Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Did Watson Really Mean That Much?

  1. #1
    Member naptownmenace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    4,636

    Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Did Watson Really Mean That Much?

    This is a jab at the other thread but it's also a legit question seeing as how the Pacers have lost 4 games in a row since his injury against Golden State (he only played 13 minutes due to injury in that game).

    Even when CJ's not hitting his shot, he usually plays good defense and he provides spacing on the floor that the Pacers just don't have with Donald Sloan. Evan Turner running the point has been pretty disastrous as well, especially from a defensive standpoint. C.J. really is the best on the team at staying in front of his man defensively. George Hill is good at closing out on jump shooters but he gets beat off the dribble on a regular basis when he has to play someone quick like Steph Curry or Patrick Beverley.

    I'm hoping there's nothing seriously wrong with his elbow.
    Quote Originally Posted by vnzla81
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Larry is not coming back, he didn't have a meeting with Orlando for not reason, yeah he is coming back to the NBA but not to the Pacers, the notion that he is a taking a year off and then come back is absurd.
    Quote Originally Posted by Trader Joe View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    GOOD GOD THAT'S LARRY BIRD'S MUSIC!

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


  3. #2
    Member BenR1990's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Fredonia, NY
    Posts
    1,361

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Did Watson Really Mean That Much?

    He also has those games where he can give you 12+ off the bench and we could have really used one against he Mavs. I love what CJ has done at the backup point and when he's needed to start, he's done an incredible job filling in.

  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to BenR1990 For This Useful Post:


  5. #3

    Default Re: Did Watson Really Mean That Much?

    CJ give the Pacers a legit outside shooter. Evan, Lance and Luis are not really 3-point shooters. They are much better in the mid-range area. Add to that, Ian and Sloan are non-shooters. When CJ is out, the Pacers really don't have anyone to stretch the defense.

  6. #4

    Default Re: Did Watson Really Mean That Much?

    The Pacers have lost the last three games by an average of 20 points. If CJ Watson's presence is worth a point differential of 20, then he is severely underpaid to say the least.

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to FlavaDave For This Useful Post:


  8. #5
    Go Colts! Shade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Age
    36
    Posts
    44,312

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Did Watson Really Mean That Much?

    His absence may have cost us the Dallas game at least. The bench produced a whole lotta nothin' last night.

  9. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Shade For This Useful Post:


  10. #6
    Member naptownmenace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    4,636

    Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Did Watson Really Mean That Much?

    Quote Originally Posted by FlavaDave View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The Pacers have lost the last three games by an average of 20 points. If CJ Watson's presence is worth a point differential of 20, then he is severely underpaid to say the least.
    Maybe it's just a coincidence but it is an interesting coincidence. The Pacers are definitely missing him, I'm just wondering how much.
    Quote Originally Posted by vnzla81
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Larry is not coming back, he didn't have a meeting with Orlando for not reason, yeah he is coming back to the NBA but not to the Pacers, the notion that he is a taking a year off and then come back is absurd.
    Quote Originally Posted by Trader Joe View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    GOOD GOD THAT'S LARRY BIRD'S MUSIC!

  11. #7
    .
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583

    Default Re: Did Watson Really Mean That Much?

    I think it's one of the pieces. I saw Bruno tweeting that Paul doesn't have Shaw or Danny around any more to 'keep him focused.' Is that enough on its own to answer for all of this? No, I don't think so.

    But then factor in his back injury. And Waton's injury. And the adjustment to Turner being here instead of Danny (thinking more of chemistry and fit as opposed to production). They start to add up, but even then that doesn't explain Roy's struggles. I think there was talk coming out of the all-star break about reigning Lance in, and I think that's made things worse because you took the good away with the bad when he complied while simultaneously the team has since struggled offensively when they try to do it 'the right way' (and I'm not saying it's wrong, either) and that results in the worse of both worlds regarding that particularly point.

    Add all of the above up, and this losing streak starts to make a lot more sense, I think. And I'm thinking there's still probably more to it than that because on both sides of the ball the team has been just out of sync and/or out of position too often.

    I can envision a recovery happening soon, but it's definitely sucked lately.

  12. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Hicks For This Useful Post:


  13. #8
    Tree People to the Core! indygeezer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Cumberland
    Posts
    15,271
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Did Watson Really Mean That Much?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicks View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I think it's one of the pieces. I saw Bruno tweeting that Paul doesn't have Shaw or Danny around any more to 'keep him focused.' Is that enough on its own to answer for all of this? No, I don't think so.

    But then factor in his back injury. And Waton's injury. And the adjustment to Turner being here instead of Danny (thinking more of chemistry and fit as opposed to production). They start to add up, but even then that doesn't explain Roy's struggles. I think there was talk coming out of the all-star break about reigning Lance in, and I think that's made things worse because you took the good away with the bad when he complied while simultaneously the team has since struggled offensively when they try to do it 'the right way' (and I'm not saying it's wrong, either) and that results in the worse of both worlds regarding that particularly point.

    Add all of the above up, and this losing streak starts to make a lot more sense, I think. And I'm thinking there's still probably more to it than that because on both sides of the ball the team has been just out of sync and/or out of position too often.

    I can envision a recovery happening soon, but it's definitely sucked lately.
    Agreeing with HIcks but adding that I noticed the slippage starting before the AS break.....like when we picked up Bynum at eh same time talk around the league was about how Hibbert wasn't getting called for the fouls (I think they were trying to psych the refs with talk about him not going straight up). It seemed they really got to Hibbert and the refs on that. I also see Lance getting into a lot more trouble with his dribble penetration. It seems he either loses the ball himself or throws a bad pass. I dunno, it just seems like the wheels started coming off long long ago.
    If you get to thinkin’ you’re a person of some influence, try orderin’ somebody else’s dog around..

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


  15. #9
    .
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583

    Default Re: Did Watson Really Mean That Much?

    I'll add that the whining to officials is too much lately. I think they've gotten a few less calls their way since that got worse.

  16. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Hicks For This Useful Post:


  17. #10
    Member TinManJoshua's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Posts
    1,367

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Did Watson Really Mean That Much?

    Watson is a better basketball player than Sloan, and a better option for floor general than Evan Turner, so I'd say the difference between a good bench PG and Donald Sloan/out of position Evan Turner is pretty important.

  18. The Following User Says Thank You to TinManJoshua For This Useful Post:


  19. #11
    Member Pacergeek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    3,482

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Did Watson Really Mean That Much?

    Sloan hasn't done much when he is out there, and Turner has been even worse. Second unit misses CJ
    David "And One" West

  20. #12
    Intuition over Integers McKeyFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Free Lance!
    Posts
    8,086

    Default Re: Did Watson Really Mean That Much?

    I've liked CJ since day one. I definitely think his loss makes a difference.
    .

    .

    .

    .


    “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. #13
    CA Pacer Fan A-Train's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    1,281

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Did Watson Really Mean That Much?

    As I scan through a few threads, I find mentions of Hill to be as invisible as he tends to be on the court. People talk about Hibbert's lack of rebounding, the loss of Hansborough, the Granger trade, PG's back, Scola's poor shooting.... But, what about the lack of aggressiveness from our starting point guard?

    (I haven't been around much, so forgive me if I've missed the Hill talk)

    Hill is a scorer. He can take a game over offensively, yet rarely does. He seems to just wander around without a purpose. He should be our 2nd leading scorer, IMO. 11 points and 3.4 assists per game is unacceptable. I just want to see him play with an edge. Something.

  22. #14

    Default Re: Did Watson Really Mean That Much?

    Quote Originally Posted by A-Train View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    As I scan through a few threads, I find mentions of Hill to be as invisible as he tends to be on the court. People talk about Hibbert's lack of rebounding, the loss of Hansborough, the Granger trade, PG's back, Scola's poor shooting.... But, what about the lack of aggressiveness from our starting point guard?

    (I haven't been around much, so forgive me if I've missed the Hill talk)

    Hill is a scorer. He can take a game over offensively, yet rarely does. He seems to just wander around without a purpose. He should be our 2nd leading scorer, IMO. 11 points and 3.4 assists per game is unacceptable. I just want to see him play with an edge. Something.


    He's playing as a PG. They should sometimes go to a lineup where Hill is a SG, and CJ is the PG. Allowing Hill to score more. But this goes back to Vogel not knowing how to use all of these versatile pieces. Also, with CJ hurt now, they should expand a five man rotation featuring Solo at the back up 2 and Evan at back up PG. With Bynum, Cope, and Rasual.

Posting Permissions

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