Page 12 of 36 FirstFirst ... 2891011121314151622 ... LastLast
Results 276 to 300 of 889

Thread: Four big IF's about Lance Stephenson.

  1. #276
    Member ilive4sports's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    6,896

    Sports Logo Sports Logo 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
    Which is why our bigs will starve. LeBron will enjoy being guarded by Danny as well. He'll be able to operate the offense easily compared to facing Paul George who will instead be chasing DWade around the floor...as LeBron easily dishes to Birdman for a dunk or Chalmers for a three because Danny can't move fast enough to get into the passing lanes........

    Edit: the thought of an aging and, at best, recovering Granger guarding LeBron James is a HORRIBLE thought.
    Things are so black and white to you. Its either option A or B. Rather than the mix which is what we will have.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to ilive4sports For This Useful Post:


  3. #277
    Member Sollozzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    17,767

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Nuntius View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Who said that I want the team to do what's easiest for Granger?

    A team plays at its best when its players play at their best. It's really, really simple.

    Hibbert at his best + West at his best + PG at his best + Lance at his best + George Hill at his best + Danny at his best + Scola at his best + Ian at his best + CJ Watson at his best + Orlando Johnson at his best + Solomon Hill at his best = Indiana Pacers at their best.

    The goal is to have this team play at its best, right? Isn't this what we want to do?

    Sure in theory, but my point is that if the current starting unit is what's best for the team, then it really doesn't matter what's best for Granger. My point is that even if Granger himself looks better with the starters, it's still not a good thing if the team is even better with Lance starting.

    When a team is as stacked as the Pacers, sometimes you can't maximize every single player.

  4. #278
    All Hail CJ Watson! Nuntius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Somewhere in Southern Europe
    Posts
    20,581

    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
    Which is why our bigs will starve. LeBron will enjoy being guarded by Danny as well. He'll be able to operate the offense easily compared to facing Paul George who will instead be chasing DWade around the floor...as LeBron easily dishes to Birdman for a dunk or Chalmers for a three because Danny can't move fast enough to get into the passing lanes........

    Edit: the thought of an aging and, at best, recovering Granger guarding LeBron James is a HORRIBLE thought.
    Paul George will guard the opposition's best player. Period.

    One of the reasons that the Heat were able to crowd our bigs in the post was because they didn't respect Lance's 3 point shot. Lance shot 30.4% from 3 in the ECF series and didn't make the Heat pay for cheating off of him. The situation was even worse when Sam Young played because it allowed LeBron to play free safety since he knew that Sam wouldn't score.

    Now, if Lance keeps up the shooting that he is exhibiting NOW. Then hell yeah. It will be a lot harder for them to guard us. But Lance has to keep this up. Please, keep it up, Lance
    Tonight, all flags must burn, in place of steeples.
    Autonomy must return into the hands of the people.

    Panopticon

    -------------

    CJ Watson - 20 points on 6/10 shooting!

    13/4/2014

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


  6. #279
    Come Home Lance! BlueNGold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    16,039

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

    Quote Originally Posted by ilive4sports View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Things are so black and white to you. Its either option A or B. Rather than the mix which is what we will have.
    Let's say the score is tied with a minute to go against Miami in the playoffs. Are you saying you want Granger guarding LeBron? Honestly, I don't think Granger has the foot speed to adequately guard either LeBron or DWade.

  7. #280
    All Hail CJ Watson! Nuntius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Somewhere in Southern Europe
    Posts
    20,581

    Sports Logo

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Sollozzo View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Sure in theory, but my point is that if the current starting unit is what's best for the team, then it really doesn't matter what's best for Granger. My point is that even if Granger himself looks better with the starters, it's still not a good thing if the team is even better with Lance starting.

    When a team is as stacked as the Pacers, sometimes you can't maximize every single player.
    If Lance is awesome with both the starters and the bench while Danny is awesome with the starters but mediocre with the bench what will you do? Because honestly this is what I think that will happen. I don't think that the bench would work with Danny since he is not a facilitator.
    Tonight, all flags must burn, in place of steeples.
    Autonomy must return into the hands of the people.

    Panopticon

    -------------

    CJ Watson - 20 points on 6/10 shooting!

    13/4/2014

  8. #281
    Member aamcguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    West Lafayette
    Age
    23
    Posts
    2,835

    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 agree with about half of this. Rather than point out difference, I have a question.

    What happens if Danny plays, gets up to maybe 85%, then he builds up enough scar tissue (again) by March that he can't finish the season? All that time spent when Lance could be fine tuning his game with the starters?

    Based on my readings, that tendon will never be the same physically. It has been operated on and scraped. There will always be scar tissue and I suspect it will be more susceptible to inflammation and building up more of it.

    What a shame if that happens when we could have used Danny as a "plus" for the bench. Instead, he upsets the starting unit that will indeed close the vast majority of the time, particularly in the playoffs against Miami.
    My answer is simple: I don't think a change from Granger to Stephenson would upset anything. George Hill was leading our team in touches by far, and we still did fine with him sitting. I believe you go with your best lineup at the given time. With Granger coming off of a fresh injury while still rehabbing from the old, make him prove he's recovered from all short-term injury problems. Once he's playing 25+ minutes without incident and 10 games or so off the bench, move him to the starting unit. The only caveat being that if while Granger is coming off the bench the Pacers are just steamrolling everybody, you don't make that change.

  9. #282
    Come Home Lance! BlueNGold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    16,039

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Nuntius View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Paul George will guard the opposition's best player. Period.
    LeBron? Then we are cool. Granger in no way can guard DWade.

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


  11. #283
    Come Home Lance! BlueNGold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    16,039

    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
    My answer is simple: I don't think a change from Granger to Stephenson would upset anything. George Hill was leading our team in touches by far, and we still did fine with him sitting. I believe you go with your best lineup at the given time. With Granger coming off of a fresh injury while still rehabbing from the old, make him prove he's recovered from all short-term injury problems. Once he's playing 25+ minutes without incident and 10 games or so off the bench, move him to the starting unit. The only caveat being that if while Granger is coming off the bench the Pacers are just steamrolling everybody, you don't make that change.
    Well, we are 3-0 right now. So, you would start Granger even if Lance is playing better huh? Personally, if Granger comes back and plays better than Lance, I want Granger playing with the starters. Ain't happening though.

  12. #284

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

    You seriously want to base your statement on a half pre-season game with Danny playing great and ignore how lance performed with the starting unit over a year?

    OK, that's fine. We don't need to discuss this further.

    Are we clear?

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to speakout4 For This Useful Post:


  14. #285

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Nuntius View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    If Lance is awesome with both the starters and the bench while Danny is awesome with the starters but mediocre with the bench what will you do? Because honestly this is what I think that will happen. I don't think that the bench would work with Danny since he is not a facilitator.
    I think Granger will play with one of Stephenson or George regardless if hes coming off the bench or not.

    Granger will most likely replace Orlando Johnson/Solo Hill off the bench.

    SG: Stephenson (32 minutes), Granger (16 minutes)
    SF: George (36 minutes), Granger (12 minutes)

  15. #286
    Member ilive4sports's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    6,896

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

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

    Look, the reason I want Lance off the bench? Because he has more freedom off the bench. Tonight shows that too. Look at his splits. Playing with PG he put up 6 points, 2 boards and 1 assist. Without Paul George? 16 points, 3 boards, 2 assists.

    Lance is a play maker with the ball in his hands. Without, he isn't nearly as effective. This is also a huge reason the bench has looked better this year. Because Lance is out there with them a lot.

    PG and Lance have more redundant skills than PG and Granger do imo. Granger is better off the ball than Lance. Lance is better with the ball than Granger. I believe that Granger's skill set will compliment the starters more than the bench while Lance's will compliment the bench more than the starters.

    This is not a knock on Lance what-so-ever. This is about having a very talented team and seeing which pieces fit where best. This doesn't mean Lance won't play well with the starters or that 5 man unit won't be great. We know thats not the case from what we have seen last year and this year. And Danny would do fine off the bench as well. Guess what? Whoever plays where, this team is gonna win some games. And by some, I mean a lot. And by a lot, I mean we are gonna be playing in June.

    We have an excellent shot at winning the title with Lance or Granger starting. Both will be key to winning a title.

  16. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ilive4sports For This Useful Post:


  17. #287
    Member ilive4sports's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    6,896

    Sports Logo Sports Logo 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
    Let's say the score is tied with a minute to go against Miami in the playoffs. Are you saying you want Granger guarding LeBron? Honestly, I don't think Granger has the foot speed to adequately guard either LeBron or DWade.
    PG is going to be guarding LeBron pretty much all game, whether Danny or Lance is starting. Danny can hang with Wade enough, especially with having big Roy holding down the paint.

  18. #288
    Member Sollozzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    17,767

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Nuntius View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    If Lance is awesome with both the starters and the bench while Danny is awesome with the starters but mediocre with the bench what will you do? Because honestly this is what I think that will happen. I don't think that the bench would work with Danny since he is not a facilitator.
    I agree that Lance could look great in whatever position he's in, while Danny only looks good with the starters. But in that scenario, it could still be true that the team is better overall with Lance starting even if Danny himself looks best with the starters. What is Granger at his current best going to look like? Granger might play his best with the starters, but that still doesn't mean that he'll be anywhere near as good as Lance. At this point, he needs to be pretty damn good to justify starting him over Born Ready, who is playing phenomenal ball right now.

    As has been the case for the last year, when Granger actually proves that he can consistently do big things for this team, then we'll figure out what role is best for him. I just hope that we see Granger play some consistent minutes sooner rather than later so that these issues can have some resolution. These debates are tough because everything surrounding Granger is in theory. Some think that he can be close to what he was two years ago while others think that he'll be a shell of himself, but no one knows for sure since the guy hasn't played consistent ball in ages. It really clouds the debate and everyone is on different levels since there is nothing concrete to work with.

    People's opinions vary a lot when you're judging a game that you can see with your own eyes, so it's infinitely muddier when everyone's playing a guessing game about a guy that hasn't played consistent ball in a very long time.

  19. #289
    Member ilive4sports's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    6,896

    Sports Logo Sports Logo 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
    Well, we are 3-0 right now. So, you would start Granger even if Lance is playing better huh? Personally, if Granger comes back and plays better than Lance, I want Granger playing with the starters. Ain't happening though.
    it isn't about which individual is playing better. Its about as a unit which will be playing better? Starters with Granger + Bench with Lance vs Starters with Lance + Bench with Granger.

  20. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ilive4sports For This Useful Post:


  21. #290
    Member aamcguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    West Lafayette
    Age
    23
    Posts
    2,835

    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
    Well, we are 3-0 right now. So, you would start Granger even if Lance is playing better huh? Personally, if Granger comes back and plays better than Lance, I want Granger playing with the starters. Ain't happening though.
    That isn't the question you asked me at all. You asked if Granger gets up to 85%, would I rather have him start over Stephenson?

    But yes, if Granger is playing well, I want Granger in the lineup after he comes off the bench while getting used to playing with the team again.

  22. #291
    Come Home Lance! BlueNGold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    16,039

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

    Lance is shooting pretty well people. He is also quite capable of dishing to Paul, Hibbert and West. Why not get ALL the players involved instead of just rely on Granger's perimeter shot. Danny isn't going to facilitate a darn thing. Paul would turn it over if he tried. George Hill protects the ball but is not strong at passing the ball. The bottom line is that I recognize Granger will help spread the floor and hit threes but I think Lance can do some of that and a lot more other things to help when we are competing against the other team's very best players.

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


  24. #292
    .
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583

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

    If Lance can keep shooting the three well, then you definitely keep him as the starter.

  25. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Hicks For This Useful Post:


  26. #293
    All Hail CJ Watson! Nuntius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Somewhere in Southern Europe
    Posts
    20,581

    Sports Logo

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

    Quote Originally Posted by ilive4sports View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I don't know why so many Lance "supporters" are acting like if Lance comes off the bench, he won't get any burn with the first unit.
    Because let's be honest here. We're not talking about Lance supporters. McKeyFan is a Lance supporter and he has also expressed the opinion that being used as a 6th man is great for Lance and makes a lot of sense for the team.

    The ones that are act like being a 6th man is a demotion are a very specific group and they have a very specific agenda. They want to see Granger gone from the team yesterday. I mean, we're talking about the guy who said that Granger is a chucker (thinking that Satan is still the coach, I guess?) and the guy that would trade Granger for a bag of Doritos. We're talking about posters that allow their dislike about a player to cloud their basketball judgement.

    Important note: I want to make very clear that this post is aimed at the two specific posters that I mention in it. The rest are using basketball arguments instead of allowing our likes and dislikes cloud our judgement.
    Tonight, all flags must burn, in place of steeples.
    Autonomy must return into the hands of the people.

    Panopticon

    -------------

    CJ Watson - 20 points on 6/10 shooting!

    13/4/2014

  27. #294
    Member ilive4sports's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    6,896

    Sports Logo Sports Logo 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
    Lance is shooting pretty well people. He is also quite capable of dishing to Paul, Hibbert and West. Why not get ALL the players involved instead of just rely on Granger's perimeter shot. Danny isn't going to facilitate a darn thing. Paul would turn it over if he tried. George Hill protects the ball but is not strong at passing the ball. The bottom line is that I recognize Granger will help spread the floor and hit threes but I think Lance can do some of that and a lot more other things to help when we are competing against the other team's very best players.
    You know, Danny Granger can do more than hit threes...

  28. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ilive4sports For This Useful Post:


  29. #295
    Member Sollozzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    17,767

    Sports Logo 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
    Lance is shooting pretty well people. He is also quite capable of dishing to Paul, Hibbert and West. Why not get ALL the players involved instead of just rely on Granger's perimeter shot. Danny isn't going to facilitate a darn thing. Paul would turn it over if he tried. George Hill protects the ball but is not strong at passing the ball. The bottom line is that I recognize Granger will help spread the floor and hit threes but I think Lance can do some of that and a lot more other things to help when we are competing against the other team's very best players.
    Exactly. I just don't like the idea that a team that went to Game 7 of the ECF's last year and is off to a hot start this year needs to rearrange a key part of its lineup just so they can make things easier for a guy who hasn't played consistent ball since May 2012.

    Granger needs to adapt to the current Pacers team, not the other way around.

  30. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Sollozzo For This Useful Post:


  31. #296
    All Hail CJ Watson! Nuntius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Somewhere in Southern Europe
    Posts
    20,581

    Sports Logo

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

    Quote Originally Posted by speakout4 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    You seriously want to base your statement on a half pre-season game with Danny playing great and ignore how lance performed with the starting unit over a year?

    OK, that's fine. We don't need to discuss this further.

    Are we clear?
    Did I ever say that I want to do that? Did I ever say that I want to ignore anything that Lance has said? Haven't I been saying throughout this thread that I'm extremely glad that Lance is playing the way he is right now and if he keeps playing that well then every other argument is moot?

    I mean, honestly. I shouldn't need to bold every sentence I write to make myself clear. I realize that I may not be extremely eloquent since I'm not a native English speaker but I think that you should be able to understand what I'm saying when I have posted some things time and time again.
    Tonight, all flags must burn, in place of steeples.
    Autonomy must return into the hands of the people.

    Panopticon

    -------------

    CJ Watson - 20 points on 6/10 shooting!

    13/4/2014

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


  33. #297
    Come Home Lance! BlueNGold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    16,039

    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
    That isn't the question you asked me at all. You asked if Granger gets up to 85%, would I rather have him start over Stephenson?

    But yes, if Granger is playing well, I want Granger in the lineup after he comes off the bench while getting used to playing with the team again.
    I'm not saying you didn't answer the question. I'm asking another one.

  34. #298

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

    Quote Originally Posted by vnzla81 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    If Lin was as good as Lance he would be starting, Lin is on the bench because he is just not that good.
    Not next to Harden, in the Houston scenario, he wouldn't.

    BTW: Jeremy Lin was a better player than Lance the past two seasons, and his statistics are about equal to that of Lance so far this season. Nice to try, but way to ultimately miss the point.

    You want a closing lineup. Assuming everyone is healthy and we are keeping to a "rule", I expect the five on the floor would be Hill, PG, Granger, Hibbert, and West. Because at full strength, Granger is better until proven otherwise. And no, three games doesn't prove otherwise.

    But I think that idea is silly, because Vogel has shown he'll go with who is playing best. Although I don't know that he'll take out Roy again. (Even though, IMO, he made the right call statistically.) PG and Roy are the only guarantees. (Although Hill better be there if we need a basket..)

    edit: Easier might also mean "health" wise. I'm not sure if it's the same for Danny's injury. But I've seen some players who come back from knee injuries where they need to start, because letting the knee sit after warming it up, stiffens the knee.
    Last edited by Sookie; 11-03-2013 at 12:21 AM.

  35. #299
    Member ilive4sports's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    6,896

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Sollozzo View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Exactly. I just don't like the idea that a team that went to Game 7 of the ECF's last year and is off to a hot start this year needs to rearrange a key part of its lineup just so they can make things easier for a guy who hasn't played consistent ball since May 2012.

    Granger needs to adapt to the current Pacers team, not the other way around.
    No one is saying that Granger needs to start because it will be where he looks best. They say thats how the team will look best, because Granger fits with the starters better than the bench, while Lance fits with both. We don't believe the starting 5 will suffer with Granger compared to with Lance starting, but we think the bench will play better with Lance rather than with Granger.

  36. The Following User Says Thank You to ilive4sports For This Useful Post:


  37. #300
    All Hail CJ Watson! Nuntius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Somewhere in Southern Europe
    Posts
    20,581

    Sports Logo

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

    Quote Originally Posted by The Future View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I think Granger will play with one of Stephenson or George regardless if hes coming off the bench or not.

    Granger will most likely replace Orlando Johnson/Solo Hill off the bench.

    SG: Stephenson (32 minutes), Granger (16 minutes)
    SF: George (36 minutes), Granger (12 minutes)
    That's quite possible. That would alleviate the need to put a facilitator as a 6th man since both George and Stephenson are facilitators.
    Tonight, all flags must burn, in place of steeples.
    Autonomy must return into the hands of the people.

    Panopticon

    -------------

    CJ Watson - 20 points on 6/10 shooting!

    13/4/2014

Posting Permissions

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