RealGM

Hope in Last Place.

A few days ago the blog Wages of Wins Journal had an interesting topic about the Pacers...


Below is an excerpt.

After 152 minutes, though, Dunleavy hasn’t yet returned to the form we saw last year. If he does, though, it’s quite possible that the Pacers will make the teams ranked ahead of Indiana sweat a bit. Although it’s unlikely given the Pacers current record of 15-25 that Indiana can finish in the playoffs, there’s certainly hope heading into next season.

Next season Indiana - like the Wizards - could field a starting line-up that consists entirely of above average players (Ford, Dunleavy, Granger, Murphy, Foster). And that line-up - if on the court the entire season - could contend for the playoffs in 2009-10.

Excerpt??

I hope when they say that Dunleavy isn't back to form yet that it isn't a knock. He's only played in nine games, so it's hard to envision him being 100% on a team that was gelled, even if they were playing badly.

The thing that worries me is that while Jeff's name has ALWAYS come up in trade rumors because he is such a hard worker and a "glue" player he's actually a potential trade candidate this season. I hope I'm wrong, obviously, because we lack veteran, stabilizing players.

Our play from now to the All-Star break will probably decide if we can somehow make the teams above us in the standings "sweat."

So far, so good. I'd rather us make the playoffs and have our players get a taste of that then bow out and add more inexperience to our corps.

Miller4ever wrote:So far, so good. I'd rather us make the playoffs and have our players get a taste of that then bow out and add more inexperience to our corps.

I couldn't agree more. I'd MUCH rather get bombed by the Cavs, Magic or Celtics in four or five games than sit at home and select in the Lottery again. We'd probably be entering the postseason as one of the worst teams (record-wise) which means we wouldn't take a huge hit in terms of draft order either way.

Just playing in the playoffs would help us close out games a heck of a lot better in 2009-10.

PacerPerspective wrote:

Miller4ever wrote:So far, so good. I'd rather us make the playoffs and have our players get a taste of that then bow out and add more inexperience to our corps.

I couldn't agree more. I'd MUCH rather get bombed by the Cavs, Magic or Celtics in four or five games than sit at home and select in the Lottery again. We'd probably be entering the postseason as one of the worst teams (record-wise) which means we wouldn't take a huge hit in terms of draft order either way.

Just playing in the playoffs would help us close out games a heck of a lot better in 2009-10.

I couldn't disagree more.

To start, the difference between 8 and 14 is huge in this draft. Past the first 8-10, this draft is really weak. The reason I would hate not to get a decent rookie in this draft is because if we don't we are stuck in mediocrity for a while. Dunleavy, Murphy, and Tinsley all have long term deals. We have a lot of money locked up in mediocre players, 1 of which isn't even going to be playing for us again. By mediocre I mean none of them will ever be considered an All-Star. We simply can't afford to be satisfied with an 8th seed in the playoffs for the next 3 years. We either need to get a good draft pick or make a trade.

Obviously, I'm not going to be pissed to see us make the playoffs. I love watching us win and don't root for us to lose, but the fact is, if we don't make a trade and are satisfied with mediocrity, we will never get past mediocrity. The 8th seed in the playoffs gets us a sweep, a bad rookie, and the same result next season. We need to change something for us to be good again.

I'd rather see us make the playoffs and get the experience. This draft sucks, to put it nicely. Besides, we need to get guys like Granger, Dunleavy, Murphy, etc. some playoff experience. Just to disagree with some above, I really dont think we would get completely ransacked by the #1 seed in the playoffs, if we did make it. I see it this way: if we make the playoffs, we will have to have had a hell of a second half run to get there. We have been in nearly every game this season, and we are among the elite scoring teams in the league. Moreover, we give Boston a lot of problems when we play them. We have played Orlando tough both times we've seen them. The only team I think would completely pound us is Cleveland. I think they are the champs this year anyway, but I dont think we could win a game in the playoffs against LeBron. I think we could sneak a couple wins against Boston, and make Orlando sweat a bit. I dont think we'd win any of these series, but if we could play one of these elite teams tough, it could give us something to build on for next year.

PacerPerspective wrote:

Miller4ever wrote:So far, so good. I'd rather us make the playoffs and have our players get a taste of that then bow out and add more inexperience to our corps.

I couldn't agree more. I'd MUCH rather get bombed by the Cavs, Magic or Celtics in four or five games than sit at home and select in the Lottery again. We'd probably be entering the postseason as one of the worst teams (record-wise) which means we wouldn't take a huge hit in terms of draft order either way.

Just playing in the playoffs would help us close out games a heck of a lot better in 2009-10.

PP, i just want to say it's really good to see you posting on here actively again, welcome back to the neighborhood brother man.

But, i know we barley ever disagree on topics on the Pacers, but this one, i can not disagree more. There is almost no point of making it to the playoffs and getting crushed by the Celtics or Cavs. They would run on us, they would push us around, they should take our proud feeling of clinching the playoffs mean worthless and destroy us into pieces.

From a fan point-of-view, i do think i'd be cool, for a few days. Leading up to the games, thinking, wow, how do we match up. But once the beating begins, we would all be sitting home wondering, wow, i wish we Weren't going to this party...

I do like this team a lot and i do think they have many strengths and weaknesses but i do think they are in need of another draft and develop another player (or two, maybe we get a 2nd late round pick too?) before we are truly ready to test the waters that are the NBA playoffs.

We can trade up in the draft. A team should ALWAYS perform the BEST they can. Anything short is sacrilege to the game of basketball. Is the goal the championship? Yes. But I can wait until fortune swings our way. Otherwise, manipulating our standings for a better shot at a higher pick is low.

Do you know how many late-game nail-biters away from being a great team? If HALF of those games went the other way, we'd be 22-21. Put Rush into playoff game. Let him become experienced, and if he doesn't get better, he's a trade chip. Let Granger and Hibbert develop one more season. We are way closer to contending than our record, and we are not a mediocre team. Other teams are scared of us. We kill giants. We have taken the Celtics down by 15+ points, we've split with the Lakers and both times went down to the wire. What is the difference? Change of coach during the offseason to give us +3 in the margin? Rush sinking one more 3-point attempt per game to give us +3 in the margin?

I'm not accusing anyone of WANTING to tank. It's the willingness to accept less than OUR best that counts. For those of you looking at the close margins and the heartbreaking stats, go and see the Pacers play live, or, if you can't and don't have League Pass, then catch up on the highlights. You have internet, obviously. The way we're playing excites people. As long as we play with passion, I'm happy. There's gold in the lower picks that you just don't see now. The chances are slim, but I think that we have goo scouts, and we'll get a valuable piece no matter what spot in the draft we have.

Your right M4E. I agree with you, I'm really not hoping we lose, as I said, I like to see us win and will always root for us to win. However, I do think it would be better for our team if we had the 8th pick in the draft than the 14th pick after a sweep. Thats all I was saying.

I'd rather make the playoffs and get the experience, unless we get the #1 pick. The draft really isn't good, and even if we have the 9th pick, the chance that the player pans out is just a little bit higher than if we are 15th. The draft just doesn't really seem very good. And don't forget, we got Granger after making the playoffs!

DGrangeRx33 wrote:Your right M4E. I agree with you, I'm really not hoping we lose, as I said, I like to see us win and will always root for us to win. However, I do think it would be better for our team if we had the 8th pick in the draft than the 14th pick after a sweep. Thats all I was saying.

I think that the experience gained from playoffs (the different atmosphere, the fact that you have to go in a series against the same team a bunch of times) makes up for the disparity in talent that the 8th pick would get over the 14th pick.

My contention is that it wouldn't be the difference between the 8th and 14th pick...it would probably be more like the 12th or 14th pick...if we contend for a playoff spot down the stretch.

I just hope we don't get caught in no-man's land again where we don't make the playoffs, and we don't get a high draft pick either. What the team does is up to them, but I just don't think that's a very good situation.

Well, I really think that our roster is full of above average players, so it's really unlikely that unless we purposely tank the season, we won't end up in no man's land. I agree with PP here in that we really should make a push for the playoffs and get some crunch time credit. We surely needed it this year.

And if we could pull off a run like the Hawks did last year, who knows maybe the momentum will carry over to this year.

I really don't like dave berri's formula, it's too rebound heavy. Is Murphy really our best player? According to Berri's formula he is. When every other statistical measure says the opposite about Granger's value, you have to wonder. The New Yorker had a piece on his book, and highlighted how his ratings continually show Iverson as an average player, even in his MVP season. Now, Iverson might be overrated, but that disparity is just silly.

Wages of Wins formulas (at least in the book, which I read) are indeed whack. There is only so much you can do with stats prediction if you are going to ignore +- (and hence, team defense). It's exactly the kind of mistake that overrates a player like Troy.

floppymoose wrote:Wages of Wins formulas (at least in the book, which I read) are indeed whack. There is only so much you can do with stats prediction if you are going to ignore +- (and hence, team defense). It's exactly the kind of mistake that overrates a player like Troy.

I think the only people to ever overrate Troy Murphy were the Golden State Warriors, they seem to overrate a lot of players though. I think talent wise, Troy is actually underrated. Everyone seems to think he sucks because hes known as a bad contract, but he is actually a good player. Obviously he is overpaid, but he still produces.

Anyone who says Troy is an above average starter is overrating him. That claim was made by the wages of win guy, and he is not a member of the Warriors organization.

floppymoose wrote:Anyone who says Troy is an above average starter is overrating him. That claim was made by the wages of win guy, and he is not a member of the Warriors organization.

PER suggests that he is an average PF with above average offense, very lousy defense, decent rebounding.

His per is slightly above league average. I agree with floppy's assessment.