IS J.O'B THE MAN FOR THE JOB?

[xxSnEaKyPxx]

I will say one thing for Obie: He gets effort out of his players. They don't quit on him. That may sound like something small, but in today's NBA, it's a pretty impressive feat. Part of that could be the character of the guys on our team, but it's worth noting nonetheless.

i don't understand why everyone is saying this. Look at our team, most the players on our team are known for work ethic and passion. I don't understand why he gets all the credit when Bird purposely brought in guys for that purpose.

I'm not trying to discredit O'Brien in that sense, he did do a good job of making sure everyone played hard every night, but I think a lot of those guys were like that anyway.

[Miller4ever]

Eh...Murphy?

[cdash]

I will say one thing for Obie: He gets effort out of his players. They don't quit on him. That may sound like something small, but in today's NBA, it's a pretty impressive feat. Part of that could be the character of the guys on our team, but it's worth noting nonetheless.

i don't understand why everyone is saying this. Look at our team, most the players on our team are known for work ethic and passion. I don't understand why he gets all the credit when Bird purposely brought in guys for that purpose.

I'm not trying to discredit O'Brien in that sense, he did do a good job of making sure everyone played hard every night, but I think a lot of those guys were like that anyway.

Evidently you missed the last sentence in my post.

[Scoot McGroot]

scoot and jackson are on my list.

Thanks for the ringing endorsement, but I have to take my name out of the running now. I'm just unable to make the time commitment to the Indiana Pacers.

[PR07]

I also think you could at least contribute some of Granger's offensive improvement to O'Brien and his system. Would he have done that under Carlisle? It's hard to say.

[fienX420]

He'll get his shot this year and he deserves at least that much. If we don't make the playoffs, then he's sealed his fate. I'm pulling for him. My only real beef with him is some of the small lineups. I just don't like to give up size. I don't like Jack at the 2. Also, talk is cheap - our defense needs to seriously improve.

[cdash]

He'll get his shot this year and he deserves at least that much. If we don't make the playoffs, then he's sealed his fate. I'm pulling for him. My only real beef with him is some of the small lineups. I just don't like to give up size. I don't like Jack at the 2. Also, talk is cheap - our defense needs to seriously improve.

I'd rather give up size than talent.

[fienX420]

Sorry, but when is that really an issue? I don't think playing Ford and Jack together in the back-court is more talent-heavy than having Rush at the 2. And the bottom line is that Jack can't defend 2-guards efficiently. He's pretty good at guarding 1s. Use him where we get the most out of his talent. We have players that fit traditional positions very well - it's dumb to get too 'smart' moving them all around. When Dunleavy is healthy, sure - you can throw out a 'small' lineup with Granger at PF every once in awhile. Otherwise, we need to keep our players where they belong.

[cdash]

Sorry, but when is that really an issue? I don't think playing Ford and Jack together in the back-court is more talent-heavy than having Rush at the 2. And the bottom line is that Jack can't defend 2-guards efficiently. He's pretty good at guarding 1s. Use him where we get the most out of his talent. We have players that fit traditional positions very well - it's dumb to get too 'smart' moving them all around. When Dunleavy is healthy, sure - you can throw out a 'small' lineup with Granger at PF every once in awhile. Otherwise, we need to keep our players where they belong.

Playing Ford and Jack together isn't more talent heavy than playing Rush. Why? Because Rush is more talented than either one of them.

[fienX420]

That's what I was saying.

[cdash]

That's what I was saying.

Oh, ****. I didn't read the end of your post. I thought when you said something about the smaller lineups, you meant with Granger at the 4 and Murphy at the 5. My bad.

[fienX420]

It's cool. Murphy at the 5, Granger at the 4 doesn't really give up that much size. Murphy still pulls down boards. And they're lethal from outside. If only we had someone better at taking advantage of all that spacing...!

[8305]

I like the effort seen night in night out and that the Pacers continued to compete even after the playoffs were out reach. The coach has to get some credit for this. I also like the style of pay. While you would like to have seen this team in the playoffs the last couple of years I don't think you can say this team underachieved. All you can ask the coach to do is get the best out of what he has. By and large this has been done.

This season will be key. If this team is healthy, there is sufficient talent and experience to make the playoffs. Winning somewhere between 42 and 46 games is not unrealistic. Something less than that and you have to start looking at the coach.