Page 33 of 36 FirstFirst ... 232930313233343536 LastLast
Results 801 to 825 of 889

Thread: Four big IF's about Lance Stephenson.

  1. #801
    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 BlueNGold View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Granger has been out 16 or maybe 17 months. It's more like just about a year and a half...
    So ok my fault for saying almost 2 years, I'm quoting BlueNgold post because he is right with the timing.

    Again before those that like to overreact start overreacting I'm admitting that I was wrong with the 2 years thing.

  2. #802
    Next stop June 2015
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    16,085

    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
    After he missed a whole season, how could people not be ready for it? Also, we ran regard him as either a bonus or a cog as much as we want. But his importance to the team will be decided on how well he plays. It would be like if every time he scored 10-15 points in the first half you tell him to stop scoring in the 2nd half or you'll sit his *** down because you can't have the team depending on his scoring in case he goes down for injury in 2 months. You may laugh that off as if that's not what you meant, but if he is playing well enough to be a key cog, that's what you would have to do almost every game in order to make sure he's not a key cog.
    Yes, that is indeed what I am saying. I don't trust his health enough at this point to take either the risk of losing games because he's not fully ready to go OR the risk that he goes down at the wrong time. I don't want that risk because I don't think we need to take the risk...combined with the fact I think Lance Stephenson unquestionably will be the better NBA player this year.

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


  4. #803
    All Hail CJ Watson! Nuntius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Somewhere in Southern Europe
    Posts
    20,706

    Sports Logo

    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
    So ok my fault for saying almost 2 years, I'm quoting BlueNgold post because he is right with the timing.

    Again before those that like to overreact start overreacting I'm admitting that I was wrong with the 2 years thing.
    Good. I respect that you're admitting your mistake in this case
    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. #804
    Member aamcguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    West Lafayette
    Age
    23
    Posts
    2,837

    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
    Yes, that is indeed what I am saying. I don't trust his health enough at this point to take either the risk of losing games because he's not fully ready to go OR the risk that he goes down at the wrong time. I don't want that risk because I don't think we need to take the risk...combined with the fact I think Lance Stephenson unquestionably will be the better NBA player this year.
    So, in a nutshell, you think it's bad if Granger comes back and plays poorly.

    You also think it's bad if Granger comes back and plays well.

    Why are you spending so much time arguing that Lance be the starter and Granger play off the bench? Besides the fact that you think our other top 6 players are so unstable that they couldn't handle learning to play again without the guy that's been sitting on the bench for a year, that's not even what you truly want to happen. You would actually prefer it if Danny didn't play for us ever again. Why not just say that?

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


  8. #805
    Redemption. docpaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Noblesville, IN
    Posts
    1,701

    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
    Yes, that is indeed what I am saying. I don't trust his health enough at this point to take either the risk of losing games because he's not fully ready to go OR the risk that he goes down at the wrong time. I don't want that risk because I don't think we need to take the risk...combined with the fact I think Lance Stephenson unquestionably will be the better NBA player this year.
    If somehow Lance can keep up this current pace throughout the season, he'll not only be "better than Granger", he'll be in the top 40-50 players in the league.

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


  10. #806
    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
    If somehow Lance can keep up this current pace throughout the season, he'll not only be "better than Granger", he'll be in the top 40-50 players in the league.
    More like top 20, how many players are averaging 19,7 and 4 while shooting over 50%?

  11. #807
    thx4tehmRys Danny! daschysta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Geist, Indianapolis
    Posts
    1,958
    Mood

    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
    Yes, that is indeed what I am saying. I don't trust his health enough at this point to take either the risk of losing games because he's not fully ready to go OR the risk that he goes down at the wrong time. I don't want that risk because I don't think we need to take the risk...combined with the fact I think Lance Stephenson unquestionably will be the better NBA player this year.
    Seriously? A healthy and productive Danny only makes us better. We can be really really good with Danny OR Lance killing it, but both? We get both of them playing well at once and we have a chance to be a GREAT team. We at the very least owe it to that possibility to see what Danny has got.

    DISCLAIMER

    Lance has imo played himself into the starting role but it works out because he's our first sub, meaning Danny and he can split time with the starters, and honestly Lance with the bench has killed it so far, so even if Danny did start Lance could still thrive, but you don't bench a guy playing as well as Lance. Danny taking S hills and even OJs minutes as well as he has played will only make us better. Danny showed some game in the last few games he played in preseason, and was getting better before the unrelated calf thing. Danny should still be a guy off the bench that can give you 20 points every few games, which is great to have off the bench. We haven't had that since Stephen Jackson and Harrington, in Danny and Scola we have two now.

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


  13. #808
    thx4tehmRys Danny! daschysta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Geist, Indianapolis
    Posts
    1,958
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    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
    More like top 20, how many players are averaging 19,7 and 4 while shooting over 50%?
    Where do you see Lance falling this year? I think

    15-16 points 6-7 rpg 3-4 apg would be magnificent, but not top 20. I think he has an outside shot to hit the high end of that but it's unlikely as he'll likely settlein to 33 or so mpg once Danny is back, and David will get more touches once he hits his stride. Lance might be our second leading scorer though, Paul will score 20+ ppg, but the next few scorers will be clustered between 13-16 ppg imo.

  14. #809
    Member aamcguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    West Lafayette
    Age
    23
    Posts
    2,837

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    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
    More like top 20, how many players are averaging 19,7 and 4 while shooting over 50%?
    There are exactly 0 players in the league meeting all of those criteria.

    However, Lance, PG, and Eric Bledsoe are the closest. http://www.basketball-reference.com/...r_by=pts_per_g

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


  16. #810
    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 daschysta View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Where do you see Lance falling this year? I think

    15-16 points 6-7 rpg 3-4 apg would be magnificent, but not top 20. I think he has an outside shot to hit the high end of that but it's unlikely as he'll likely settlein to 33 or so mpg once Danny is back, and David will get more touches once he hits his stride. Lance might be our second leading scorer though, Paul will score 20+ ppg, but the next few scorers will be clustered between 13-16 ppg imo.
    I think Lance is going to be at 14ppg, 6rpg and 3.5apg while shooting over 42%, I don't see him losing minutes because of Danny either they play different positions.

  17. #811
    Member ilive4sports's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    6,899

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

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

    After PG, I see the rest of the six core guys averaging somewhere in the ball park of 12ppg, give or take 2 points. Just so many good options on this team, we will go through stretches where Lance is scoring 20 a game or West and etc. We legit have 7 players that could score 20+ points any given night. Thats just incredible.

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


  19. #812
    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 aamcguy View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    There are exactly 0 players in the league meeting all of those criteria.

    However, Lance, PG, and Eric Bledsoe are the closest. http://www.basketball-reference.com/...r_by=pts_per_g
    Damn Paul George is kicking a**, man I really wanted Bledsoe in draft night he keeps breaking my heart

  20. #813
    Intuition over Integers McKeyFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Free Lance!
    Posts
    8,220

    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
    I'm sorry, I just can't let this go because it continues to use "intuition" as if it was the same as "reasoning". They are not synonyms.

    No judge uses "intuition" to make a judgement in a case. A judge uses reasoning, precedent, and evidence to make a judgement (and to determine if a jury did NOT use those things when making their decision and therefore whether to overturn a verdict). Judicial decisions must be supported with statements of fact, including statements as to why certain evidence was or was not chosen.
    I think you are making good points here and in your other posts. (I got busy and couldn't keep responding.)

    You are right to examine the word "Intuition," as it's one I've chosen for this discussion that I think helps communicate a point, but it doesn't completely serve the situation. Yes, logic and evidence are used by both jurors and judges in making their final decisions. But the crux is where you say they "must" use logic. Everybody thinks they're logical. Everybody thinks they are making their final decision based on the "facts." A judge who overturns a case thinks he is, but maybe he's not. Who knows? He gets to make the final decision based on his gut. Same with a jury.

    The point, the whole point, is that once this human being, this judge or juror, makes their decision based on "all" evidence and all their "logic," no computer, formula, or other set of statistics can overturn it. The human being, the "eyeballs," make a decision, and that decision is final. It trumps all the reams of evidence from both sides of the aisle.

    You may say, "Yes, but it must be based on the evidence!" Well, maybe so. But who says he or she didn't? They are the judge. THEY decide. And guess what. As much as you think and are convinced and "know" they were wrong, maybe they weren't.

    Again, the point is that the human person, the human soul, the human creation "in the image of God" is higher and more grand than computers and statistics and mathematical formulas. This is especially the case with invisible and immeasurable things, like "guilt" and "innocence" and the character and reliability of basketball players, their competitive fortitude, and the many other intangibles a coach uses, along with measurable stats, to determine who to play.

    So, I am using "Intuition" to capture this unquantifiable, unjudgable, ultimate aspect of decision-making that we cannot measure. You could call it gestalt, right brain, spirit, soul, image of God activity or higher level consciousness. But the crown of creation, humans, have created every formula and every software program and all the aspects of Aristotelian logic. Those are tools for them, but they cannot judge them. Only another human being can "judge" a human being, or make judgments about invisible human character. Once it is agreed upon who that judge is, or that group of jurors, than we are left to accept their "Intuition" on the matter.

    Same with Frank's decisions. He makes them and we can question, but he has been appointed to make that decision. And he may or may not decide according to accepted statistical notions.

    Now, on PD, no one has been appointed the final decider of anything, so it's a free-for-all. But an entertaining one.
    Last edited by McKeyFan; 11-05-2013 at 08:16 AM.
    .

    .

    .

    .


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


  22. #814

    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
    If somehow Lance can keep up this current pace throughout the season, he'll not only be "better than Granger", he'll be in the top 40-50 players in the league.
    If Lance continues to shoot 65% from 3, he will be the MVP of the league and the .

  23. #815
    Intuition over Integers McKeyFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Free Lance!
    Posts
    8,220

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

    Quote Originally Posted by xIndyFan View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    If Lance continues to shoot 65% from 3, he will be the MVP of the league and the .
    Yeah, I think V.'s prediction of 42 % in an earlier post was a more realistic expection. (V. was that from 3 or overall?).

    Lance proponents who keep riding this 65 percent thing are in for a chop down real soon.
    .

    .

    .

    .


    “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

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


  25. #816
    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 McKeyFan View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Yeah, I think V.'s prediction of 42 % in an earlier post was a more realistic expection. (V. was that from 3 or overall?).

    Lance proponents who keep riding this 65 percent thing are in for a chop down real soon.
    Overall even though I didn't know that his shooting percentage from last year was .460 and .330 from 3, so I guess my .420 expectation was kind of low.

  26. #817
    It is ka Thankee sai Major Cold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Garrett, IN
    Posts
    9,189
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

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

    Whenever I read this thread title:


  27. #818
    Member Ace E.Anderson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    6,527

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    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
    Overall even though I didn't know that his shooting percentage from last year was .460 and .330 from 3, so I guess my .420 expectation was kind of low.
    Not necessarily. With higher volume, comes less efficiency.

    Plus defenses will eventually see they can't leave him open for 3, and will begin focusing on his drives to the basket more--which should alleviate some of the defensive attention on our bigs a bit. Right now teams are double teaming Roy and at times West and sagging off Lance who is gladly taking the open opportunities.
    Last edited by Ace E.Anderson; 11-05-2013 at 07:53 PM.

  28. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Ace E.Anderson For This Useful Post:


  29. #819
    Next stop June 2015
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    16,085

    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
    Yeah, I think V.'s prediction of 42 % in an earlier post was a more realistic expection. (V. was that from 3 or overall?).

    Lance proponents who keep riding this 65 percent thing are in for a chop down real soon.
    It's been a nice ride. It's a fair bit better than Granger's 20% from 3 last year. It's also better than his 38.1% from the prior year.

    Want the truth? Granger's 3pt % has dropped every single year except one since his rookie year. Even if healthy, he is bound to dip to 37% or less if that continues.

  30. #820
    Member Eleazar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Indy
    Posts
    8,591

    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
    It's been a nice ride. It's a fair bit better than Granger's 20% from 3 last year. It's also better than his 38.1% from the prior year.

    Want the truth? Granger's 3pt % has dropped every single year except one since his rookie year. Even if healthy, he is bound to dip to 37% or less if that continues.

    05-06 .323
    06-07 .382
    07-08 .404
    08-09 .404
    09-10 .361
    10-11 .386
    11-12 .381

    If you are actually going to use stats, at least have the correct stats.

  31. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Eleazar For This Useful Post:


  32. #821
    Next stop June 2015
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    16,085

    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
    So, in a nutshell, you think it's bad if Granger comes back and plays poorly.

    You also think it's bad if Granger comes back and plays well.

    Why are you spending so much time arguing that Lance be the starter and Granger play off the bench? Besides the fact that you think our other top 6 players are so unstable that they couldn't handle learning to play again without the guy that's been sitting on the bench for a year, that's not even what you truly want to happen. You would actually prefer it if Danny didn't play for us ever again. Why not just say that?
    That is just not true. I want Granger to play mostly with the bench to improve it. If he comes in to give Paul or Lance some rest and play with the starters, that's fine too. But I don't want him part of the group closing out games. I want Lance getting every bit of that experience (with the starters) unless match ups absolutely dictate otherwise.

  33. #822
    Next stop June 2015
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    16,085

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Eleazar View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    05-06 .323
    06-07 .382
    07-08 .404
    08-09 .404
    09-10 .361
    10-11 .386
    11-12 .381

    If you are actually going to use stats, at least have the correct stats.
    Ok. I suppose it was his 2 FG% that dropped about every year. Combine that with the fact his 3 FG% has a negative slope as well...that's not exactly good news for Granger. When shooting is your calling card, you really should be improving not getting worse. Fact is, competing on good teams are going to make his numbers go down A LOT.

  34. #823
    Member Eleazar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Indy
    Posts
    8,591

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

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

    .496
    .497
    .468
    .470
    .471
    .443
    .434

    It went up in 3 separate seasons. It dropped when he took a larger offensive role which isn't unexpected, then again when Vogel took over. 2 bad seasons could just be a statistical anomaly. As a general rule, it isn't a trend until it happens 3 times.

  35. #824
    Next stop June 2015
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    16,085

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Eleazar View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    .496
    .497
    .468
    .470
    .471
    .443
    .434

    It went up in 3 separate seasons. It dropped when he took a larger offensive role which isn't unexpected, then again when Vogel took over. 2 bad seasons could just be a statistical anomaly. As a general rule, it isn't a trend until it happens 3 times.
    What are those numbers? They are not Granger's 2 pt FG% stats. Not sure what they are.

    http://www.basketball-reference.com/...grangda01.html

  36. #825
    Next stop June 2015
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    16,085

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

    Ok...just to straighten this out. Here are his dropping 2 pt FG% figures rookie year on.

    .462
    .459
    .446
    .447
    .428
    .425
    .416
    .286

Posting Permissions

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