Pacers@Bucks Gamethread

glasket · Post #81 » by **glasket** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 3:19 am

Losses like this make me really upset.

This was a game we should have won.

glasket · Post #82 » by **glasket** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 3:23 am

I agree with Ajizzle.
I was surprised to see the comment from the Pacers that Kareem has developed defensively. I think Quisy and Danny are by far our two best perimeter defenders.

However I have no problem in Rush starting. Quisy should provide the spark as our sixth man.

TSC25 · Post #83 » by **TSC25** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 3:27 am

Well it looked like we just got tired from maybe playing last night,but Redd did get hot.

ajizzle · Post #84 » by **ajizzle** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 3:31 am

It's not like a demotion or anything, in fact, Kareem would probably score more points as a 6th Man. It's helped Ginobili, Barbosa, and Terry. It doesn't mean he's a worse player... it just means that he fits better as a 6th, and Quisy isn't a consistent enough scorer to be depended upon to provide that spark we need.

Tonight, the bench was 4-21 from the field for 8 points. Kareem had 14 points off of 5-11 shooting. Imagine if he'd had 5 more tries as a 6th, and Danny and Mike could've split 10 of those tries.

It's worth a shot. Kareem can help our struggles w/ TOs and ballhandling (Quisy and Owens are terrible), and he can create his own shot. He's deserving of a starting spot, but his fit on this squad is probably as a 6th.

jeremy1215 · Post #85 » by **jeremy1215** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 3:35 am

Dunleavy was a bone head this game.. we needed Rush, as shown by us falling out of contention for the game when he got hurt.. But seriously guys how can you say Tinsley is so much better than Diener when they play about the same? This isn't my homerism for him, its true..We are so much faster with him too. But our players were being so stupid today, all those careless turnovers. Bad shooting on some players parts also. I love how agressive Dunleavy has been of late, but he needs to be smart about it. If he really wants to be first option he can't knock it off his feet, drop the ball, or anything like that. He needs to work on the ball handling.

jeremy1215 · Post #86 » by **jeremy1215** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 3:38 am

I also wanted to point this out, our defense needs to try harder. Players being left open constantly is not something we want to do. We are lucky Simmons wasn't hitting all his shots, he was never guarded. Redd is just a streak shooter, and our D on his wasn't that bad he is just really good.

ajizzle · Post #87 » by **ajizzle** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 3:41 am

We fell out of contention when our 2nd team came in, mainly b/c there was nobody who could score. Dunleavy actually kept us in the game. Kareem got lit up by Redd, even before he got hurt. We need a true defensive stopper, and Kareem isn't that good. With Quisy as a starter, he can devote most of his energy to defense, just like Kareem could devote more time to scoring off the bench.

Danny is our first option, and Dunleavy is our 2nd. As 6th Man, Kareem would be our 3rd. But we need to have a spark off the bench, and Quisy can't give us that.

Diener was quite impressive in his start. I would like to see him start, even when Tinsley gets back, but that won't happen, for a lot of reasons, one of which is we may be showcasing Tinsley to possibly package him in a deal (For Luke Ridnour I hope).

jeremy1215 · Post #88 » by **jeremy1215** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 3:47 am

ajizzle wrote:Diener was quite impressive in his start. I would like to see him start, even when Tinsley gets back, but that won't happen, for a lot of reasons, one of which is we may be showcasing Tinsley to possibly package him in a deal (For Luke Ridnour I hope).

I'm not sold that even if we got Rid for Tins that Ridnour would start. If we DID do that trade, we should check to see if Diener has the potential that I know he has. Ridnour is great, but is basically Diener without shooting(something Diener needs to prove).

OUR BENCH WAS PITIFUL. Gosh, its depressing to look at the stats of our bench. Daniels is a scrub, Owens is a ball hog at times, Murphy is trigger happy, and Shawne was also trigger happy. I think, if Murphy and Shawne had played better, this game was ours. Everyone else did their best, and our starting lineup was great.

jeremy1215 · Post #89 » by **jeremy1215** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 3:51 am

Did anyone else hear the announcer say Daniel Granger when Danny hit a three? That made me think, Daniel Granger sounds better than Danny Granger.

http://www.last.fm/user/DPF55 · Post #90 » by **Buck You** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 4:15 am

Hey guys, good game, good luck on the rest of the season. Jeremy, you do know the Bucks have a new logo right? Just wanted to point that out.

glasket · Post #91 » by **glasket** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 4:18 am

Deiner had a good assist to TO ratio but a bad FG percentage. Also when Tins comes back (from his mysterious absence) he will be the starter. Deiner is a backup PG at best.
Quisy was not himself and didn't play well but he can play better.
I actually though Rush and Mikey D were solid (very good FG%) in taking their shots. Ofcoarse defence is another story altogether.

Also if Danny (and Jeremy I like Danny Granger better than Daniel Granger) didn't have all those turnover then he would have probably gotten my pacesetter vote.

Well here's hoping for a beter performance in our next game.

jeremy1215 · Post #92 » by **jeremy1215** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 4:32 am

glasket do you got something against Diener? He did nothing wrong today other than shooting. And we all know that is his biggest stregth.

glasket · Post #93 » by **glasket** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 4:48 am

Umm if you read my post I actually said that Deiner had a good assist to turnover ratio and did well to fill in for Tins.
As you even pointed out, his shooting wasn't good tonight. I have nothing agsint him and I hope he turns out to be a good player, I just don;t see him being a starter on a team that wants to compete from the playoffs.

So far this season we haven;t seen Deiner shoot well in any game (except the one he scored 19 against magic I think) and until he proves otherwise I can't accept him being a great shooter.

Mind you I really do hope that he becomes a great shooter and a great backup PG.

ajizzle · Post #94 » by **ajizzle** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 8:09 am

We had way too many TOs tonight, and a lot of them came on those High Post plays, where a big gets the ball out on the perimeter, then tries to pass to a cutter in the middle. NO! Stop that $#!T right now. Our bigs aren't great passers, especially out of the high post. If we're gonna pass out of that, let it be off of backdoors, not mid-lane flashes.

Plus, we need to get to the point where anyone can bring the ball up the court. We spend too much time getting the defensive rebound, only to make an ill-advised pass that gets stolen or travel b/c we're looking to outlet to the PG every time we grab a board. If we're gonna play small, every player should be able to dribble the ball, at least pass the half-court line. We miss too many easy scoring opps b/c instead of looking ahead and getting the ball up, we're getting the ball to our PG. That's important, but c'mon, don't be ridiculous about it. Get it and go. That's the difference between us and Phoenix, or Golden State, or Denver.

When we score, we usually win. When we don't, we lose. Simple equation, fellas.

And no more Quisy Js. Either drive all the way to the hoop, or drive and kick it out, b/c I'm tired of seeing that 10-footer that should be either a layup, a trip to the line, or a kickout for 3 being shot (while heavily contested) and missed. It was good for about a 6-game stretch, Quisy, but now it's just pi$$ing me off every time you miss it (which has been a lot recently). Either layin, foul shots, or pass for 3.

Finally, I'm tired of seeing ISO POST, unless it's Jamaal, JO, or Ike, and even still, those times should be minimal. No one else has a great post game, especially back-to-basket posting. I've seen Quisy and Junior post up guys 3'-6' shorter than them, only to see their shot blocked or missed terribly. It's one thing to expose a mismatch, but it's another to expose ourselves in the process. We are a drive-and-kick, High Post Cuts, pickNroll/Pop, Fake3-then-go team... Can we stick w/ those and just get execute instead of trying new things??? They don't work. Maybe next season, after you've worked on it tediously during the summer, but not now, when we're legitimately in the playoff race...

Sorry for the rant, but these last few games have been frustrating, especially when we do things that we shouldn't be doing, or trying things to see if they work, even though they haven't worked all year (maybe all career) long. Keep it simple, just execute it better.

I am AJizzle, and I support this message.

Paid for by the friends and associates of AJizzle.

mbucks22 · Post #95 » by **mbucks22** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 1:54 pm

glasket wrote:Losses like this make me really upset.

This was a game we should have won.

I'll add you to the "we should have won this game" list. You're number 5 million or so on the list of opposing fans that take the Bucks lightly.

mosarsour · Post #96 » by **mosarsour** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 5:40 pm

Diener with 9 assists to 1 turnover....Not too shabby at all.

glasket · Post #97 » by **glasket** » Sat Jan 26, 2008 1:12 am

mbucks22 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

I'll add you to the "we should have won this game" list. You're number 5 million or so on the list of opposing fans that take the Bucks lightly.

And I'll add you on our "who cares what he says list".

The Bucks are a mediocre team and the Pacers are not too much better at the moment but we still should have won.