Page 7 of 36 FirstFirst ... 3456789101117 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 175 of 889

Thread: Four big IF's about Lance Stephenson.

  1. #151
    The Last Great Pacer BlueNGold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    14,849

    Default Re: Four big IF's about Lance Stephenson.

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

    That doesn't mean half the board has to argue he's a great athlete when it simply isn't true. Or that he's a great shooter, or the number of other things people say.
    Where did anyone say he's a great shooter OR a great athlete? I mentioned his FG% which is a fact. I mentioned the fact "he can get up", which he has. But in no way if you look at the context of posts am I saying that he's a great shooter OR a great athlete. I stress his passing, rebounding, defense, toughness, drive to the rack...his overall game.

  2. #152
    The Last Great Pacer BlueNGold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    14,849

    Default Re: Four big IF's about Lance Stephenson.

    BTW, the reason why Lance is special is due to the things he brings this particular starting lineup:

    1) Puts pressure on the D because at any moment he could drive to the rack. Paul is a threat as well, but Lance is important here too.

    2) Allows Paul George to play his natural position, which is SF.

    3) Sees the floor and can feed the post and pass better than any other starter, possibly with the exception of West. This is HUGE and makes our other players better. I would argue that he doesn't have as many assists as he should have because last year they had him spotting up for threes instead of using his best talents. Honestly, I think they were forcing him to play off the ball to improve his shooting.

    4) Toughness. Other than West, our starters cannot be described as being tough guys.

    5) Edgy. Unlike our other guys, he's got an edge that gets under the skin of the opposition. He is no Reggie Miller, but that's what I'm talking about.

    6) Runs the fast break very, very well.

    7) Now this one is potential. I foresee that he will develop a consistent mid range shot that he will be able to get off any time because he can move so well with the ball. This is a HUGE deal and will open up the rest of his game. He will use that to draw the defender then drive by...go to the rack or dish. It will be huge if and when he gets this down. I'm already seeing that he's worked on it...

  3. #153
    Intuition over Integers McKeyFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Free Lance!
    Posts
    8,027

    Default Re: Four big IF's about Lance Stephenson.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueNGold View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Rodney Stuckey is not a bad comparison and isn't a slap in the face to Lance supporters...or shouldn't be. Stuckey is a notch below all-star caliber which is where Lance is trying to prove himself. But Lance has more potential. Lance blows away Stuckey on rebounds. Lance is 25 lbs heavier people...a lot more physical. He's a better shooter. Look at Stuckey's FG% historically. Lance may never shoot that bad. Yet Stuckey is a very good NBA player. Again, there are a few seats left on the bus.
    I don't think Stuckey is anywhere near Lance's court vision, and that is the part of Lance that separates him from the pack.
    .

    .

    .

    .


    “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

  4. #154
    Intuition over Integers McKeyFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Free Lance!
    Posts
    8,027

    Default Re: Four big IF's about Lance Stephenson.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Anytime a player who has yet to average double figures for an entire season
    This is the crux.

    Lance proponents (at least speaking for myself) see that he has not been given the long leash that PG and others have been given. We're convinced he will break out this year if he gets it.

    It could be that "freeing Lance" earlier or in the future is a bad idea. But no one can win the debate until he gets that chance. If he does, nobody on either side will be upset if our side wins.
    .

    .

    .

    .


    “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

  5. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to McKeyFan For This Useful Post:


  6. #155
    Artificial Intelligence wintermute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,064

    Default Re: Four big IF's about Lance Stephenson.

    I'd like to point out that Stuckey's contract pays him over $8m per year. And that he signed his big contract at age 25, i.e. a year older than Lance would be next season. In fairness, he'd already have a couple of seasons of 15+ ppg at that point. On Lance's side, he can't equal Stuckey's production (yet), but on the other hand being a contributor on a much better team should work in his favor. From a market value perspective, I think Stuckey's deal seems like a reasonable benchmark.

  7. #156
    The Last Great Pacer BlueNGold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    14,849

    Default Re: Four big IF's about Lance Stephenson.

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

    Lance proponents (at least speaking for myself) see that he has not been given the long leash that PG and others have been given. We're convinced he will break out this year if he gets it.

    It could be that "freeing Lance" earlier or in the future is a bad idea. But no one can win the debate until he gets that chance. If he does, nobody on either side will be upset if our side wins.
    I think the Pacers knew Orlando's potential last year and they knew Lance's. But Orlando wasn't given any minutes and Lance was given minutes but placed into a role that required him to develop a more disciplined game. I can't argue with that approach.

    What I'm saying is that where you see a short leash, I see a choker. Not to compare him to a dog, but Lance needed trained. They knew all along he has a lot of potential but he's untamed and they wanted to push him to the corner to work on his shot. I think it's paying off some right now...and that choker has been taken off. IOW, Lance has basically been freed. Let's see how the game goes tonight. It does appear that they are letting him play his game this year...where they did not last year.

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


  9. #157
    Intuition over Integers McKeyFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Free Lance!
    Posts
    8,027

    Default Re: Four big IF's about Lance Stephenson.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueNGold View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I think the Pacers knew Orlando's potential last year and they knew Lance's. But Orlando wasn't given any minutes and Lance was given minutes but placed into a role that required him to develop a more disciplined game. I can't argue with that approach.

    What I'm saying is that where you see a short leash, I see a choker. Not to compare him to a dog, but Lance needed trained. They knew all along he has a lot of potential but he's untamed and they wanted to push him to the corner to work on his shot. I think it's paying off some right now...and that choker has been taken off. IOW, Lance has basically been freed. Let's see how the game goes tonight. It does appear that they are letting him play his game this year...where they did not last year.
    I hope you're right.

    Lance hasn't missed two shots in a row yet this year. Much less three or four or a couple of turnovers in a row. We'll see if he gets the same long leash others seem to get.
    .

    .

    .

    .


    “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

  10. #158
    Member aamcguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    West Lafayette
    Age
    23
    Posts
    2,437

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Four big IF's about Lance Stephenson.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueNGold View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I think the Pacers knew Orlando's potential last year and they knew Lance's. But Orlando wasn't given any minutes and Lance was given minutes but placed into a role that required him to develop a more disciplined game. I can't argue with that approach.

    What I'm saying is that where you see a short leash, I see a choker. Not to compare him to a dog, but Lance needed trained. They knew all along he has a lot of potential but he's untamed and they wanted to push him to the corner to work on his shot. I think it's paying off some right now...and that choker has been taken off. IOW, Lance has basically been freed. Let's see how the game goes tonight. It does appear that they are letting him play his game this year...where they did not last year.
    Of course that's what they did. That's what every contending team does with a player who isn't currently skilled enough to be given a more prominent role. Orlando got plenty of minutes for a rookie. He wasn't given starter minutes because he wasn't as good or as experienced as Lance. It wasn't some special design to specifically develop Lance Stephenson, it was your typical, run-of-the-mill team development strategy. Remember that at the start of last season Lance's potential was obvious. But the team still tried out Gerald Green and Sam Young in the starting lineup before they turned to Lance.

  11. #159

    Default Re: Four big IF's about Lance Stephenson.

    How we can keep both lance and Danny beyond this year seems just about impossible. If Danny is through we likely don't sign him and if Danny is any good we can't afford him.

  12. #160
    It is ka Thankee sai Major Cold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Garrett, IN
    Posts
    9,006
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Four big IF's about Lance Stephenson.

    Quote Originally Posted by McKeyFan View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I hope you're right.

    Lance hasn't missed two shots in a row yet this year. Much less three or four or a couple of turnovers in a row. We'll see if he gets the same long leash others seem to get.

    He won't. And as much as you want it to happen, this is not Lance's team. He is not getting the ISO play to win it all. He isn't going to be the DWayne Wade to Paul George's Lebron. If you want that then you don't want West. You really don't want Hibbert. Lance can be unleashed to grab the ball off of the rim and run with it. And it doesn't seem to be enough. He can get the 12 fga and that won't be enough.

    When player successes come at the cost of the team being completely different than they have been. And been good at. Then your desire for that player successes is unwarranted.

    And that goes for anyone. I don't want Hibbert shooting more than 12fga. I don't want George flinging up 6 3pointers. I don't want West playing over 35mpg. I don't want Hill being a traditional point. I don't want Granger coming back and taking over. I don't want Lance to be the man that has a role that only Paul George deserves to have.

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to Major Cold For This Useful Post:


  14. #161
    The Last Great Pacer BlueNGold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    14,849

    Default Re: Four big IF's about Lance Stephenson.

    Nobody is saying they want this to be Lance's team. It's Paul George's team and that's not up for debate. But this thread is about whether Lance should be the starting PG...although IMO the real question is if Lance will be given the opportunity to initiate the offense. That's not to say he's Batman on this team. That title belongs to Paul and nobody is taking it away.

    ...and Lance "getting his" is not about getting his points. It's about freeing him to use his talents. It's about assists. It's about rebounds. It's about good defense. It's about good FG%. It's about solidifying his mid range game. It's about going to the rack. It's about his moxy and his toughness. It's about the fast break.

    It's about a changing of the guards with Miami...powering through Chalmers for an And-One... shutting down an aging DWade (eventually)...and rubbing the man's nose in it.

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to BlueNGold For This Useful Post:


  16. #162

    Default Re: Four big IF's about Lance Stephenson.

    Love's a a quicker basketball player than Lance, and Danny's better at taking the ball to the rack even though once he gets there he can't make the shot or set his teammates up? Gotcha mattie

  17. #163
    Member PR07's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    4,860

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Four big IF's about Lance Stephenson.

    I like Stephenson, but I like him as an off guard at SG. I think having him next to Hill, actually masks Hill's shortcomings...lack of creative passing and playmaking ability for others. However, I don't like Stephenson as my everyday point guard, I think it forces him to run the offense and take care of the ball (a job that Hill can easily do and do efficiently), whereas I think Lance is at his best when he's looking to attack and make plays, and not worry about the other things. Just because he COULD play PG, doesn't mean we need to put him there. I remember when LeBron was a rookie, everyone said he'd be a point guard...because he COULD play point guard; however, fast forwarding to today, he's much better as a 2, 3, or 4.

  18. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to PR07 For This Useful Post:


  19. #164

    Default Re: Four big IF's about Lance Stephenson.

    My prediction: Lance Stephenson finishes the year #2 in the league in FG% for SGs only behind D. Wade.

  20. #165
    Intuition over Integers McKeyFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Free Lance!
    Posts
    8,027

    Default Re: Four big IF's about Lance Stephenson.

    Quote Originally Posted by Major Cold View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    He won't. And as much as you want it to happen, this is not Lance's team. He is not getting the ISO play to win it all. He isn't going to be the DWayne Wade to Paul George's Lebron. If you want that then you don't want West. You really don't want Hibbert. Lance can be unleashed to grab the ball off of the rim and run with it. And it doesn't seem to be enough. He can get the 12 fga and that won't be enough.

    When player successes come at the cost of the team being completely different than they have been. And been good at. Then your desire for that player successes is unwarranted.

    And that goes for anyone. I don't want Hibbert shooting more than 12fga. I don't want George flinging up 6 3pointers. I don't want West playing over 35mpg. I don't want Hill being a traditional point. I don't want Granger coming back and taking over. I don't want Lance to be the man that has a role that only Paul George deserves to have.
    Asking Lance to have the same size leash as the other starters isn't the same as asking for it to be "his" team only.

    I'm asking that he have the same leash Paul George had two years ago, when Danny and West were the key go to players. Paul got to make mistakes without constant fear of getting jerked to the pine. Granted, if Lance continues to make mistakes ongoing it must be addressed. But we haven't found out if one of our most efficient players will stay just as efficient if his shots and touches are significantly increased.

    Now, if you don't care whether or not he's a James Harden type and prefer we not find out because you are attached to everyone else, that's another issue.
    .

    .

    .

    .


    “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

  21. #166

    Default Re: Four big IF's about Lance Stephenson.

    Without that "leash" Lance wouldn't have been nearly as successful as he was last season. He needed the structure.

    But I really didn't see that as a leash. I saw it as he was simply the fifth option on offense. Like PG was at one point. So, he had to do other things (rebound, play defense, irritate Wade and Lebron) to help the team. He had to move without the ball to get an open shot. (And he got a lot better at that.)

    So, who in the offense would you like to move Lance ahead of? PG? I'd imagine that would be a resounding no. Hill? I'm sure some of you would, but I'd argue this team needs Hill's stability, especially because the Pacers are prone to turnovers. Rather than what Lance brings. West and Hibbert aren't really controlling the ball much, but I'd imagine no one would want to take shots from them.

    So unless we're giving him Hill's role. (Which, IMO..would be silly. It's best to let Hill control the team, thereby controlling when it's appropriate for Lance to do what Lance does best, rather than Lance forcing things.) He's not moving from the fifth option.

    The alternative, is that Lance plays the sixth man position and is the first option in that unit. Which, so long as he gets his minutes, would probably explain why Lance was excited about that possibility.
    Last edited by Sookie; 11-02-2013 at 05:46 PM.

  22. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Sookie For This Useful Post:


  23. #167
    Member aamcguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    West Lafayette
    Age
    23
    Posts
    2,437

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Four big IF's about Lance Stephenson.

    Quote Originally Posted by McKeyFan View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Asking Lance to have the same size leash as the other starters isn't the same as asking for it to be "his" team only.

    I'm asking that he have the same leash Paul George had two years ago, when Danny and West were the key go to players. Paul got to make mistakes without constant fear of getting jerked to the pine. Granted, if Lance continues to make mistakes ongoing it must be addressed. But we haven't found out if one of our most efficient players will stay just as efficient if his shots and touches are significantly increased.

    Now, if you don't care whether or not he's a James Harden type and prefer we not find out because you are attached to everyone else, that's another issue.
    Last season Lance averaged 29.2 minutes. Two seasons ago Paul George averaged 29.7 minutes per game. You're talking about George being given 30 seconds more per game, and remember that Paul George also started every single game, so when he started Lance actually played more per game than George did. In addition to being already our best wing defender, George also outproduced Lance in points, rebounds, steals, and blocks.

    This sentiment that Lance was never allowed to make mistakes or was unfairly boxed in is a myth. He was given the role that his skills and production warranted last season.

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


  25. #168
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Indy
    Posts
    7,745

    Default Re: Four big IF's about Lance Stephenson.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sookie View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Without that "leash" Lance wouldn't have been nearly as successful as he was last season. He needed the structure.

    But I really didn't see that as a leash. I saw it as he was simply the fifth option on offense. Like PG was at one point. So, he had to do other things (rebound, play defense, irritate Wade and Lebron) to help the team. He had to move without the ball to get an open shot. (And he got a lot better at that.)
    And that probably helped to make George a better all-around player too. Unless you are dealing with a Lebron type player, in my opinion it is the smart thing to limit the role of younger players. Force them into doing things they wouldn't do otherwise. This is why if Lance was drafted by this years Magic he might be free and put up better stats, but he probably wouldn't be half the player he currently is.

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


  27. #169
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Indy
    Posts
    7,745

    Default Re: Four big IF's about Lance Stephenson.

    Quote Originally Posted by aamcguy View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Last season Lance averaged 29.2 minutes. Two seasons ago Paul George averaged 29.7 minutes per game. You're talking about George being given 30 seconds more per game, and remember that Paul George also started every single game, so when he started Lance actually played more per game than George did. In addition to being already our best wing defender, George also outproduced Lance in points, rebounds, steals, and blocks.

    This sentiment that Lance was never allowed to make mistakes or was unfairly boxed in is a myth. He was given the role that his skills and production warranted last season.
    I think it is a case of Paul didn't go out and make a bunch of stupid mistakes. He mostly played within his role and abilities. So you didn't see him get pulled for making mistakes very often. On the other hand Lance would occasionally force stuff and play outside of his abilities. In which case he would get pulled put of the game.

  28. #170
    Your Daddy RobRoy317's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Bloomington, IN
    Age
    21
    Posts
    128

    Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Four big IF's about Lance Stephenson.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicks View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    IF Lance continues to demonstrate improved decision-making with the ball in his hands.

    IF Lance can adequately guard the position.

    IF Lance proves to be more consistent than last season.

    IF, and this is the biggest question mark to me, Lance shows more growth in regards to his maturity....

    I think I want him to be our starting point guard later on this season. I think FOR THIS TEAM and HOW THIS TEAM PLAYS OFFENSE, he could be a killer upgrade at that position.

    Of course, in this scenario, new questions and problems would present themselves now and during the summer... primarily regarding George Hill.
    5th option: IFFFFFF he masters that behind the back pass he just did
    "What you are witnessing right now is the old Danny Granger of old!!" - Chris Denari 01/01/2014

  29. #171
    It is ka Thankee sai Major Cold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Garrett, IN
    Posts
    9,006
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Four big IF's about Lance Stephenson.

    Just because that I don't want to give the keys to Lance doesn't mean I don't want him to progress. In fact getting rid of the leash might have him run into traffic.

  30. The Following User Says Thank You to Major Cold For This Useful Post:


  31. #172
    It is ka Thankee sai Major Cold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Garrett, IN
    Posts
    9,006
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Four big IF's about Lance Stephenson.

    Oh and I am all for lengthening the leash when it comes to rebounding. I love it.

  32. #173
    The Last Great Pacer BlueNGold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    14,849

    Default Re: Four big IF's about Lance Stephenson.

    Quote Originally Posted by aamcguy View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    This sentiment that Lance was never allowed to make mistakes or was unfairly boxed in is a myth. He was given the role that his skills and production warranted last season.
    Oh, he was allowed to make mistakes. He was properly coached as well. But to say they didn't have him on a short leash in terms of what he was allowed to do would be wrong. I'm not saying that was a wrong move. He was indeed boxed in but it wasn't unfair. It was proper and we are seeing Lance grow a bit more. 9 points in the first half so far...above his last year's average already...

  33. #174
    Member aamcguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    West Lafayette
    Age
    23
    Posts
    2,437

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Four big IF's about Lance Stephenson.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueNGold View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Oh, he was allowed to make mistakes. He was properly coached as well. But to say they didn't have him on a short leash in terms of what he was allowed to do would be wrong. I'm not saying that was a wrong move. He was indeed boxed in but it wasn't unfair. It was proper and we are seeing Lance grow a bit more. 9 points in the first half so far...above his last year's average already...
    He's also above last year's average in both fouls and turnovers as well. Remember with more Jekyll comes just a little bit more Hyde as well

  34. #175
    The Last Great Pacer BlueNGold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    14,849

    Default Re: Four big IF's about Lance Stephenson.

    Quote Originally Posted by aamcguy View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    He's also above last year's average in both fouls and turnovers as well. Remember with more Jekyll comes just a little bit more Hyde as well
    Still 8 minutes left. Double his ppg average now...only 2 turnovers which was actually his average last year. Shooting better than 50% again. 67% from 3. There's only a couple more seats left on this bus...

Posting Permissions

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