Posts tagged as:

Solomon Jones

Game #74 Recap: Al Horford REALLY Likes Playing the Pacers

by Tim Donahue on March 28, 2010 at 7:58 pm · 3 comments

Atlanta Hawks 94 – Indiana Pacers 84

————–

Well, you knew it couldn’t go on forever. Heck, you’re probably still not sure that the Pacers really and truly had a five-game winning streak. Regardless, it all ground to a halt in the second half as the Pacer offense that had been running like well-oiled machine seized up.

Atlanta is a tough matchup for our boys in Blue. Their frontcourt is quick and athletic, capable of protecting the rim and controlling the glass. Backcourt mates Joe Johnson, Mike Bibby, and Jamal Crawford all can make you pay if you lose them on the perimeter.

The most glaring advantage Atlanta has is in the pivot, where Al Horford has just destroyed Roy Hibbert all season long. In the first two matchups, Horford has outscored Roy 49-12, outrebounded him 35-13, and recorded 7 blocks vs. only 2 for Roy. Still, those were both played before the first of the year, and Hibbert has made some great strides since then.

Unfortunately, not great enough. A good chunk of the story can be seen on their comparative shot charts:

alvroy

The Pacers tried to work Roy early, but he missed his first four shots as Horford used his strength to force Roy into jump hooks from just a foot or two outside his comfort zone. Meanwhile, Horford continually found himself wide open for 12 to 15-foot jumpers, and he capitalized. Hibbert either got lost in rotations or (understandably) gave the Hawks’ center space due to a lack of foot speed. At the end of the day, Horford posted 18 points and 12 boards, essentially in three quarters of play. Conversely, Roy managed only 6 points and 2 rebounds in 23 ineffectual minutes.

As for the rest of the Pacers, they posted an impressive 31-point 1st 1uarter, buoyed by 6-of-9 shooting from beyond the arc. Brandon Rush drained all four three-point tries in his 12 first quarter minutes, and the Pacers entered the 2nd up 31-26. From there, it was a tough road-a-hoe.

Over the next 36 minutes, the Pacers managed only 53 points while hitting only 2 of their 17 threes. Brandon Rush, who was so hot in the first, didn’t play at all in the second, then went 1-for-5 from the floor the rest of the game and was generally nonexistent. At least twice in the second half, he was completely exploited defensively by Jamal Crawford. Rush committed a dumb foul on Joe Johnson late in the first. It’s unclear as to whether his second quarter absence was some sort of punishment by O’Brien, or if it was because Brandon had two fouls. Unfortunately, there was no Pacer TV coverage, and Mike Wells didn’t make the trip to Atlanta, so we’ll have to wait to find out what happened there.

Danny played a good, bordering on great, floor game today, but couldn’t buy a bucket. He scored 18 points on 7-for-19 shooting. He did play some good defense, and his attacking the basket was creating the few second quarter opportunities the Pacers got. Unfortunately, any day that finds both Danny and Roy struggling to score is pretty much going to doom the Pacers limited offense.

Watson, like Rush, played a fantastic first quarter, then showed us his down side. Josh McRoberts was unable to repeat his recent aerobatics, as he was at an athletic disadvantage to Josh Smith, Marvin Williams, and Al Horford. Solo got the call after McBob’s first rotation, and performed admirably, posting 7 points and 7 boards. AJ Price and Dahntay Jones, God Love ‘em, played like hot garbage. The only Pacer who was able to maintain his play of late was Troy Murphy, with 21 points and 14 rebounds.

Still, despite being overwhelmed by the Hawks, the Pacers largely kept their heads in the game. This wasn’t a game where they just rolled over. No question they were soundly beaten in the second half, but they kept chasing it. The Pacers have had several losses this year where the final score was closer than the game really was. This game was really closer than the fourth quarter and the final score showed.

None of it was good enough, and the Pacers dropped their 47th game in 74 tries. It’s long been a foregone conclusion, but if Toronto holds onto the double-digit lead they hold in Miami late in the third, then the Pacers will officially be mathematically eliminated from the playoffs. One more loss, and the Pacers will be guaranteed of having their worst record in 21 seasons.

{ 3 comments }

Bucks’ Game-Clinching Play vs. the Pacers

by Jared Wade on March 15, 2010 at 7:58 pm · 1 comment

Over on NBA Playbook, Sebastian Pruiti broke down a key play from late in Indiana’s loss to Milwaukee yesterday. Honestly, when a team that has won 11 of its last 12 games has a home date with the Pacers, the real “game clinching” play is probably the opening tip, but Sebastian does give us a nice look at how the Bucks pounded the final nail into the coffin.

Here’s the set-up:

When the Bucks entered the fourth quarter against the Pacers, it looked like it was going to be an easy 12 minutes. The Bucks were leading by 14 at the start of the fourth, and have only allowed 62 points to the Pacers. However, the Pacers decided to make things interesting in the fourth quarter. In fact, with 2:19 left a Solomon Jones dunk made the score 90-94, cutting the lead to 4 points. The Bucks were reeling and they needed a bucket to try and put the game away.

Sebastian then shows exactly what happened in full detail, but the gist is that Solomon Jones and Brandon Rush collectively misread/mishandled a simple up-screen from John Salmons that freed Andrew Bogut for a wide-open bucket at the rim.

Rush, by an large, is a pretty good defender — especially by this roster’s standards. He guards his man rather well when he has the ball and, as we saw in the Laker game during the last West Coast trip, he definitely has the chops to slow down even elite scorers.

But he still does slip up on a lot of the more nuanced stuff. He doesn’t fight through screens consistently and often gets caught napping or just out of position. Veterans are all too often able to find free space while he is guarding them by employing some relatively run-of-the-mill cuts. Sometimes, they don’t even need a screen to get open for a good look.

Of course, this probably isn’t the best representation of Brandon failing in this regard — Solomon simply cannot allow a guy like Bogut to get that much separation so close to the hoop. Most of this bucket is probably on Mr. Jones. Still, Brandon is too often involved in multi-player defensive break downs like this, and his defensive development is not going to progress much beyond where it currently is if he cannot make better off-the-ball decisions/reads.

He seems to have all the foot speed, strength and soft skills to learn how to do everything on the defensive end better. He looks like he may have the potential to be a key perimeter presence in a very good defense some day. That, combined with his shooting and his ability to get to the hoop on occasion is what made a lot of Indy fans glad that the rumored deadline deal with the Bobcats never happened.

The rest of this year and the 2010-11 season will be all about him putting it all together.

{ 1 comment }

The Numbers Behind “Going Small”

by Tim Donahue on January 28, 2010 at 12:49 pm · 5 comments

If the games against Philly and LA are any indication, the pairing of Roy Hibbert and Troy Murphy could be a thing of the past. To back up his new commitment to “Going Small,” O’Brien said:

“In regards to small vs. big lineup the margin is over +320 (favoring small) for the year. We’ll go with it for as many games as we can, as long as we can because that’s our best lineup.”

That +320 number is pretty dazzling, so I wanted to understand it a little better. Basketballvalue.com has some pretty detailed unit statistics that I use pretty regularly to help me understand things. Though I couldn’t quite replicate the +320, the statistical differences still make a pretty damning case against any big lineups the Pacers have.

(Note: All analysis excludes Wednesday’s loss to the Lakers, unless specifically noted otherwise.)

What Constitutes a Big Lineup?

A “big lineup” is something of a misnomer when it comes to the Pacers. Roy Hibbert is the only honest-to-God center on the roster, as well as being the only player over 7-feet tall. The rest of the “bigs” on this team are really either ‘tweeners or straight power forwards.

Generally, when Obie talks about the big lineup, he’s really referring to the Roy/Troy combo. For the purposes of this discussion, however, I’m going to expand that. This roster has three guys whose primary roles are to play center: Roy Hibbert, Jeff Foster and Solomon Jones. Admittedly, it’s a bit of a stretch to say Foster and Jones are true centers, but that is their role here.

“Big lineups” in this analysis will be defined as any lineup with Roy, Jeff or Solomon at center, alongside one of the other two or one of the more traditional power forwards: Troy Murphy, Tyler Hansbrough or Josh McRoberts.

All other units will be considered “small lineups,” including any lineups where Granger, Dahntay Jones or other smaller players are manning the power forward position.

Big vs. Small

Using these definitions, the Pacers have employed a big lineup for 1,202 minutes this season, which equals about 56% of all minutes. With a big lineup on the floor, the Pacers have been outscored by 252 points, resulting in a +/- per 48 minutes of -10.1 points. This is in stark contrast to when the Pacers have gone small this year. In the 958 minutes of small ball, they’ve outscored their opponents by 34 points, translating to a 48 minute +/- of +1.7 points. This gives small lineups a +286 advantage for the year over big lineups.

(I’m not sure why there’s a discrepancy between these numbers and the +320 figure O’Brien used in the press, but it’s possible that he might be including the Murph/Hansbrough pairing as a big lineup. That duo is -45, which would bring the total to +331. I treated all lineups with Murph as a center as small. Regardless, the difference doesn’t materially affect the conclusions.)

Offensively, small lineups are also much more efficient, scoring 6.6 more points per 100 possession than big lineups. Their 105.3 per 100 possession output isn’t anything to write home about (league average offenses put up 106.9), but it is at least significantly better than the big lineup offense that only generates 98.7 per 100. That’s output isn’t quite “New Jersey” bad, but it’s certainly within spitting distance.

Defensively, the Pacers are a middle-of-the-pack team overall, allowing 106.6 points per 100, which puts them just a hair’s breadth better than the league average of 106.9 and ranks them 15th overall. However, the smalls only give up 104.1 points per 100, which is a rate that would put them 7th in the league, while the bigs allow 108.4, which is worse than average but would still land them about 18th overall.

The generic conclusion here is that the smalls would be a good defensive team and a mediocre offensive team. If sustainable over 82 games, this type of performance probably results in a win total in the mid-40s and puts Indiana in the playoffs — in the Eastern Conference, at least.

By the same token, the numbers say the bigs are playing on a par with Minnesota and New Jersey.

However, averages can be deceiving. Also, +/- is one of those stats that is really only useful if you continue to ask questions, and there are some good ones that we can still ask.

Breaking Down the Bigs

Unsurprisingly, Roy gets the lion’s share of the center minutes in the big lineup rotation. Here’s a breakout:

BigsPie

I’ve broken these units down into “BigHibbert,” “BigSolomon” and “BigFoster,” and the nomenclature is relatively self explanatory. Each of these three groupings remain negative in terms of points produced and allowed. The units anchored by Foster are the least negative, being outscored by only 15 points in 244 minutes (or -3.0 per-48). Solo’s groups had the worst per-48 +/- at -13.4, while being outscored by 81 overall. With Roy anchoring the big lineups, opponents score 156 more points than Indiana, or 11.2 points per 48. For the year, the Pacers have only been outscored by 218 points, meaning the BigHibbert group has accounted for 72% of the team’s deficit while playing only 30% of the minutes.

Defensively, all three of these groupings are terrible. BigHibbert and BigSolomon each give up almost 108 points per 100, while BigFoster gives up just a tick over 111. BigFoster’s groupings have shown a little offensive punch by scoring 108.6 per 100, but the other two have been miserable offensively, with BigHibbert only scoring 97.4 and BigSolo scoring a measly 93.4.

However, it’s important to remember that just because these groups carry their names, it is not necessarily an indictment of Roy, Solo or Jeff. The focus here is unit — and more specifically, the big man combos (PF & C). It’s no surprise that Troy Murphy is playing the bulk of the power forward minutes in all these big lineups. To be exact, Murph is on the floor for 62% of all big lineup minutes, and during that time, the Pacers were outscored by 220 points, or 14 points every 48 minutes. They gave up almost 111 points per 100 while scoring only about 96. (We’ll come back to discuss Troy a little bit later.)

As is relatively obvious from the bad overall numbers, there is not much good news here. However, if you’re looking for a silver lining, you can find it in some of the numbers involving Buckaroo Banzai (aka Tyler Hansbrough). In 197 minutes with Tyler at the 4 alongside either Hibbert or Foster, the Pacers were actually +9, with a respectable 108 points per 100 scored vs. 105 points per 100 allowed.

Small Ball

I’ve nce again broken down the lineups by who is playing “center,” and three groups (SmallHibbert, SmallMurphy and SmallSolomon) have accounted for 93% of the minutes. So this is where we’ll focus.

Here’s the chart:

smallpie

The Pacers fared pretty poorly with Solo at Center in small lineups, being outscored by over 13 points for every 48 minutes. The Solo units were bad at both ends, scoring 94 per 100 while giving up over 110. (Truth be told, the Pacers have fared pretty poorly whenever Solo has played this year, so I’m going to operate under the assumption that he’s only going to be an emergency backup going forward.)

In 343 minutes with Troy at the 5, the Pacers have basically held their own. They were a -8 overall, or -1 for every 48 minutes. Oddly enough, the results with Murphy are somewhat counter to the conventional wisdom, as they were mediocre (to bad) offensive units at 103 points per 100, but a solid-to-good defensive units, allowing just under 105.

Small ball with Roy at center has been the most successful. Overall, the Pacers have outscored opponents by 81 in these configurations — or about 10 points per 48. Roy has been one of the few positives on the team, but here, again, it’s important to look at who is playing the four. Doing it for these units makes one conclusion relatively clear: Danny at the 4 is the secret of their success.

As noted at the top, the smalls outscored their opponents by 34 points overall this season. With Danny playing power, the Pacers have been +118 this season, over 10 points better per 48 minutes than the bad guys. From an efficiency standpoint the “DannyPower” lineup scores 111 while only giving up 101 points in every 100 possessions. Both of these numbers are outstanding.

So, the answer is: move Danny to the 4.

Right? Right?

Ehhhhhhhh … I don’t know about that.

The DannyPower Lineup

Once again, we are hit in the face with exactly how poorly the pieces on this team fit together. Roy Hibbert and Troy Murphy are the Pacers’ best big men. They are, respectively, the best center and the best power forward on the roster. However, it’s painfully obvious that they can’t play together effectively. In 468 minutes of floor time, the Pacers have been outscored by 159 points. That equates to just about a disgusting -16 points per 48 minutes. In other words, the Pacers haven’t even been remotely competive when they play together.

Overall, the two of them have played in 98 rotations together.

Take a look at the results of their on-court stretches together, which are broken down by whether they outscore the other team (win), are outscored by their opponents (lose) or match the other squad exactly (draw):

RoyTroy

Even worse than the negative results shown by this chart is the fat that the Hibbert/Murphy big combo has only had positive +/- for an entire game 9 times in the 34 games they played together. They won 6 of those 9 games, with the only losses coming on the road to the Magic, the Spurs, and the T-Puppies. And they lost 23 of the 25 games in which they were negative, winning only in Washington and at home when they mounted that miraculous comeback against Toronto.

However, if you put either one of them at the 5 with Danny at the 4, it generates some real success. The Hibbert/Granger big man combo has been +67 (or +11.6 per-48) so far this year, while a Murph/Granger combo has been +45 (or +14.7 per-48). From an efficiency standpoint, Hibbert/Granger are better offensively (112.6 per 100 vs. 110.5 per 100), but the Murphy/Granger pairing has the edge defensively (97.3 per 100 vs. 100.4 per 100). It should be noted, however, that all of the numbers are outstanding.

So, why balk at making Danny the permanent Power Forward?

Several reasons.

First, it’s important to keep perspective on things. The minutes played by these units are substantial, comparable to most of the other units, but they’re still not huge chunks of time. Combined, they only account for 20% of the 2160 minutes the Pacers have played this season. It is fair to expect the Law of Diminishing Returns to kick in at some point, bringing these numbers back to earth.

Sustaining this level of performance over 70%-75% of the minutes would likely result in a team that was would win 70%-80% of its ames. Surely, we all recognize that as wildly unrealistic. It’s far more likely that raising the playing time on these combos would steadily degrade the result, creating a team capable of winning perhaps half — give or take — of its games.

Second, the Pacers can’t be too wild about the prospect of playing their All-Star Small Forward out of position, though the horse may be out of the barn on this one. Coming into Wednesday’s night game against the Lakers, Danny had played more minutes at the 4 (549) than at his natural position, the 3 (466). He’ll regularly be tasked with guarding bigger, stronger and sometimes quicker players like Chris Bosh, Dirk Nowitzki, Kevin Garnett and Pau Gasol. Add to this the fact that he’s a relatively poor rebounder, and neither Troy nor Hibbert even approximates a dominant inside force. I’d have a hard time believing that anyone within or outside of the Pacer organization could see that as sustainable.

Third, the ripple effect exposes Indy’s lack of depth at the wing position. Danny and Mike are the only true small forwards with size on the roster. Dahntay, at 6’5″, is undersized for a 3, but lacks the shooting range requisite for a SG. Brandon Rush brings nice size, but given the pace of play and the inconsistency of performance on the wing, we will potentially see a steady diet of Luther Head. Plus, if you’re going small all the time, then Dahntay Jones will actually see some amount of time at the 4 — a position where he has logged more than 200 minutes this year.

Fourth, opponents must be taken into account. The Hibbert/Granger combo got a little fat off of losing teams, getting 58% of their minutes and a +45 against them. Even so, this story is an overall positive. The Pacers played 207 minutes against winning teams with Danny at the 4, next to either Roy or Troy. In that time, their offensive efficiency was a stunning 113 points per 100 possessions, and their defensive efficiency was just over 97. And they outscored the opponent during that time by 69 points.

Finally, it could potentially interfere with playing time for Roy Hibbert and Tyler Hansbrough. Assuming Jeff Foster isn’t going to return soon, a total commitment to small ball would essentially force Troy and Roy to split the 48 center minutes and never play the 4.

Against the Lakers, Hibbert played 28 minutes and Murphy played 27, but I wouldn’t expect that to be a common event any more. Bynum and Gasol were killing the Pacers inside all game, but when Hibbert and Murphy started the second half together, the team was outscored by 7 points in the first four minutes — hardly a harbinger of good things to come. Following that line of reasoning further says that Danny will chew up the majority of the PF minutes, leaving only scraps for Buckaroo Banzai (once he returns from his viral inner ear infection).

A Beggar’s Choice

Despite all of the things previously noted, I’m hard-pressed to disagree with O’Brien’s assessment of the situation. While I can point out all of the bad things that may happen down this path, I can’t really point out any better alternatives. I’m sure I won’t quite agree with the minute distribution between Troy and Roy, but I don’t really think that’s a huge game changer.

It really seems to me that the numbers basically indicate:

Any combination of (quasi) traditional Pacer bigs = Bad
Danny on the floor at the 4 = Better than the alternatives
A big man combo of Roy and Troy = Death

So, looking tactically, small ball seems to be the most promising way to make this particular team competitive — or, at least, less un-competitive — in the short term. If nothing else, maybe just settling in on one course of action and going with it will give the illusion of a little quiet. It’s time for O’Brien to stop shuffling and just see if he can create a cohesive unit.

However, I really doubt it will make much difference — at least not in the standings. The hole is too deep, and the cupboard is too bare. Right now, this isn’t so much a case of confusing activity with accomplishment as it is a case of having activity when there’s simply no accomplishment to be had.

beggars choosers

The grass is always greener on the other side of the Venn diagram.

{ 5 comments }

Game #30 Recap: Pacers Play the Heel

by Jared Wade on December 30, 2009 at 12:27 pm · 0 comments

Pacers	@	Bulls
95	Score	104
2	Largest Lead	19
100.0	Offensive Efficiency	109.5
46.1%	eFG%	56.9%
41.1% (37/90)	FG%	52.8% (38/72)
37.5% (9/24)	3PT%	60% (6/10)
66.7% (12/18)	FT%	91.7% (22/24)
31 (8)	Rebounds (Off.)	47 (7)
11 (7)	Turnovers (Points Led To)	21 (17)
30	Points in the Paint	20
11	Fast Break Points	11
27	Assists	24
6	Steals	4
1	Blocks	6

It was another ugly one, folks.

The Pacers came out missing everything and dug themselves a 19-point deficit by the end of the first quarter. Improved accuracy, better defense and an impressive-as-hell Josh McRoberts cameo in the second cut the lead to 4 at the half, and Indy even managed to thief the lead momentarily in the third quarter. But that house of cards was quickly blown down by the sonic boom left in the wake of Derrick Rose — and, oddly, Brad Miller — as they continually got by defenders and scored easily in the final 12 minutes.

More than anything, this game felt like a lot of the undercard wrestling matches I watched as a kid. On Saturday afternoon (or whenever these shows used to be on before the whole Monday Night Raw thing took off in primetime), there would only ever be one or two matches that were actually interesting (much like how last night in the NBA only Cavs/Hawks and perhaps Rockets/Hornets were marquee match ups).

But they still had an hour to fill. So, early in the show, someone like Jake the Snake would square off with an also-ran like The Brooklyn Brawler just to kill 10 minutes in between Cocoa Pebbles and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle action figure commercials.

Jake the Snake would come out to much fanfare and quickly start pounding away on the Brawler. A few punches to the face, a clothesline, a body slam and maybe even a supplex or two. Then, out of nowhere, the Brawler would catch Jake with a nutshot that turned the tide. He would pick Jake up, give em an eye gouge and throw in off the ropes before slamming him to the canvas. He would work Roberts over in the corner for a while, pummeling away on his skull until it looked like we might actually have a legitimate fight on our hands.

But, of course, that was all a ruse. The Brawler was never going to win that fight.

Jake got up, landed a few punches, swept the leg and then waited for the Brooklyn Brawler to get up before unleashing the match-ending DDT to put the lights out.

1-2-3.

Jake the Snake wins. Play the music.

The Pacers did an admirable job of keeping the game close last night during the middle portions, but the beginning and the end all belonged to the Bulls. And I don’t think anyone in the building really thought the Pacers were ever going to seize enough control of the game to take it over and win — even during the brief stretch in the third quarter when they took a 70-68 lead.

In fact, that was the exact moment the wheels fell off as quickly as it inevitably did for the Brooklyn Brawler.

John Salmons, a guy who had recently shot his way out of the Bulls starting lineup by going 26/81 (32.1%) in his last 8 games, hit a three. Dahntay Jones answered with a bucket of his own but the Bulls came back with a flurry of jumpers and free throws that fueled the 16-2 run over the final 6 minutes of the third quarter that ended Indy’s slim chance at a comeback win.

While the defensive lapses that allowed threes/long jumpers to Salmons, Brad Miller and Luol Deng were disheartening, it was the Pacers inability to put up any points up on the other end that all but determined the final outcome before the third quarter even ended. How an offense can so often go so long looking so inept, I’ll never understand, but, sure enough, the Pacers once again managed to go 6 minutes and 51 seconds without making a single field goal. (Two Earl Watson free throws were the only points Indy put up during the 16-2 run.)

The stretch just featured too many wasted possessions for me to recount. Too much standing around. Too many useless dribbles (I’m looking at you on that one Luther Head). Too many non-advantage creating swing passes (I’m looking at you, Coach).

Ultimately, too many bad shots.

And after that futility, all it took was a DDT from Derrick Rose in the form of his 11 fourth-quarter points (on an easy as Sunday morning 5/5 shooting) to complete the predetermined outcome that we all knew was coming even in the first quarter.

My advice to Pacers fans: Eat your vitamins and say your prayers, brother.

Five Bright Spots

(1) Josh McRoberts had a stellar second quarter and a good game overall. His alley-oop/three-pointer/alley-oop sequence was perhaps the highlight of the season. I really wish I was kidding, but I’m not even sure that I am. (OK, the Boston game was the highlight, I suppose, but this was certainly top five.)

(2) DUNKS. There were a bunch of them. Like, to the point Indy looked like a normal NBA team in terms of athleticism and getting easy buckets even. Unfortunately, dunks in the this league are often seen by fans more as signs of flashy, highlight reel decadence than what they really are: Easy shots to make. I’m not saying you can’t win if you can’t dunk (just ask Gregg Popovich how that is done), but those extra 5-6 dunks most teams other than the Pacers seem to get each night equal 10-12 points. That’s a big deal, particularly since guys like TJ Ford and Jeff Foster seem to miss so many layups — layups that many of the other players in the league would be dunking. As far as the Bulls game specifically, the two aforementioned McRoberts oops were the marquee ones, but Roy had a few and so did Solomon Jones. Speaking of…

(3) Solomon Jones. He looked good in his first-ever Pacer start. Only 3 rebounds in 23 minutes is Hibbertesque bad, but 6/9 shooting for 13 points is more than expected. Particularly since he didn’t seem to blow as many defensive assignments as usual, and he actually looked comfortable catching and shooting without hesitation (something that still eludes Tyler and Brandon Rush). Hopefully this endorsement from Coach O’Brien will give him a little confidence and keep him more engaged out there going forward.

(4) Pump fakes. I’m not sure whether it was just the fact that, as Tim Donahue tweeted during the game, “the Bulls are long on stupid,” but they sure did fall for a ton of shot fakes. Dunleavy had a few effective ones, Murph — per usual — did as well and Luther Head had one that just embarrassed the defender. Even Hibbert had some nice little up-and-under thing that I don’t really support him doing since he’s, ya know, 7 foot 2, but was nonetheless productive. I suppose most of this can just be attributed to Chicago employed Tyrus Thomas, but it might have been the best skill I’ve seen the Pacers master so far this season over a 48-minute stretch.

(5) There is no five. Sorry for lying, but I like round numbers. OK … here’s something: We got to see former Pacer fan favorite Brad Miller go by someone off the dribble on multiple occasions for the first time since, let’s say, 2006. Thanks for instigating some nostalgia, Roy Hibbert. And while I’ve got you here, please stop having nights where you miss 60% of your shots, please and thank you. You’re 7’2″, dude.

the brooklyn brawler

He even dresses like Josh McRoberts.

{ 0 comments }

← Older Stuff

Newer Stuff →