The New Lineup (By The Numbers)

Dunthreevy · Post #1 » by **Dunthreevy** » Sat Apr 4, 2009 3:50 pm

Since the incident between Double-J and T.J., and the starting lineup that resulted in the games since then, there have been huge differences in the starting lineup (specifically the backcourt and wings). So I started looking at the numbers and doing some math. Here are a few positives that I found.

Brandon Rush!!
18.7 points, 5.6 rebounds per game
56% FG, 35% 3pt FG. And he's scoring his points without the benefit of getting calls from the refs, only shooting 5 FT's in those 6 games (hit 4 of them).

Jarrett Jack
17.5 points, 4.8 rebounds, 6 assists, 1.3 steals, and his assist to turnover ratio is 3.6 to 1. 52% FG, 29% 3pt FG (

), 95% FT (19/20)

.

Danny Granger
29.7 points, 54% FG, 50% 3pt FG, 85% FT, 1.7 steals,

T.J. Ford
14 points, 6.7 assists, 4.7 rebounds, Assist/TO ratio 3.3 to 1
55% FG, 87% FT

And overall, we're just playing better basketball than we have recently, going 4-2 (outscoring our opponents 109-105 on average) in those games and looking like a team that could be something next year with a slight tweak here or there. We still need a solid interior defensive presence, but this recent incarnation of the team we all know and love is starting to look better and better.

Post #2 » by **Miller4ever** » Sat Apr 4, 2009 4:51 pm

Great starting backcourt play, Granger's basically playing like he did pre-injury, and T.J. Ford is a great sixth man. Do you have the minutes they've played?

Dunthreevy · Post #3 » by **Dunthreevy** » Sat Apr 4, 2009 8:57 pm

Miller4ever wrote:Great starting backcourt play, Granger's basically playing like he did pre-injury, and T.J. Ford is a great sixth man. Do you have the minutes they've played?

Rush is playing a TON of minutes, logged 43 last night and is averaging almost 39 minutes per in these past 6 games

Rush - 39 MIN per
Jack - 39 MIN per
Granger - 37 MIN per
Ford - 31 MIN per

bballpacen · Post #4 » by **bballpacen** » Sun Apr 5, 2009 3:48 am

I like what I have seen, and the play of the team since then... But I have to admit that I am not a fan of the small ball game, which we are playing when these guys are on the floor together...

xxSnEaKyPxx · Post #5 » by **xxSnEaKyPxx** » Sun Apr 5, 2009 3:50 am

bballpacen wrote:I like what I have seen, and the play of the team since then... But I have to admit that I am not a fan of the small ball game, which we are playing when these guys are on the floor together...

Our starting lineup isn't small ball at all, it might be one of the tallest lineups out there. Its when TJ subs in with Jack that we are playing small ball, I hate those two on the court together.

chatard5 · Post #6 » by **chatard5** » Sun Apr 5, 2009 4:00 am

DGrangeRx33 wrote:
bballpacen wrote:I like what I have seen, and the play of the team since then... But I have to admit that I am not a fan of the small ball game, which we are playing when these guys are on the floor together...

Our starting lineup isn't small ball at all, it might be one of the tallest lineups out there. Its when TJ subs in with Jack that we are playing small ball, I hate those two on the court together.

He said "when these guys are on the floor together" so I think you 2 were on the same page.

writerman · Post #7 » by **writerman** » Mon Apr 6, 2009 2:26 am

If there are no serious injuries or other losses between now and next season, I'm really optimistic about this team.

There's been a lot of talk about how we need a classic PF--but Murphy does the job on offense and on the boards, and from what I've seen even his defense has improved. If Hibbert continues to emerge (17 and 8 tonight, albeit against OKC) I think we HAVE our post presence and no longer need to trade or draft for one. I think that was our one serious need, and it may be solved by a guy already on the roster.

Our backcourt is stacked. No major worries there. Jack, Ford, Rush, Denier--will there even be room in the rotation for Dunleavy if he comes back full strength?

I honestly think this team can be a contender quicker than many people think.

Post #8 » by **Miller4ever** » Mon Apr 6, 2009 4:15 am

ECF in 2 years is my call, as long as the players want to stay. It looks to me like our chemistry is good for a team with our shoddy record.

cdash · Post #9 » by **cdash** » Mon Apr 6, 2009 4:25 am

Miller4ever wrote:ECF in 2 years is my call, as long as the players want to stay. It looks to me like our chemistry is good for a team with our shoddy record.

Who out of the current East elite falls? Cleveland, Boston, or Orlando?

chatard5 · Post #10 » by **chatard5** » Mon Apr 6, 2009 4:29 am

Boston won't be there much longer, they're getting kinda old. They may still have 2 years in um, but I don't see much passed that.

Cleveland was just Lebron, now he has Mo and a couple other players. He can't do it all by himself. Dwight Howard is good, along with Hedo and Lewis (overpaid as hell, though), but I think they need a real PG.

You also have to figure in teams like the Hawks who keep getting better, the Heat with Wade and Beasley, maybe Chicago, and maybe New York if they land some FAs. A lot can change in 2 years.

I think it'll be over 2 years, but if we keep improving like this then it is certainly possible.

DougInOz · Post #11 » by **DougInOz** » Mon Apr 6, 2009 7:14 am

chatard5 wrote:Dwight Howard is good, along with Hedo and Lewis (overpaid as hell, though), but I think they need a real PG.

They should be alright if they get a fit Nelson back?

Anyway, ECF in 2 years sounds good

, even getting to the 2nd round the next 2 years to at least get experience. I miss seeing blue 'n gold in the playoffs

.

Post #12 » by **PR07** » Mon Apr 6, 2009 2:07 pm

Well if we want to be in the ECF, we need to get a stud frontcourt player.

xxSnEaKyPxx · Post #13 » by **xxSnEaKyPxx** » Mon Apr 6, 2009 2:16 pm

I think it would take a lot for us to make the ECF in two years, for one Hibbert needs to stop fouling. Plain and simple, hes had what 77 games to figure this out by now and he still hasn't, so hopefully he works on defense over the summer. If Hibbert can stay on the court, Rush continues to improve, Granger becomes a better playmaker, we get a better option at PG, and we pick up a nice PF to replace Murphy, then I think its possible.

Thats a lot of things that need to happen though and we have the worst luck in the NBA. I think our future is bright for sure, but I imagine it will take a little more than two years, hopefully I'm wrong.

Post #14 » by **count55** » Mon Apr 6, 2009 3:23 pm

PacersRule07 wrote:Well if we want to be in the ECF, we need to get a stud frontcourt player.

I believe, in order for him to be considered a stud, that would have to be spelled "playa."

Just sayin'

Post #15 » by **Scoot McGroot** » Mon Apr 6, 2009 3:43 pm

And he'd have to have "mad skills, yo".

writerman · Post #16 » by **writerman** » Mon Apr 6, 2009 5:59 pm

DGrangeRx33 wrote:I think it would take a lot for us to make the ECF in two years, for one Hibbert needs to stop fouling. Plain and simple, hes had what 77 games to figure this out by now and he still hasn't, so hopefully he works on defense over the summer. If Hibbert can stay on the court, Rush continues to improve, Granger becomes a better playmaker, we get a better option at PG, and we pick up a nice PF to replace Murphy, then I think its possible.

Thats a lot of things that need to happen though and we have the worst luck in the NBA. I think our future is bright for sure, but I imagine it will take a little more than two years, hopefully I'm wrong.

I don't understand at all why everyone seems to think we need to replace Murphy. I think a frontcourt of a developed Hibbert, Murphy, and Granger is a very good one, IMO definitely one that can make us a serious contender. That depends on Hibbert developing, but as I said above, if he does (and I think he will) he's the post presence we need.

As for our backcourt, I just flat out don't understand what you think is wrong with the one we have. We are deep, and I think the Jack/Ford combo at PG is good enough to take us to contention, and the Rush/Dunleavy (if he's healthy) combo at SG is also good enough IMO.

In my mind, the breakthrough depends on the current group staying here and healthy and Hibbert elevating his game. If that happens, I think we can be very good. Look at how we've played the elite teams, and the games we've thrown away--those wins over the elite teams are indications that we have the talent, while the those tough losses are growing pains of developing chemistry with a revamped roster that I think will likely have disappeared by next year.

We need Hibbert to spend the summer with an elite big man coach. The work ethic is there, and I think he's going to be a very good one in this league for a long time to come.

cdash · Post #17 » by **cdash** » Mon Apr 6, 2009 6:26 pm

I really don't think we can be a serious contender with a Hibbert, Murphy, Granger frontcourt. We need a stud frontcourt player like PP said. A low-scoring beast. Hibbert can score in the post, but he can't stay in the game long enough because he fouls way too much.

I don't have a problem with our backcourt, I think if Rush continues his progress and we keep Jack for a relatively low price, then we will be okay.

writerman · Post #18 » by **writerman** » Mon Apr 6, 2009 7:21 pm

cdash wrote:I really don't think we can be a serious contender with a Hibbert, Murphy, Granger frontcourt. We need a stud frontcourt player like PP said. A low-scoring beast. Hibbert can score in the post, but he can't stay in the game long enough because he fouls way too much.

I don't have a problem with our backcourt, I think if Rush continues his progress and we keep Jack for a relatively low price, then we will be okay.

Big men just adjust more slowly to the NBA game. After PG, the five is the hardest position to learn to play effectively. The guy is a rookie, for heaven's sake...and you're ready to write him off? That's pretty foolish and short-sighted. IMO, he's shown more than enough to be very optimistic about.

I think it's a pipe dream to hope to trade for a power forward or sign a free agent (since we have no money) any better than Murphy unless we want to ruin the chemistry (by making yet more roster changes, especially since we already changed half of it this past offseason!) this team has begun to develop, and realistically we have zero chance of getting a good one in this draft. I think Hibbert has the capacity to refine his game, learn not to foul, and become the post presence we need. In his first year, he's no worse and IMO in some ways better than a lot of guys who became highly productive after struggling a bit in their first couple-three years in the league. In fact, I think he's been a fairly quick study.

Post #19 » by **Miller4ever** » Mon Apr 6, 2009 7:33 pm

Let's do a quick comparison between our frontcourt and other contender's frontcourts, in no particular order:

Indiana: Granger, Murphy, Hibbert
Orlando: Turkoglu, Lewis, Howard
Cleveland: James, Varejao, Ilgauskas
Boston: Pierce, Garnett, Perkins
Los Angeles: Ariza, Odom, Gasol
Houston: Battier, Scola, Yao
Dallas: Howard, Nowitzki, Dampier
New Orleans: Wright, West, Armstrong
San Antonio: Finley, Duncan, Bonner
Atlanta: Evans, Smith, Horford
Miami: Moon, Haslem, O'Neal

I think that we have a frontcourt that's lower-end right now, but with Granger's constant improvement and Hibbert promise, I think we can surpass teams like Miami, New Orleans, and Atlanta. Also, we may not have a consistent low-post presence, but we get a lot of points in the paint.

cdash · Post #20 » by **cdash** » Mon Apr 6, 2009 7:39 pm

writerman wrote:
cdash wrote:I really don't think we can be a serious contender with a Hibbert, Murphy, Granger frontcourt. We need a stud frontcourt player like PP said. A low-scoring beast. Hibbert can score in the post, but he can't stay in the game long enough because he fouls way too much.

I don't have a problem with our backcourt, I think if Rush continues his progress and we keep Jack for a relatively low price, then we will be okay.

Big men just adjust more slowly to the NBA game. After PG, the five is the hardest position to learn to play effectively. The guy is a rookie, for heaven's sake...and you're ready to write him off? That's pretty foolish and short-sighted. IMO, he's shown more than enough to be very optimistic about.

I think it's a pipe dream to hope to trade for a power forward or sign a free agent (since we have no money) any better than Murphy unless we want to ruin the chemistry (by making yet more roster changes, especially since we already changed half of it this past offseason!) this team has begun to develop, and realistically we have zero chance of getting a good one in this draft. I think Hibbert has the capacity to refine his game, learn not to foul, and become the post presence we need. In his first year, he's no worse and IMO in some ways better than a lot of guys who became highly productive after struggling a bit in their first couple-three years in the league. In fact, I think he's been a fairly quick study.

Where did I say I was writing Hibbert off? Seriously, I'd love to know where you got that idea from. I made a simple observation that he fouls way too much and can't stay in the game for very long. Am I wrong there? Did I say he will never be able to correct this? No and no. I am okay with Roy in the middle, I just don't think a Hibbert/Murphy frontcourt is ever going to make us a serious contender. We need a PF that scores down low and rebounds a lot (I realize Murphy is a good rebounder, but he isn't a post presence) to pair with Roy.