Hibbert's past as prologue

[McKeyFan]

In the current trade and acquisition talk now re-emerging, a major factor to the discussion is the question of whether Hibbert will continue to seriously improve.

I have my doubts. I have been a major Roy fan since the beginning but have waned in the past year or so, mainly because it is appearing to me that Roy's issues are not skill and physical development, where he will improve due to his work ethic. They are mental and psychological. When the game is on the line, and in big games like the playoffs, Roy just doesn't seem to be able to play well. He does not seem to be clutch, not a "gamer."

If so, as much as I love him, I'd rather invest elsewhere.

Yes, those mental and psychological matters could be improved as well, I suppose. But here is my question:

What do we know about this question from Roy's past? At Georgetown, did he become more of a factor late in games as a junior and senior? Did he win games in the last minute? Did he help the team become a winner?

Or, instead, did he put up better numbers each year but not show up during big games and key moments?

Same with high school. What do we know about Roy's past that will help us with seeing the future?

[billbradley]

Re: Hibbert's past as prologue

In the current trade and acquisition talk now re-emerging, a major factor to the discussion is the question of whether Hibbert will continue to seriously improve.

I have my doubts. I have been a major Roy fan since the beginning but have waned in the past year or so, mainly because it is appearing to me that Roy's issues are not skill and physical development, where he will improve due to his work ethic. They are mental and psychological. When the game is on the line, and in big games like the playoffs, Roy just doesn't seem to be able to play well. He does not seem to be clutch, not a "gamer."

If so, as much as I love him, I'd rather invest elsewhere.

Yes, those mental and psychological matters could be improved as well, I suppose. But here is my question:

What do we know about this question from Roy's past? At Georgetown, did he become more of a factor late in games as a junior and senior? Did he win games in the last minute? Did he help the team become a winner?

Or, instead, did he put up better numbers each year but not show up during big games and key moments?

Same with high school. What do we know about Roy's past that will help us with seeing the future?

[glazedham42]

Re: Hibbert's past as prologue

Most NBA big men start to hit their peak by the 3rd year. It just takes a long time for centers to develop. Go back and look at the stat lines from some above average centers of the past. Most don't really develop until year 3. Unless you are one of the all time greats like Olajuwon, Ewing, Shaq, Robinson, then expect that learning curve. I think this is the year that Roy finally becomes a consistent threat to the other team on both ends. Even more so when you consider all the work he has been putting in to get his body ready.

[BobbyMac]

Re: Hibbert's past as prologue

Look how long it took Smits to become a good center.

[Lance George]

Re: Hibbert's past as prologue

Rik Smits vs. Roy Hibbert:
Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Years 1-3

Roy's right on pace with Rik through their first three seasons. In fact, he actually had a better third-year─Roy's continued to improve each season, whereas Rik took a noticeable step back from year two to year three. Also, Roy's a significantly better rebounder than Rik was, especially on the offensive glass (12.2% vs. 5.4% of available offensive rebounds).

[vnzla81]

Re: Hibbert's past as prologue

I'll give him one more year to show me what he can do, I like the guy a lot but if we can make a trade where we get an starting center we do it.

[Major Cold]

Re: Hibbert's past as prologue

He did rebound slightly better last year. And his post defense was a lot better. I don't expect him to be a yearly all-star. But 14 ppg/8rpg/2bpg on 48%+ shooting is not asking for much.

[BillS]

Re: Hibbert's past as prologue

I'll give him one more year to show me what he can do, I like the guy a lot but if we can make a trade where we get an starting center we do it.

If we can make a trade where we get a starting center without giving up the rest of our developing pieces I'll be extremely surprised.

[docpaul]

Re: Hibbert's past as prologue

He disappointingly faded/acted small during the playoffs last year. He also had the chance to pull quite a few game winning buckets during the regular season and mostly came up short.

McKey, I think you're right on point asking this question about him... but what realistically are our alternatives at this point? Are you suggesting that we'd be bigger players in the Nene/Gasol conversation if we had no long term plans to stick with Hibbs? Not so sure, especially given that his best deal/future lies with us.

7'2" doesn't grow on trees. Especially healthy, hard working, good head on shoulders 7'2". I think we'll have Hibbs on our team for a long time to come, but whether the front office will properly value his contribution (like they did with Granger) is one unanswered question, and the other is whether he'll be part of a larger frontcourt committee vs. "the clear answer".

[aaronb]

Re: Hibbert's past as prologue

Most NBA big men start to hit their peak by the 3rd year. It just takes a long time for centers to develop. Go back and look at the stat lines from some above average centers of the past. Most don't really develop until year 3. Unless you are one of the all time greats like Olajuwon, Ewing, Shaq, Robinson, then expect that learning curve. I think this is the year that Roy finally becomes a consistent threat to the other team on both ends. Even more so when you consider all the work he has been putting in to get his body ready.

The thing that will always limit Roy is that he just isn't a top athlete. He's always going to be a little slow and less agile than the elite level guys. He doesn't have the ceiling of the guys you mention above.

[aaronb]

Re: Hibbert's past as prologue

Rik Smits vs. Roy Hibbert:
Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Years 1-3

Roy's right on pace with Rik through their first three seasons. In fact, he actually had a better third-year─Roy's continued to improve each season, whereas Rik took a noticeable step back from year two to year three. Also, Roy's a significantly better rebounder than Rik was, especially on the offensive glass (12.2% vs. 5.4% of available offensive rebounds).

Difference was that Rik was the 3rd offensive option as opposed to Roy being the #2 option.

Also, Rik played with an excellent defensive 4 who grabbed a ton of rebounds. Roy doesn't.

[daschysta]

Re: Hibbert's past as prologue

Why are people acting like there are a ton of centers out there better than Roy, and that those centers would be able to be acquired at a reasonable price. Roy has a really unique skillset in todays league and has improved every year, no need to move him.

[Sandman21]

Re: Hibbert's past as prologue

I dont know about everyone else, but I am REALLY glad that the former head coach of the Pacers apparently never saw that video of Roy hitting the 3.

[Lance George]

Re: Hibbert's past as prologue

Difference was that Rik was the 3rd offensive option as opposed to Roy being the #2 option.

Also, Rik played with an excellent defensive 4 who grabbed a ton of rebounds. Roy doesn't.

The number of shots per game (FGA and FTA) and their usage rates (percentage of offensive possessions they use) through their first three seasons are nearly identical, so I don't buy the whole "offensive option" excuse. To me, that comes across as a highly contrived excuse designed to discredit the Roy/Rik comparison.

As for you second point, if you're referring to Dale Davis, he didn't come along until Rik's fourth season ('91-'92). The Pacers' leading rebounders through Rik's first three seasons were (in yearly order): Lasalle Thompson (9.9; in only 33-games) and Detlef Schrempf, twice (7.9 and 8.0). Not exactly big time rebounders who would be cutting into Rik's totals.

[PacersandIU]

Re: Hibbert's past as prologue

I dont know about everyone else, but I am REALLY glad that the former head coach of the Pacers apparently never saw that video of Roy hitting the 3.

Oh good lord... McBob was enough for me.