Page 26 of 36 FirstFirst ... 16222324252627282930 ... LastLast
Results 626 to 650 of 889

Thread: Four big IF's about Lance Stephenson.

  1. #626
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Age
    33
    Posts
    28,142

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

    History (not just Danny, but NBA history) tells us that if Danny becomes healthy, in the long run he will still prove to be the same shooter as before, and playing with this much talent history also says that's usually when shooters are their most efficient, something that is most likely assisting Lance as well right now in his own shooting.
    History tell us that guys that are out of the NBA for almost 2 years after having surgery and multiple non successful treatments on a chronic knee never come back to be the same but lets ignore that fact.

  2. #627
    .
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Since86 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    That's not the statement in question here. The statement in question, is you using the efficiency stat as a barometer of which player is better overall, something that the efficiency stat doesn't even attempt to quantify.
    You mean you don't make or miss the HOF exclusively based on your efficiency statistics? *grabs a pen to jot this down*

  3. #628
    Member Sollozzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    16,602

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Since86 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    That's not the statement in question here. The statement in question, is you using the efficiency stat as a barometer of which player is better overall, something that the efficiency stat doesn't even attempt to quantify.

    I'm pretty sure that was the sarcastic part, unless one honestly believes that I was seriously accusing someone of believing that Brent Barry was better than Michael Jordan.

  4. #629
    Redemption. docpaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Noblesville, IN
    Posts
    1,685

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

    At what point are folks going to take a step back and recognize that the debates here are based on the "problem" of having a former team leader and all-star (Granger) coming back alongside a rapidly emerging talent in Lance?

    Does anyone actually believe that we'll do *worse* once more talent is added into the mix?

    There are 82 games in the season. There will be plenty of time to test out different scenarios once Granger returns, and coach has said repeatedly that he plans to test out *both* Granger and Lance as starters/finishers. The team is too well coached to not find the right combination.

    Surely you all don't think that absent hard prospective data you're going to be able to figure out what combination makes the most sense by talking through it on the thread and getting all frustrated with each other?

    Three to four years ago, I never dreamed of having such luxuries... Lance or Granger as a six man?

  5. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to docpaul For This Useful Post:


  6. #630

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

    Quote Originally Posted by BillS View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    What's the over/under on how many days until Danny was the worst player to play for the Pacers until MDJ and then only barely? After all, clearly the guy never played defense, only scored by chucking the ball, couldn't pass, couldn't dribble, had a horrible attitude making it likely he'll throw a fit if he doesn't get to start, and was so lazy that he never dove for a ball or tried to get physical on a play. Pacers never should have drafted him, right? What a bum.
    Yea..

    If this is the picture people have to paint of Danny in order to make their argument about Lance starting over him. They don't have a good argument.

    Funny thing is, Lance does have a good argument as the starter. If people were more reasonable with what they were saying these arguments wouldn't break down into ridiculousness in every thread. (AKA Lance isn't the second coming, and Danny isn't the worst player ever.)

  7. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Sookie For This Useful Post:


  8. #631
    Member Since86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Muncie
    Posts
    21,010

    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
    I'm pretty sure that was the sarcastic part, unless one honestly believes that I was seriously accusing someone of believing that Brent Barry was better than Michael Jordan.
    No kidding. I'm pointing out that your sarcasm didn't even address what Mattie actually said. It would be like you making a comment about Monday's, and me making a sarcastic comment about dogs. You tried to discredit what Mattie posted, with your sarcasm that didn't even have anything to do with what Mattie said.
    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

    What if someone from a school of business or management school were to ask, How did you do this? How did you get the Pacers turned around? Is there a general approach you've taken that can be summarized?

    Larry Bird: Yeah, patience.

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to Since86 For This Useful Post:


  10. #632
    Artificial Intelligence wintermute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,242

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

    Quote Originally Posted by docpaul View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    There are 82 games in the season. There will be plenty of time to test out different scenarios once Granger returns, and coach has said repeatedly that he plans to test out *both* Granger and Lance as starters/finishers. The team is too well coached to not find the right combination.
    Thank you. Though I think both "sides" are so consumed with the argument that they'll just ignore your post.

    Quote Originally Posted by docpaul View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Surely you all don't think that absent hard prospective data you're going to be able to figure out what combination makes the most sense by talking through it on the thread and getting all frustrated with each other?
    Absence of data didn't stop anyone in the offseason alas, and they've just carried on from there. I hope your words won't fall on deaf ears though.

  11. #633
    Running with the Big Boys BillS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Danberry
    Age
    55
    Posts
    11,549

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

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

    Quote Originally Posted by docpaul View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Does anyone actually believe that we'll do *worse* once more talent is added into the mix?
    Well, yeah, that's what so many of the arguments here are driving at, aren't they? Especially the ones who seem to be worried a hobbled Danny will somehow HAVE to be played because he'll be selfish or Vogel will be dumb or Bird will demand it and therefore instead of winning every game we might lose a couple, which will cause us to lose in the playoffs because you'll have to go 82-0 to get the #1 seed.
    BillS

    "Every time I pitched it was like throwing gasoline on a fire. Pkkw! Pkkw! Pkkw! Pkkw!"
    - Ebby Calvin "Nuke" LaLoosh

  12. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to BillS For This Useful Post:


  13. #634
    Member Since86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Muncie
    Posts
    21,010

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

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

    I'm just tired of the crappy arguments. I get differing opinion, and like I told my GF on the way home Sat, it's like me given the choice between T-Bone and and NY Strip. I might rather have one of them, but if I got the other, I'd be perfectly happy. The problem is that some people view the argument as T-Bone and Kibbles n Bits.
    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

    What if someone from a school of business or management school were to ask, How did you do this? How did you get the Pacers turned around? Is there a general approach you've taken that can be summarized?

    Larry Bird: Yeah, patience.

  14. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Since86 For This Useful Post:


  15. #635
    Redemption. docpaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Noblesville, IN
    Posts
    1,685

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

    Quote Originally Posted by BillS View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Well, yeah, that's what so many of the arguments here are driving at, aren't they? Especially the ones who seem to be worried a hobbled Danny will somehow HAVE to be played because he'll be selfish or Vogel will be dumb or Bird will demand it and therefore instead of winning every game we might lose a couple, which will cause us to lose in the playoffs because you'll have to go 82-0 to get the #1 seed.
    Looks like you've just won the thread.

  16. #636
    .
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583

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

    Quote Originally Posted by docpaul View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    At what point are folks going to take a step back and recognize that the debates here are based on the "problem" of having a former team leader and all-star (Granger) coming back alongside a rapidly emerging talent in Lance?

    Does anyone actually believe that we'll do *worse* once more talent is added into the mix?

    There are 82 games in the season. There will be plenty of time to test out different scenarios once Granger returns, and coach has said repeatedly that he plans to test out *both* Granger and Lance as starters/finishers. The team is too well coached to not find the right combination.

    Surely you all don't think that absent hard prospective data you're going to be able to figure out what combination makes the most sense by talking through it on the thread and getting all frustrated with each other?

    Three to four years ago, I never dreamed of having such luxuries... Lance or Granger as a six man?
    That's what's kind of the craziest about all of the drama here: I don't for one second believe the ACTUAL TEAM is experiencing anything of the sort regarding how they will use both of these guys in the rotation. It's just fan fighting.

  17. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Hicks For This Useful Post:


  18. #637
    Member Pacergeek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    3,454

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

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

    What is the debate even about? I'm seriously lost here lol
    David "And One" West

  19. #638
    Member Pacergeek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    3,454

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

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

    I wonder what fans of other teams think about us when they read posts like this one
    David "And One" West

  20. #639
    Member Sollozzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    16,602

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Since86 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    No kidding. I'm pointing out that your sarcasm didn't even address what Mattie actually said. It would be like you making a comment about Monday's, and me making a sarcastic comment about dogs. You tried to discredit what Mattie posted, with your sarcasm that didn't even have anything to do with what Mattie said.
    OK.

  21. #640
    .
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583

    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
    Yea..

    If this is the picture people have to paint of Danny in order to make their argument about Lance starting over him. They don't have a good argument.

    Funny thing is, Lance does have a good argument as the starter. If people were more reasonable with what they were saying these arguments wouldn't break down into ridiculousness in every thread. (AKA Lance isn't the second coming, and Danny isn't the worst player ever.)
    Exactly. I despise this 'zero sum game' strategy; it's disgusting.

    I HAVE EVEN SAID I think Lance should remain the starter is he's actually now a really good three point shooter. But that is ignored or forgotten.

    If Lance remains a high-quality three point shooter from now on, I see it like this: Lance is the better player. Both of them fit really, really well with the starts. But ONLY Lance is going to ELEVATE our bench by spending a lot of time with them, which is why I probably still prefer to start a healthy Danny for that reason.

    Somehow THAT is getting spun into me being a Lance hater or a Danny lover. Saying Lance is the better player isn't even enough to convince these knuckleheads of how wrong their assumptions are.

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


  23. #641
    .
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583

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

    Quote Originally Posted by wintermute View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Thank you. Though I think both "sides" are so consumed with the argument that they'll just ignore your post.
    Is it really both sides, you think? Or for that matter, what exactly are the two sides, when I'm arguing against one side while admitting Lance is currently the better player? How does that work? Will it fall deaf on Nuntius's ears, too, for example?

  24. #642
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Age
    33
    Posts
    28,142

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

    Quote Originally Posted by docpaul View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    At what point are folks going to take a step back and recognize that the debates here are based on the "problem" of having a former team leader and all-star (Granger) coming back alongside a rapidly emerging talent in Lance?

    Does anyone actually believe that we'll do *worse* once more talent is added into the mix?

    There are 82 games in the season. There will be plenty of time to test out different scenarios once Granger returns, and coach has said repeatedly that he plans to test out *both* Granger and Lance as starters/finishers. The team is too well coached to not find the right combination.

    Surely you all don't think that absent hard prospective data you're going to be able to figure out what combination makes the most sense by talking through it on the thread and getting all frustrated with each other?

    Three to four years ago, I never dreamed of having such luxuries... Lance or Granger as a six man?
    I'm ok with bringing more talent we just have to see how much better this talent is compared to what we already have, if this talent is broken then we can lose some games, of course I'm concerned about that.

    And it looks to me like the people that are screaming and whinning are the people that have been proven wrong but are not willing to admit they were wrong, this people though lance was not going to be able to stay out of trouble, wrong, they also thought he wasn't going to be able to shoot the 3 at a high percentage, wrong again, they also thought he was never going to be able to score over 10ppg saying that we needed DG starting "because he is the better scorer", wrong, I could keep going but you get my point

  25. #643
    .
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Since86 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I'm just tired of the crappy arguments. I get differing opinion, and like I told my GF on the way home Sat, it's like me given the choice between T-Bone and and NY Strip. I might rather have one of them, but if I got the other, I'd be perfectly happy. The problem is that some people view the argument as T-Bone and Kibbles n Bits.
    I'm with you; the crappy logic / crappy arguments are what rile me up as much as when people insist on TELLING ME what I think, even when it flies in the face of what I AM SAYING that I think.

    I don't even really consider myself on either Danny or Lance's "side", either. Not to be confused with saying I like or dislike them equally, just that I'm not like some Twilight fangirl obsessing over Jacob vs. Edward, either.

  26. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Hicks For This Useful Post:


  27. #644
    Running with the Big Boys BillS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Danberry
    Age
    55
    Posts
    11,549

    Sports Logo 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
    Not to be confused with saying I like or dislike them equally, just that I'm not like some Twilight fangirl obsessing over Jacob vs. Edward, either.
    Is it wrong that it disturbs me that you know enough about Twilight to make that analogy?
    BillS

    "Every time I pitched it was like throwing gasoline on a fire. Pkkw! Pkkw! Pkkw! Pkkw!"
    - Ebby Calvin "Nuke" LaLoosh

  28. The Following User Says Thank You to BillS For This Useful Post:


  29. #645
    Intuition over Integers McKeyFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Free Lance!
    Posts
    8,080

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

    Originally Posted by BillS
    Well, yeah, that's what so many of the arguments here are driving at, aren't they? Especially the ones who seem to be worried a hobbled Danny will somehow HAVE to be played because he'll be selfish or Vogel will be dumb or Bird will demand it and therefore instead of winning every game we might lose a couple, which will cause us to lose in the playoffs because you'll have to go 82-0 to get the #1 seed.
    Quote Originally Posted by docpaul View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Looks like you've just won the thread.
    I think BillS made a good contribution, but he didn't win the thread. He shut it down, along with all of PD. This is an opinion board. Questioning decisions at every level is what we do.

    Beyond that, let's not forget Vogel failed to start Lance last year (and West said we would have started out much better if he had) and that Bird extended JOB. Questioning the decision makers is not always tilting at windmills.
    .

    .

    .

    .


    “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

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


  31. #646
    Member CableKC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    San Jose, CA ( 1123, 6536, 5321 )
    Age
    41
    Posts
    24,551

    Sports Logo

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

    Quote Originally Posted by docpaul View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Does anyone actually believe that we'll do *worse* once more talent is added into the mix?
    Quote Originally Posted by BillS View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Well, yeah, that's what so many of the arguments here are driving at, aren't they? Especially the ones who seem to be worried a hobbled Danny will somehow HAVE to be played because he'll be selfish or Vogel will be dumb or Bird will demand it and therefore instead of winning every game we might lose a couple, which will cause us to lose in the playoffs because you'll have to go 82-0 to get the #1 seed.
    Just so you know...the discussion/argument/debate hasn't been about Granger returning to the Lineup.....it has centered SPECIFICALLY around Granger returning to the Starting lineup OR being the 6th Man/1st Wing Off the bench....hence the "Start Lance" Vs. the "Lance, the Super-Sub" factions on both sides of the argument.

    There ( unfortunately ) is a difference.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    This is David West, he is the Honey Badger, West just doesn't give a *****....he's pretty bad *ss cuz he has no regard for any other Player or Team whatsoever.

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


  33. #647
    Member aamcguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    West Lafayette
    Age
    23
    Posts
    2,526

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

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

    [QUOTE]
    Quote Originally Posted by vnzla81 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I'm ok with bringing more talent we just have to see how much better this talent is compared to what we already have, if this talent is broken then we can lose some games, of course I'm concerned about that.

    And it looks to me like the people that are screaming and whinning are the people that have been proven wrong but are not willing to admit they were wrong, this people though lance was not going to be able to stay out of trouble, wrong, they also thought he wasn't going to be able to shoot the 3 at a high percentage, wrong again, they also thought he was never going to be able to score over 10ppg saying that we needed DG starting "because he is the better scorer", wrong, I could keep going but you get my point
    Not everybody comes to a sports message board to be right or wrong. Personally, I love watching the Pacers and I love coming on here and discussing my opinion of the players. Yes, if you were to ask me if I think my opinion is right, I would say yes. But personally I like to see continued success before I change my opinion. Does this mean that I am sometimes slower than others at throwing my lot in with a specific player who will ultimately succeed? Yes. But it also means that I am less likely to be disappointed when players just go through a hot stretch of basketball and come out of it the same player they were before.

    Exhibit A: Brandon Rush finished out his rookie season by averaging 17 points over the last month and had consecutive game groupings of (29,29) and (21,27,24) points as we went 8-4 to end the season. This was a clear sign he was ready for a break out and would become the second star that Danny needed. Ultimately, we know how that turned out.

    I know people single you out for making wrong predictions all the time, but that's because in addition to being so forceful when you make the predictions you also make a huge deal about predictions that prove you right or force you to admit you were wrong. If you notice they don't really do it with other posters.

  34. #648
    Member CableKC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    San Jose, CA ( 1123, 6536, 5321 )
    Age
    41
    Posts
    24,551

    Sports Logo

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Pacergeek View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I wonder what fans of other teams think about us when they read posts like this one
    Every fan forum has these types of Player specific discussions. This is not all that uncommon when it comes to a Forum of highly-dedicated fans to a specific Team.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    This is David West, he is the Honey Badger, West just doesn't give a *****....he's pretty bad *ss cuz he has no regard for any other Player or Team whatsoever.

  35. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to CableKC For This Useful Post:


  36. #649
    Intuition over Integers McKeyFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Free Lance!
    Posts
    8,080

    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
    All statistics are generated from eyeballs. It's just that those eyeballs have a hand holding a pen next to a pad of paper. Or two hands on the keyboard of a laptop. In other words, they are more consistent and reliable eyeballs.
    I will agree with this at one level. Documented observation is more reliable down the road and allows for various types of analysis. But by "eyeballs" I mean "Intuition over Integers."

    It's like watching your garden for a few hours to see what's eating the lettuce. You write down your observations and see that rabbits are hanging out around the lettuce more than the other creatures. This helps you if a few weeks later you can't quite remember if it was rabbits or deer or turtles. But it doesn't help you figure out if the rabbits are actually taking a bite, if spraying the lettuce will cause more problems than solutions, or if the rabbits' "activity" around the lettuce is actually helping to fertilize it. Data is helpful, but it doesn't compete with higher level thinking and intuition.
    .

    .

    .

    .


    “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

  37. #650
    .
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583

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

    Quote Originally Posted by BillS View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Is it wrong that it disturbs me that you know enough about Twilight to make that analogy?
    Mm... a little bit, yeah.

    But I love Grandpa Bill anyway.

Posting Permissions

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