Goodbye Mack...hello AJ Price

payitforward · Post #61 » by **payitforward** » Wed Jul 25, 2012 12:52 am

WizStorm wrote:http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/player-review-2012-aj-price

One of the most popular players in the locker room -- both with players and coaches -- A.J. Price has been an ideal backup in his three seasons with the Pacers.

When out of the rotation, he doesn't complain or sulk, practices hard and actively supports his teammates. When in the rotation, he has proven consistently effective at running the offense smoothly, directing the team and hitting the occasional big shot.

I don't know about "big" -- but "occasional" is certainly accurate. His eFG% is .41 (must be because he "practices hard"? :-?

).

dangermouse · Post #62 » by **dangermouse** » Wed Jul 25, 2012 1:47 am

1 year deal?

TGW · Post #63 » by **TGW** » Wed Jul 25, 2012 1:49 am

Well, I guess if the one shot he makes out of 3 are big shots, then that's a good thing.

long suffrin' boulez fan · Post #64 » by **long suffrin' boulez fan** » Wed Jul 25, 2012 2:23 am

Why does Ernie hate us?

DCZards · Post #65 » by **DCZards** » Wed Jul 25, 2012 2:30 am

dandridge 10 wrote:
Yeah, most of the IND board said that he was a professional and did pretty well for what he was asked to do. Some even suggested that he could do better in a bigger role. The kid is still young...I'm willing to reserve judgment on him until I see him play.

Well, there's a novel approach...waiting until Price actually suits up and plays for the Zards before passing judgment on whether or not he was a good pickup.

DMVleGeND · Post #66 » by **DMVleGeND** » Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:03 am

I found this funny:

Draftexpress wrote:DraftExpress: Found my NBA comparison for Shelvin Mack. A.J. Price. Combo, average burst/inside-arc scorer, but great shooter, big balls. Plays w/swagger.
2011-04-16 02:58:19

I'll reserve judgment before I see him play though.

cdouglas · Post #67 » by **cdouglas** » Wed Jul 25, 2012 11:18 am

Making a good move to change in the culture of this team. Can't bash Grunfield for bringing in a guy who can bring good locker room presence. Looks like we have a serious team and the days of goofing around in the locker room are gone. It use to be funny when Gil was here but in the long run it wasn't good for our rookies.

TheKingOfVa360 · Post #68 » by **TheKingOfVa360** » Wed Jul 25, 2012 2:41 pm

I wish we got a back up pg with more experience but Price can't possibly be worse than Mack

TGW · Post #69 » by **TGW** » Wed Jul 25, 2012 3:51 pm

TheKingOfVa360 wrote:I wish we got a back up pg with more experience but Price can't possibly be worse than Mack

Oh yes, it's very possible, considering that Mack had a higher PER and TS% in his rookie year than Price had in his 3rd year.

This is a pretty pitiful signing with no upside. People keep saying "you guys complain about everything, its not a big deal blah blah blah" -- the FO essentially gave up two second round picks (who could have been Crowder, Denmon, etc) to leave roster space open to sign losers like AJ Price. It's yet another example of Grunfeld's short-sightedness and inability to make creative moves to improve the roster.

bgroban · Post #70 » by **bgroban** » Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:09 pm

Meh. I will reserve judgment until I see them in action.

Kanyewest · Post #71 » by **Kanyewest** » Wed Jul 25, 2012 6:24 pm

For a good veteran point guard, Washington wold be among the last choice of destinations considering that it is unlikely that you would secure more than spot minutes playing behind John Wall, not to mention that Washington hasn't established itself as a playoff team.

That being said, the Wizards could have gone the a of youth instead of AJ Price. I'm unfamiliar though with the likes of Machado etc.

Ultimately the point guard I'm most concerned about is John Wall and his development. At least Price wasn't signed to a deal longer than 2 years.

Chocolate City Jordanaire · Post #72 » by **Chocolate City Jordanaire** » Wed Jul 25, 2012 6:46 pm

TGW wrote:
TheKingOfVa360 wrote:I wish we got a back up pg with more experience but Price can't possibly be worse than Mack

Oh yes, it's very possible, considering that Mack had a higher PER and TS% in his rookie year than Price had in his 3rd year.

Also, Mack had a much higher assist rate and a (slightly) lower turnover rate than AJ Price.

Mack averaged 6.1 assists with only 2.2 turnovers per 36. For his career, Price has averaged 4.9 assists and 2.3 turnovers per 36.

Chocolate City Jordanaire · Post #73 » by **Chocolate City Jordanaire** » Wed Jul 25, 2012 6:56 pm

Anyone who wants to solve a mystery, here's one:

How did the Wizards have a +5.5 points per 100 possessions with Mack on the court?

http://www.82games.com/1112/11WAS3.HTM

Effective field goal percentage allowed and points allowed were much lower with Mack on the court if 82games is accurate.

--Mack has drawn criticism from Sam Cassell, and in the Vegas SL, Shelvin had more turnovers than assists. However, that was not the case all last season, when Mack had nearly a 3:1 assist to turnover ratio.

--I am not a huge fan of Shelvin Mack, but he seems like a methodical player who looked to pass first and who made few mistakes. Despite an article call him smallish, I thought he did a solid job defensively, too. I feel weird defending Mack, because I believe he's very much average or worse.

dobrojim · Post #74 » by **dobrojim** » Wed Jul 25, 2012 7:45 pm

either Mack, Price or someone else is going to be our 4th G in what will probably
generally be a 3 guard rotation. Not a big deal either way.

popper · Post #75 » by **popper** » Wed Jul 25, 2012 7:53 pm

Chocolate City Jordanaire wrote:Anyone who wants to solve a mystery, here's one:

How did the Wizards have a +5.5 points per 100 possessions with Mack on the court?

http://www.82games.com/1112/11WAS3.HTM

Effective field goal percentage allowed and points allowed were much lower with Mack on the court if 82games is accurate.

--Mack has drawn criticism from Sam Cassell, and in the Vegas SL, Shelvin had more turnovers than assists. However, that was not the case all last season, when Mack had nearly a 3:1 assist to turnover ratio.

--I am not a huge fan of Shelvin Mack, but he seems like a methodical player who looked to pass first and who made few mistakes. Despite an article call him smallish, I thought he did a solid job defensively, too. I feel weird defending Mack, because I know he's believe he's very much average or worse.

What are you going to believe CCJ, your own eyes or all the chatter. I saw the exact same thing you did last season. Mack was not that bad. I'm not a big fan of his either but he wasn't terrible like many on this board proclaim.

closg00 · Post #76 » by **closg00** » Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:22 pm

Actually Beal is a candidate for back-up PG duties from what I've read. If Mack gets cut, I think we'll see some of that this year.

payitforward · Post #77 » by **payitforward** » Thu Jul 26, 2012 12:56 am

TGW wrote:Well, I guess if the one shot he makes out of 3 are big shots, then that's a good thing.

What does that mean? Does a "big shot" put a bigger 2 or 3 points on the board? If you make a "big shot" in the 4th quarter... well what if you'd made one you missed instead in the first quarter? How is that different?

payitforward · Post #78 » by **payitforward** » Thu Jul 26, 2012 1:01 am

DCZards wrote:
dandridge 10 wrote:
Yeah, most of the IND board said that he was a professional and did pretty well for what he was asked to do. Some even suggested that he could do better in a bigger role. The kid is still young...I'm willing to reserve judgment on him until I see him play.

Well, there's a novel approach...waiting until Price actually suits up and plays for the Zards before passing judgment on whether or not he was a good pickup.

You are so right, Zards -- there is just no way to know whether Price is a good player or a bad player until "suits up and plays" for the Wizards.

And, I mean, it could go the other way too. I mean, you know, suppose we acquired Wade and people were excited. I mean wouldn't you be right to come in and say 'hey don't excited. How do we know he's any good? Lets wait until he "actually suits up and plays" for us.'

Of course you would, because there is just no way to know whether a guy is good or not... unless, you know, you looked at what he'd done in his several seasons as a pro. Hey, that's an idea -- that might tell you something! Glad you thought of that.

dangermouse · Post #79 » by **dangermouse** » Thu Jul 26, 2012 2:04 am

That post was so loaded with sarcasm it gave me a tummy ache

SUPERBALLMAN · Post #80 » by **SUPERBALLMAN** » Thu Jul 26, 2012 2:30 am

popper wrote:
Chocolate City Jordanaire wrote:Anyone who wants to solve a mystery, here's one:

How did the Wizards have a +5.5 points per 100 possessions with Mack on the court?

http://www.82games.com/1112/11WAS3.HTM

Effective field goal percentage allowed and points allowed were much lower with Mack on the court if 82games is accurate.

--Mack has drawn criticism from Sam Cassell, and in the Vegas SL, Shelvin had more turnovers than assists. However, that was not the case all last season, when Mack had nearly a 3:1 assist to turnover ratio.

--I am not a huge fan of Shelvin Mack, but he seems like a methodical player who looked to pass first and who made few mistakes. Despite an article call him smallish, I thought he did a solid job defensively, too. I feel weird defending Mack, because I know he's believe he's very much average or worse.

What are you going to believe CCJ, your own eyes or all the chatter. I saw the exact same thing you did last season. Mack was not that bad. I'm not a big fan of his either but he wasn't terrible like many on this board proclaim.

Agreed, thought Mack was solid last season, especially for a rookie learning the position. My only disapointment was I expected him to shoot better. But I feel good with our pg depth now with the addition of Price. Wall is gonna play alot of minutes, Mack is a solid 3rd pg, and Crawford will get time there also. But what I like about Price and Mack are they are both steady and reliable now, and have the potential to continue to improve. Effort wise they seem like the type of players we want.