The Official "Fire Jim O'Brien!" Thread

[PaceBalls]

Re: if Carisle were coach we would have kept Diogu...

I think Jack is one of Carlisle's type of back up PGs like say, AJ. Which is the kind that play good D and run the plays the coach calls. I agree with Rick having little patience with the TOs, but would Jack have as many TOs with Rick as coach?

The notion that somehow we would be better off with Ike on our team instead of Jack and McBob is pretty far out. I'd take McBob over Ike alone and is there anyone besides people on this forum who would take Ike over JJack?

Ike has PF skills in a SF size body which = bad. At least thats what I saw. It was like watching Al Harrington without any type of passing skills or mid range/outside/fadeaway shot .

[NuffSaid]

Re: if Carisle were coach we would have kept Diogu...

hey just wanted to say that i feel like if Rick Carlisle were coach Diogu probably would have been our starting PF. This guy was supposed to be our future PF but as soon as O'brien gets the job he is traded. THUS, we wouldn't have a hole at that position now. But with O'Brien and the lack there of of an inside presence, i wouldn't be surprised that even if we did get a PF than can post up down low he still wouldn't allow his guards and wing players to jack up 3's early in the shot clock. your thought?

First off, what makes you think Diogu would be any better under RC than he was under JOB? IMO, Ike showed promise, but he also looked lost under both RC AND JOB! Both coaches would constantly yell out where he should be on the court in specific situations. It's like he never was able to grasp either coach's schemes, particularly on defense.

Now, I agree with you in part that IF the Pacers had a definitive post-presence which I think Hibbert is beginning to round into, the Pacers wouldn't rely so heavily on perimeter shooting. That said, if you've been paying close attention of late you'll notice that the Pacers have tried to establish Hibbert in the post very often AND have had very good success with him on the floor. I firmly believe that once Dunleavy returns AND as long as players 1-11 remain healthy (Granger, Quis, Ford, Murphy, Hibbert, BRush, Jack, Diener, Foster, Rasho and Dunleavy) this team will improve and things will be alright.

With Dunleavy's return comes a more solidified rotation.

With Dunleavy's return comes less pressure on Granger as a primary scoring threat.

With Dunleavy's return comes the opportunity to create more balace not just in the rotation, but also to shore up the 2nd Unit. Quis or Dunleavy will provide leadership and place a consistent scorer among the reserves.

But I digress, I seriously doubt Ike would have been any more successful under RC than he was under JOB. I just don't see it. He has the tools, just not the basketball IQ.

[Naptown_Seth]

Re: if Carisle were coach we would have kept Diogu...

I think Jack is one of Carlisle's type of back up PGs like say, AJ. Which is the kind that play good D and run the plays the coach calls. I agree with Rick having little patience with the TOs, but would Jack have as many TOs with Rick as coach?

I'm of the opinion that Rick wasn't a big fan of AJ actually. Proof? How many times did AJ hit the bench and find himself forced to once again earn PT? A lot.

The fact is that Tins was a wreck, Gill wasn't NBA caliber and Fred Jones was a SG. Rick was forced to use AJ most of the time. And when they signed Saras he was made the #2 PG without playing a single game. It was only when he started to struggle that AJ got slipped back into the rotation.

Rick went to a lot of strategies out of NECESSITY, not choice. His roster had the most Pacers 3PAs ever till JOB took over. That's Carlisle and a team of guards shooting something like 25-30 3PA per game at one stage that season (Reggie's last).


Now your point on Jack is legit, it might well be that were Rick coaching him he would be asked/expected to approach things totally differently and Rick certainly would have liked his physical defense at PG. I'd say he'd be puking on the sidelines watching Jack and TJ jump into a shot only to make a wild pass midway up over and over (ala Fred Jones).

[PR07]

Re: if Carisle were coach we would have kept Diogu...

Diogu can't play defense. Why would he be a Carlisle guy?

[count55]

Re: if Carisle were coach we would have kept Diogu...

I find it hard to believe that Ike will even be in the league next year.

[Anthem]

Re: if Carisle were coach we would have kept Diogu...

The notion that somehow we would be better off with Ike on our team instead of Jack and McBob is pretty far out. I'd take McBob over Ike alone and is there anyone besides people on this forum who would take Ike over JJack?

Good call.

[YoSoyIndy]

Re: Rick Carlisle vs Jim O'Brien

Wait, did you say Jim calls every play like Rick did?

Jim doesn't call the play often at all. The whole point of his offense is that it's meant to be random. Calling a set play would defeat the point, which is why O'Brien doesn't often do that.

This will be nick-picking, but I think "random" is the wrong word to describe the output of JOB's offensive philosophy. He gives the team freedom to move the ball up the court quickly and doesn't want them to stiffle an opportunity because they're looking at the bench for the play. That doesn't mean there isn't any structure to it.

[owl]

Re: Rick Carlisle vs Jim O'Brien

Yep. Someone in between would be quite nice, but knowing this board it wouldn't take them long to find something to pick at.

I believe some people live by the motto, no scab is too small to pick. :-)

[BlueNGold]

Re: if Carisle were coach we would have kept Diogu...

Ike played pretty awful when he wasn't posting up someone or completely open for a midrange shot. Even then, he started to become ineffective at that when teams started defending him better. He really has no game or athleticism. If something doesn't change for him, he is just about done.

[Jay@Section12]

Re: Rick Carlisle vs Jim O'Brien

Who you don't like?

You know, I said the exact same thing to my good friend UB the other day:

http://www.pacersdigest.com/apache2-default/showthread.php?p=827404#post827404

Lighten up people, we have enough admins around here to take care of the real problems.

To vnzla81 (and others), a suggestion: you are perceived as being new around here, and a number of have been doing this particular message board for a long time and we have a familiarity with each other that allows us to cut right to the "zinger." Unfortunately, we can also act like a clique at times. The best way to be taken seriously around here elaborate on your posts so that (a) we can get to know you your opinions of the team/ players, and (b) a post doesn't appear to be insulting/ abrasive. It doesn't take lengthy novel, just a complete thought.

= = = = = = = = = = =

I'd hate to think that an "average" poster or a "new" poster is not allowed to question the opinion of an admin or other long-term member of our community. I'd be really bored and disappointed if some of the opinions I took/ take on the Pacers and also the NFL board didn't get a reaction thrown back at me.

[grace]

Re: Rick Carlisle vs Jim O'Brien

I'd be really bored and disappointed if some of the opinions I took/ take on the Pacers and also the NFL board didn't get a reaction thrown back at me.

Not so much now that your avatar isn't a picture of Cowher with the Super Bowl trophy.

[OakMoses]

JO'B in Close Games

This is a hotly discussed topic, so I thought I'd crunch a few numbers and see what popped up.

I defined close games as games won or lost by less than 4 points. This was mainly done for ease as this data is available at Basketball Reference.

Here's how it breaks down (Season, Overall Record, Close Games):

00-01 24-24 6-3
01-02 49-33 8-9
02-03 44-38 6-7
03-04 22-24 8-4
04-05 43-49 10-4
07-08 36-46 4-3

Total Overall Record: 218-204 (0.517)
Total Close Game Record: 42-30 (0.583)

This season:
08-09 12-21(0.364) 4-6(0.400)

Conclusions and interesting tidbits:

O'Brien's coaching, historically, has not led to his team losing close games. His teams actually have a better record in these games.

During his best season in terms of winning close games (Philly '04-'05), he also coached one of the best players in the NBA (Allen Iverson) who was at or near his peak.

This year's Pacers team is actually faring better in close games than they are overall.

The striking thing is the one thing we all know: The Pacers are playing in a ton of close games. In O'Brien's career the highest percentage of close games he's coached was in '03-'04 when he coached 46 games and 12 of them were close (26%). This season the Pacers have played 33 games and 10 of them have been close (30%).

[count55]

Re: JO'B in Close Games

This is a hotly discussed topic, so I thought I'd crunch a few numbers and see what popped up.

I defined close games as games won or lost by less than 4 points. This was mainly done for ease as this data is available at Basketball Reference.

Here's how it breaks down (Season, Overall Record, Close Games):

00-01 24-24 6-3
01-02 49-33 8-9
02-03 44-38 6-7
03-04 22-24 8-4
04-05 43-49 10-4
07-08 36-46 4-3

Total Overall Record: 218-204 (0.517)
Total Close Game Record: 42-30 (0.583)

This season:
08-09 12-21(0.364) 4-6(0.400)

Conclusions and interesting tidbits:

O'Brien's coaching, historically, has not led to his team losing close games. His teams actually have a better record in these games.

During his best season in terms of winning close games (Philly '04-'05), he also coached one of the best players in the NBA (Allen Iverson) who was at or near his peak.

This year's Pacers team is actually faring better in close games than they are overall.

The striking thing is the one thing we all know: The Pacers are playing in a ton of close games. In O'Brien's career the highest percentage of close games he's coached was in '03-'04 when he coached 46 games and 12 of them were close (26%). This season the Pacers have played 33 games and 10 of them have been close (30%).

I did something similar in this thread a couple of weeks ago:

http://www.pacersdigest.com/apache2-default/showpost.php?p=822359&postcount=54

The only difference between your methodology and mine was that I used all regulation games decided by 4 pts or less, and all OT games. I assumed that all OT games were "close" games, regardless of the final score. Three of the Pacers' four OT games this season were losses of more than 4 points, but the 48-minute margin had to be zero to get to OT.

[OakMoses]

Re: JO'B in Close Games

I did something similar in this thread a couple of weeks ago:

http://www.pacersdigest.com/apache2-default/showpost.php?p=822359&postcount=54

The only difference between your methodology and mine was that I used all regulation games decided by 4 pts or less, and all OT games. I assumed that all OT games were "close" games, regardless of the final score. Three of the Pacers' four OT games this season were losses of more than 4 points, but the 48-minute margin had to be zero to get to OT.

I missed that one. Thanks for pointing it out. You've got a good point about the OT games. I guess a 2 week time lapse is about what it takes for an inferior mind to catch up with a great one.

[count55]

Re: JO'B in Close Games

Also, using my slightly different definition, the Pacers have had 15 of 33 games (or 45%) that were decided in regulation by 4 points or less or in OT (by any margin). They are 4-11 in those games, including 0-4 in OT.

For the two years under O'Brien, the totals are 10-13 (.435) in close regulation games, and 1-6 (.143) in OT games, for a combined 11-19, or .367.

While that is certainly poor, it actually compares favorably to the two season prior to O'Brien's arrival. In Rick's final two years, the Pacers were 2-3 (.400) in OT games, but an they were only 8-24 (.250) in games decided in regulation by 4 points or less. This combined 10-27 (.270) is significantly lower than the overall .463 winning percentage.

Now, this is far from a perfect and complete analysis. Some "close" games really reflect some garbage time shrinkage, and some wider margins reflect fouls or FT's at the end of the game. While O'Brien's record here in "close" games (my definition) is not fantastic, neither was Rick's in his final two years (where the talent was comparable).

It should be noted that in Rick's first two years, the team was 20-19 in "close regulation games" and 8-5 in OT games. This combined record of 28-24 was .538 and considerably lower than the team's .640 winning percentage (105-59). Over Rick's four years, the Pacers were 28-43 (.394) in regs decided by 4 or less, and 10-8 (.556) in OT games for a combined record of 38-51, or .427. This compares unfavorably to the teams 181-147, or .552, record during those four years.

On the other end of the spectrum, last year there were only 15 "close or OT" games (18%) compared to 24 "Blowout" games (Greater than 12 point spread) (29%). The Pacers were 8-16 (.333) in those games. This season there have only been 10 "blowout" games (30%), and the Pacers are 4-6 (.400) in these.

Under Carlisle, the Pacers had 30% of their games (99) decided by 12 points or more. They were 59-40 (.596) in these games. The breakdown by season was 19-5, 14-7, 16-11, and 10-17, winning over 73% of these games in the first two season, but slightly under water in the final two.