enough when it very clearly is not.

  26. #244
    Member aamcguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    West Lafayette
    Age
    23
    Posts
    2,336

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

    Quote Originally Posted by Dece View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    And that's exactly why this off season was so frustrating. We have FIVE really good players. Hill, George, Hibbert, West, Granger. We have 5. We have the assets to increase this to 6. With that 6th player, a difference maker, we would have had a shot at the title. Especially important for us to have SIX because one of our five, Hibbert, can only play 30 good minutes a night, instead of the 40 you can get out of your usual top 5. Guys, it's not that I think we have a bad team, it's never been that, I've said over and over, we're good, we're a 50 win club. But without another difference maker we WILL NOT win a title. We had SO many assets this off season to acquire one with, or to give up one of our 5 to get 2 back (5-1+2=SIX!), and instead we said no, this 5 is enough when it very clearly is not.
    I think you're being unfair. How can we say that the 5 are or are not enough when the 5 haven't played together this year? Regardless of what they could or should have done in the offseason, we did what we did. Until we see the team we put together actually play together, I don't think it is too much to ask to be patient and enjoy the good that they bring.

    I think the acquisitions of Green and Ian look a lot better when our true starting wings are out there. I think the whole bench looks better when you have both Green and Stephenson as bench players. As of right now, when that unit is together they're playing with a guy who failed to fill in as a starter. Just give them time to play together and then make your assessment before pronouncing doom.
    Last edited by aamcguy; 12-18-2012 at 07:47 PM.

  27. The Following User Says Thank You to aamcguy For This Useful Post:


  28. #245
    All Hail CJ Watson! Nuntius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Somewhere in Southern Europe
    Posts
    16,991

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

    Quote Originally Posted by Dece View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The deepest team in the league has never been how I've ever heard someone describe any of the NBA champions, ever. I've heard best starting 5, I've heard best player, I've heard about the Big 3, Hall of Fame duos... never has anyone said, at least within my ear shot, "that team won it all because they were the deepest team in NBA."
    So, the Mavs weren't the deepest team in the league when they won it? Wasn't it Barea (their back up PG) that was able to cut through Los Angeles' and Miami's defense like swiss cheese?

  29. The Following User Says Thank You to Nuntius For This Useful Post:


  30. #246
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Little Rock, AR
    Age
    28
    Posts
    1,201

    Default Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

    Barea game 1 (L) 1-8 in 18 minutes
    Barea game 2 (W) 2-7 in 14 minutes
    Barea game 3 (L) 2-8 in 19 minutes
    Barea game 4 (W) 3-9 in 22 minutes
    Barea game 5 (W) 6-11 in 26 minutes
    Barea game 6 (W) 7-12 in 30 minutes

    So the guy had 4 bad games and 2 good ones, not sure I'd call that slicing it like butter -- also of note, JET was playing 6th man behind Deshawn Stevenson to start, then 6th man behind Barea in the last 2 games... essentially Barea WAS their 6th best player, Deshawn isn't that good. In game 6 their top 6 players played 30+ minutes, Ian Deshawn and Brian Cardinal played 10-12 minutes. I'd say the Mavs had 6 difference makers, and 3 warm bodies. Same as my argument would expect.

    Edit: those numbers are his shooting, he shot 1 for 8, etc.
    Last edited by Dece; 12-18-2012 at 07:51 PM.

  31. #247
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Indy
    Posts
    7,079

    Default Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

    Quote Originally Posted by Dece View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    And that's exactly why this off season was so frustrating. We have FIVE really good players. Hill, George, Hibbert, West, Granger. We have 5. We have the assets to increase this to 6. With that 6th player, a difference maker, we would have had a shot at the title. Especially important for us to have SIX because one of our five, Hibbert, can only play 30 good minutes a night, instead of the 40 you can get out of your usual top 5. Guys, it's not that I think we have a bad team, it's never been that, I've said over and over, we're good, we're a 50 win club. But without another difference maker we WILL NOT win a title. We had SO many assets this off season to acquire one with, or to give up one of our 5 to get 2 back (5-1+2=SIX!), and instead we said no, this 5 is enough when it very clearly is not.
    You want a 6th difference maker, look no further than Lance.

    you want someone who can play 18 minutes a game and adequately replace Roy, I give you Ian, who if he didn't have hands of stone would be a competent starter.

    So what the hell are you looking for? A bench that is full of starter level players? I have bad news for you, those types of benches don't exist. Some teams might have one player, a couple might be lucky with two, but that is all.

    See it takes more than just a great starting five. It also takes a good bench. What exactly defines a good bench for your team varies from team to team. No team wins a championship without a bench you can rely on. You don't hear about it for the same reason ESPN gushes all over Brady, but ignore that he probably has one of the best offensive lines ever. Without Battier the Heat do not win the championship last year. Battier is far from a sexy name for a sixth difference maker. What this team had last year was not a reliable bench, that was why we lost in the playoffs. Really at the moment we aren't far from a reliable bench. We have the true center we needed. We have a reliable defender. We just need that difference maker. Luckily he is already on the team, just for injury reasons he is starting instead of coming off the bench. Who knows once he is coming off the bench Green goes from being a disappointment, but acceptable 9th or 10th man to being what we hoped he would be, offense off the bench.

  32. The Following User Says Thank You to Eleazar For This Useful Post:


  33. #248
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Little Rock, AR
    Age
    28
    Posts
    1,201

    Default Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

    What are you talking about, everyone does and has loved Battier for a long time. He's long been regarded as an elite defender, glue guy, and difference maker.

    Gonna have to see a lot more from Lance before he's a difference maker - though I hope you're right, I hope he's the next DWade.

  34. #249
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Little Rock, AR
    Age
    28
    Posts
    1,201

    Default Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

    The Dallas Mavericks 2010-2011 game 6 best players: 204 minutes played. The rest of their roster: 36 minutes played split almost even between 3 guys.

    It doesn't take a good bench. It takes a handful of difference making players.

  35. #250
    Member aamcguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    West Lafayette
    Age
    23
    Posts
    2,336

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

    Quote Originally Posted by Dece View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Barea game 1 (L) 1-8 in 18 minutes
    Barea game 2 (W) 2-7 in 14 minutes
    Barea game 3 (L) 2-8 in 19 minutes
    Barea game 4 (W) 3-9 in 22 minutes
    Barea game 5 (W) 6-11 in 26 minutes
    Barea game 6 (W) 7-12 in 30 minutes

    So the guy had 4 bad games and 2 good ones, not sure I'd call that slicing it like butter -- also of note, JET was playing 6th man behind Deshawn Stevenson to start, then 6th man behind Barea in the last 2 games... essentially Barea WAS their 6th best player, Deshawn isn't that good. In game 6 their top 6 players played 30+ minutes, Ian Deshawn and Brian Cardinal played 10-12 minutes. I'd say the Mavs had 6 difference makers, and 3 warm bodies. Same as my argument would expect.

    Edit: those numbers are his shooting, he shot 1 for 8, etc.
    In the same post you said Barea only had 2 games out of 6 where he was important and that Barea was one of 6 difference makers. It can't be both.

    For what it's worth, Barea was the 7th most used player in the Mavs/Lakers sweep and the 6th most used player in the Mavs/Heat game. The only difference between the two was that Peja Stojakovic didn't really play in the Finals. So they had 7 guys, and Stevenson was the 8th player barely trailiing Barea for 7th and 6th most minutes.

    They had a deep bench. You don't think having a deep bench saved the oldest team in the NBA some energy so they could play longer minutes in the Finals?

  36. The Following User Says Thank You to aamcguy For This Useful Post:


Similar Threads

  1. Windhorst: Thunder still rolling without Harden [ESPN]
    By RoboHicks in forum NBA Headlines (RSS Feeds)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-28-2012, 03:00 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-28-2012, 01:30 PM
  3. Thunder intend to keep both Harden and Ibaka
    By Sparhawk in forum Trade Proposals
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 06-15-2012, 07:00 PM
  4. Miami And Chicago Discussed Deal Involving Gordon, Marion
    By MillerTime in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 09-18-2008, 11:52 PM
  5. {Pacers.Com} Is deal for #1 pick being discussed ?
    By Frank Slade in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 06-21-2006, 10:40 PM

Posting Permissions

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