/ laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"
Tweet
HavenÄt seen it posted yet!? If I am mistaken, please delete the post.
I think he is pretty accurate and his statistics just prove my subjective impressions.
SOURCE: ESPN (http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story...-danny-granger)
ATLANTA -- It looked like the type of win that can turn around a season. The Pacers were up by 14 points on the road in Atlanta, with just six minutes left, and had shown few signs of the offensive struggles that plagued them in their first four games.
And then, befuddled by a Hawks' zone, here's how the next 10 possessions went:
Missed 23-footer.
Missed 20-footer.
Blocked shot at rim.
Turnover.
Missed 26-footer.
Missed 22-footer.
Turnover.
Missed 7-footer.
Missed 23-footer.
Turnover.
Seven straight misses and three turnovers later, the Pacers were down four points with 32 seconds left and essentially toast. When Paul George's final fling didn't hit anything, Indiana had dropped to 2-3.
On a micro level, it's hard to pinpoint one single cause. The Pacers had a couple of open looks that missed, had a couple of forced shots in late-clock situations, and had a couple of bad passes. Hey, it happens. They might also have been out of gas: The four key Pacers (George, Roy Hibbert, David West and George Hill) all played 21 second-half minutes after the bench was destroyed by Atlanta's in the first half, and one will note only one of those 10 possessions produced a shot inside 20 feet.
FOLLOW THE NBA ON ESPN
Stay up to date with the latest NBA news, stories and analysis. Follow the NBA on ESPN on Twitter, Facebook and Google+:
Twitter » Facebook » Google+ »
Nonetheless, with no Danny Granger for three more months, Indy is in danger of drifting into mediocrity, and Wednesday's crunch-time offensive meltdown underscored the main reason. Indy is 27th in offensive efficiency, despite an opening-week slate that isn't exactly a murderers' row of great defenses: Toronto, Atlanta, Charlotte, Sacramento and San Antonio all rank outside the top 10 at the moment. In fact, the Bobcats are dead last and have been absolutely skewered in every game except the one that Indiana inexplicably lost to them.
How did this happen? The Pacers were supposed to be deep and talented enough to withstand the loss of a key player, especially since most would argue Granger isn't even the best player on the team (that'd be Hibbert). With Gerald Green waiting in the wings and Paul George seeming primed for a breakout, Granger seemed the one player whose loss Indy could absorb most easily.
When we break down the numbers, here's where we get to the weird part. Indiana was one of the most bizarre offenses in NBA annals a year ago, finishing just 28th in both 2-point shooting percentage and percentage of assisted baskets, but ranking eighth in offensive efficiency because they drew fouls, shot 3s, got offensive boards, and avoided turnovers.
In retrospect, this was an amazing accomplishment. Normally teams that post up as much as the Pacers do commit a lot of turnovers, because making the entry passes can be difficult and double-teamed big guys are more prone to mistakes.
Last year's Pacers managed to avoid that fate, but not this year's crew. Indy is 29th in the NBA in turnover rate; on cue, the most important turnover in Wednesday's collapse came on a botched post entry from George to Hibbert. Indy also had miscues that had nothing to do with post-ups, including a comical eight-second violation in the first minute, but the entries seem to be the biggest problem.
Nonetheless, any decline this sharp is rarely so simple. Instead, it's a confluence of factors coming together to knock the Pacers' offense sideways. (And make no mistake, it's just the offense: Indy remains a robust seventh in defense):
• George isn't breaking out. The thought was that Granger's absence would allow George to shine. The reality has been less encouraging, as George looks like the same fourth option he was before the injury. According to Synergy, George has only had nine plays as a pick-and-roll ball handler, and he hasn't earned more: Indy scored on only one of them.
Similarly, he's had only nine plays in isolation, and regardless of the play type he's not making shots and virtually never drawing fouls. (He has eight free throws in 199 minutes this season). Somehow, he's managing to threaten the league lead in turnovers anyway.
The Pacers' go-to guy instead has been West, who has had a whopping 41 post-up tries in five games and leads the club in usage rate. While he hasn't been terrible, this role stretches his abilities to their absolute limit. It would be very helpful if one of the Pacers' perimeter players could establish himself as a legitimate creator, and George is the obvious guy to do it. But so far, it hasn't happened.
• The Collison trade hurt. Darren Collison is doing things in Dallas that he never did in Indiana, so it's perhaps a bit much to pin that on the Pacers. Nonetheless, the decision to replace him with D.J. Augustin has been a massive downgrade. Were Collison still here Indiana might respond to Granger's injury with a Hill-Collison backcourt, producing more ball handling and spacing.
Instead, the Pacers are stuck with Hill and whatever -- a flotsam including Sam Young, Lance Stephenson and Gerald Green. Shockingly, Stephenson has been the best of the three, but that's full of faint praise.
Ideally, they would play Augustin at the one and move Hill to the two, but there are two problems with this. First, Augustin, despite being by far the best passer on the team, just hasn't provided enough scoring and shooting to compel this move. And second, Augustin is a huge liability at the defensive end; unless there's a good place to hide him it's difficult to justify the offensive gain compared with the defensive cost.
• Hibbert needs to play better. Roy Hibbert has a max contract. He also has the lowest usage rate on the team, including the Orlando Johnsons and Ben Hansbroughs, is shooting 42.6 percent, isn't drawing fouls, and is struggling to make catches in the post -- like on the key turnover Wednesday night. No matter what else happens with Indiana, it won't matter if Hibbert doesn't play better. Yes, perhaps the guards could get him some easier looks, but this offense was just as ugly a year ago and Hibbert still got shots and points.
• The bench still stinks. A lot of people think Indiana had a good bench last season and that's what helped them in the lockout year, but that point of view is 100 percent wrong; the Pacers' bench was routinely outscored and only the strength of the starting five kept the team in the East's upper crust. According to NBA.com, last year's team was plus-+261 with either Hill or Collison at the point and the other four starters, and minus-43 the rest of the time.
You're seeing that more now that Granger is out. Indy's starters were very healthy last year aside from an injury to Hill, who was their most replaceable starter because they had Collison behind him, but the Granger injury opens up a new weakness.
Again, the proof is in the numbers. Indiana's "Core 4" of Hill-West-George-Hibbert is plus-14 for the season, which is pretty solid despite their offensive struggles.
Other units? Not so good, a ghastly minus-30 in just 110 minutes. You can't win with that. The Pacers' starters are basically trying to offset a 2011-12 Bobcats performance from the bench. While the cost has been entirely at the defensive end -- the offense with the Core 4 has been just as inefficient as the bench units -- one can see Frank Vogel's dilemma. He doesn't have any offensive solutions hiding on his bench, at least until Gerald Green starts scoring, but has exponentially greater defensive liabilities.
Sum it up and the Pacers can point to a few areas where they might reasonably expect to do better. Hibbert will probably do better, the 3s will probably start falling more often (they've made only 28.6 percent, after being one of the league's better 3-point shooting teams in 2011-12), and Green will probably start scoring. Also, one can still imagine George turning the corner. Those with long memories will also note that Indy's offense had a lot of problems early last season before steadily improving over the course of the year.
With all that said, this team needed to do everything else right to overcome a woeful 2-point shooting percentage a season ago. Even at its best, this was an offense where the ball stuck a lot and many of the shots are contested. The plague of turnovers doesn't offer an easy solution, nor do the shortcomings on the bench and the absence of Collison.
In other words, Indy's problems appear to go a lot deeper than just Danny Granger. But his absence is exacerbating them, and as a result the Pacers' tenure in the East's upper crust is threatening to be short-lived.
I think he is pretty accurate and his statistics just prove my subjective impressions.
SOURCE: ESPN (http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story...-danny-granger)
ATLANTA -- It looked like the type of win that can turn around a season. The Pacers were up by 14 points on the road in Atlanta, with just six minutes left, and had shown few signs of the offensive struggles that plagued them in their first four games.
And then, befuddled by a Hawks' zone, here's how the next 10 possessions went:
Missed 23-footer.
Missed 20-footer.
Blocked shot at rim.
Turnover.
Missed 26-footer.
Missed 22-footer.
Turnover.
Missed 7-footer.
Missed 23-footer.
Turnover.
Seven straight misses and three turnovers later, the Pacers were down four points with 32 seconds left and essentially toast. When Paul George's final fling didn't hit anything, Indiana had dropped to 2-3.
On a micro level, it's hard to pinpoint one single cause. The Pacers had a couple of open looks that missed, had a couple of forced shots in late-clock situations, and had a couple of bad passes. Hey, it happens. They might also have been out of gas: The four key Pacers (George, Roy Hibbert, David West and George Hill) all played 21 second-half minutes after the bench was destroyed by Atlanta's in the first half, and one will note only one of those 10 possessions produced a shot inside 20 feet.
FOLLOW THE NBA ON ESPN
Stay up to date with the latest NBA news, stories and analysis. Follow the NBA on ESPN on Twitter, Facebook and Google+:
Twitter » Facebook » Google+ »
Nonetheless, with no Danny Granger for three more months, Indy is in danger of drifting into mediocrity, and Wednesday's crunch-time offensive meltdown underscored the main reason. Indy is 27th in offensive efficiency, despite an opening-week slate that isn't exactly a murderers' row of great defenses: Toronto, Atlanta, Charlotte, Sacramento and San Antonio all rank outside the top 10 at the moment. In fact, the Bobcats are dead last and have been absolutely skewered in every game except the one that Indiana inexplicably lost to them.
How did this happen? The Pacers were supposed to be deep and talented enough to withstand the loss of a key player, especially since most would argue Granger isn't even the best player on the team (that'd be Hibbert). With Gerald Green waiting in the wings and Paul George seeming primed for a breakout, Granger seemed the one player whose loss Indy could absorb most easily.
When we break down the numbers, here's where we get to the weird part. Indiana was one of the most bizarre offenses in NBA annals a year ago, finishing just 28th in both 2-point shooting percentage and percentage of assisted baskets, but ranking eighth in offensive efficiency because they drew fouls, shot 3s, got offensive boards, and avoided turnovers.
In retrospect, this was an amazing accomplishment. Normally teams that post up as much as the Pacers do commit a lot of turnovers, because making the entry passes can be difficult and double-teamed big guys are more prone to mistakes.
Last year's Pacers managed to avoid that fate, but not this year's crew. Indy is 29th in the NBA in turnover rate; on cue, the most important turnover in Wednesday's collapse came on a botched post entry from George to Hibbert. Indy also had miscues that had nothing to do with post-ups, including a comical eight-second violation in the first minute, but the entries seem to be the biggest problem.
Nonetheless, any decline this sharp is rarely so simple. Instead, it's a confluence of factors coming together to knock the Pacers' offense sideways. (And make no mistake, it's just the offense: Indy remains a robust seventh in defense):
• George isn't breaking out. The thought was that Granger's absence would allow George to shine. The reality has been less encouraging, as George looks like the same fourth option he was before the injury. According to Synergy, George has only had nine plays as a pick-and-roll ball handler, and he hasn't earned more: Indy scored on only one of them.
Similarly, he's had only nine plays in isolation, and regardless of the play type he's not making shots and virtually never drawing fouls. (He has eight free throws in 199 minutes this season). Somehow, he's managing to threaten the league lead in turnovers anyway.
The Pacers' go-to guy instead has been West, who has had a whopping 41 post-up tries in five games and leads the club in usage rate. While he hasn't been terrible, this role stretches his abilities to their absolute limit. It would be very helpful if one of the Pacers' perimeter players could establish himself as a legitimate creator, and George is the obvious guy to do it. But so far, it hasn't happened.
• The Collison trade hurt. Darren Collison is doing things in Dallas that he never did in Indiana, so it's perhaps a bit much to pin that on the Pacers. Nonetheless, the decision to replace him with D.J. Augustin has been a massive downgrade. Were Collison still here Indiana might respond to Granger's injury with a Hill-Collison backcourt, producing more ball handling and spacing.
Instead, the Pacers are stuck with Hill and whatever -- a flotsam including Sam Young, Lance Stephenson and Gerald Green. Shockingly, Stephenson has been the best of the three, but that's full of faint praise.
Ideally, they would play Augustin at the one and move Hill to the two, but there are two problems with this. First, Augustin, despite being by far the best passer on the team, just hasn't provided enough scoring and shooting to compel this move. And second, Augustin is a huge liability at the defensive end; unless there's a good place to hide him it's difficult to justify the offensive gain compared with the defensive cost.
• Hibbert needs to play better. Roy Hibbert has a max contract. He also has the lowest usage rate on the team, including the Orlando Johnsons and Ben Hansbroughs, is shooting 42.6 percent, isn't drawing fouls, and is struggling to make catches in the post -- like on the key turnover Wednesday night. No matter what else happens with Indiana, it won't matter if Hibbert doesn't play better. Yes, perhaps the guards could get him some easier looks, but this offense was just as ugly a year ago and Hibbert still got shots and points.
• The bench still stinks. A lot of people think Indiana had a good bench last season and that's what helped them in the lockout year, but that point of view is 100 percent wrong; the Pacers' bench was routinely outscored and only the strength of the starting five kept the team in the East's upper crust. According to NBA.com, last year's team was plus-+261 with either Hill or Collison at the point and the other four starters, and minus-43 the rest of the time.
You're seeing that more now that Granger is out. Indy's starters were very healthy last year aside from an injury to Hill, who was their most replaceable starter because they had Collison behind him, but the Granger injury opens up a new weakness.
Again, the proof is in the numbers. Indiana's "Core 4" of Hill-West-George-Hibbert is plus-14 for the season, which is pretty solid despite their offensive struggles.
Other units? Not so good, a ghastly minus-30 in just 110 minutes. You can't win with that. The Pacers' starters are basically trying to offset a 2011-12 Bobcats performance from the bench. While the cost has been entirely at the defensive end -- the offense with the Core 4 has been just as inefficient as the bench units -- one can see Frank Vogel's dilemma. He doesn't have any offensive solutions hiding on his bench, at least until Gerald Green starts scoring, but has exponentially greater defensive liabilities.
Sum it up and the Pacers can point to a few areas where they might reasonably expect to do better. Hibbert will probably do better, the 3s will probably start falling more often (they've made only 28.6 percent, after being one of the league's better 3-point shooting teams in 2011-12), and Green will probably start scoring. Also, one can still imagine George turning the corner. Those with long memories will also note that Indy's offense had a lot of problems early last season before steadily improving over the course of the year.
With all that said, this team needed to do everything else right to overcome a woeful 2-point shooting percentage a season ago. Even at its best, this was an offense where the ball stuck a lot and many of the shots are contested. The plague of turnovers doesn't offer an easy solution, nor do the shortcomings on the bench and the absence of Collison.
In other words, Indy's problems appear to go a lot deeper than just Danny Granger. But his absence is exacerbating them, and as a result the Pacers' tenure in the East's upper crust is threatening to be short-lived.
Comment