A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...
This...For most of the year we were very successful in making teams worry about matching up with us. That only failed when Hibbert started struggling and I think it had less to do with teams figuring Hibbert out then it did in our game plan and Hibbert's internal struggles. We would have never had the success at the beginning of the season that we enjoyed if Hibbert was struggling then either.
I'd much prefer to take the approach of playing to our strengths and force teams to match up with us.
Incredibly obvious with Hibbert. Hill getting into Twitter *****ing matches with fans. Paul's bad on and off court decisions.
I don't see how those weaknesses could be missed.
Now, let's not confuse mental weakness with sheer stupidity - That isn't what I'm meaning. More like mental immaturity.
That series was just a microcosm of the second half of the season. The team was completely dominating and for no obvious basketball reason they became a .500 team and sub .500 the last month and a half of the season. It was as-if they didn't want to finish the season. IMO that simply does not happen when a team is mentally with it.
Except for one game against the Heat, they were beating NOBODY competitive during that period. That indicates they gave a great effort in that game and were mailing it in most other games. Also, there was infighting, baby mama drama and Hibbert spouting off to the media about selfish players. It was a collapse of epic proportions and the game against the Hawks was a direct extension of the regular season. It was NOT a situation where an 8 seed surprised a 1 seed. It was a situation where a team had been playing spectacular and backed into a 1 seed while playing a lot more like a 6 or 7 seed...FAR below its ability.
IMO, that happened for more than one reason and a lot of it was immaturity. I do blame Lance for a nice chunk of it. I do blame Bird for moving Granger who I believe was a stabilizing force in the locker room...even if he couldn't play on the court.
Nick Van Exel is the only one of those guys who is left handed.Default Re: 2/10/2014 Game Thread #51: Pacers Vs. Nuggets
Quote Originally Posted by cdash View Post
Our angry Italian plumber friend made this point in the postgame thread last night that I think has been glossed over: CJ Watson has been pretty bad lately.
CJ is a player who works off picks, and also he's a lefty. I think Bynum will set better picks for him. Lefties also need space and a bit more time to get their shots off. Although some of the exceptions are...REX CHAPMAN, Peja Stojakovich, Nick Van Exel.
Last edited by cdash; 09-02-2014 at 04:07 AM.
Off-topic subject, I know .
Ian says it's not as bad an injury as everyone thought.
From a Scott Agness article....
“No surgery, no injections,” Mahinmi told VigilantSports.com Thursday. “So it’s not as bad as everybody thought it would be.
“Obviously there’s a healing process and then treatment, and then I have to get strength back in my shoulder. Then, I’m good to go.”
While Mahinmi did not provide a timetable, he hopes it will only keep him away from basketball activities for a few weeks.
He may not have been a stabilizing force in terms of leadership, so I will defer to others on that point. But I still think it destabilized the locker room in other ways.
By trading Granger the way we did, it had to send a message to the other players. Loyalty does not mean anything. I recall David West and George Hill being interviewed shortly after the trade and they were not happy...and more important, they were not acting about their displeasure and had to hold their tongues. I think the team, including Granger, had been tight and the franchise just tossed aside a player who had been a warrior for the team. So, I think that hurt morale a bit.
Also, Granger may not have been a leader type but he wasn't going to be intimidated by anyone. We lost a guy who wouldn't back down to Lance...and that mattered when we saw Lance misbehave even more later in the season.
So, while not the only reason, I think moving Granger for a younger player (who Lance fought with) was part of the problem last year. Maybe not the biggest issue. But it was a factor.
Last edited by BlueNGold; 09-07-2014 at 01:28 PM.
That's what I think was the biggest issue with losing Granger. If you've read about Granger's upbringing, he'll throw down with anyone. Having a guy like that as the elder statesman in the locker room meant something. He didn't have to be vocal for young players to know you don't mess with Danny. I think his presence was intimidating to a guy like Lance and losing likely gave Lance a green light to act up.
Of course this has been discussed to death.