PDA

View Full Version : Indiana does the texas two-step


EricaLubarsky
01-10-2004, 10:59 PM
and win against Dallas and San Antonio on their home court.

The bad: we got beaten up bad. The good: even though San Antonio bullied the boards and are one of the top defensive teams in the league the Pacers have had layup drills for Artest and Harrington

Pacers forced 22 TOs against the Spurs

edit too quick to my post: a lucky three forces overtime.

Chiwas
01-10-2004, 11:21 PM
Well, the Spurs won, but Indiana looks impressive.

I wonder if they will keep their Pace (i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif ) or get deflated as last season.

22 TO's and no one Spur had more than 4. That's total pressure on the offense. Very good defense by Indiana.

TVI
01-10-2004, 11:21 PM
Originally posted by: EricaLubarsky
and win against Dallas and San Antonio on their home court.

The bad: we got beaten up bad. The good: even though San Antonio bullied the boards and are one of the top defensive teams in the league the Pacers have had layup drills for Artest and Harrington

Pacers forced 22 TOs against the Spurs

edit too quick to my post: a lucky three forces overtime.

Lucky? Hedo is a good 3 point shooter. He's 37.5 % this year. He's 12/17 over the last 6 games!

How about Miller's three from 38 ft. behind the line? Jeez, that guy has no conscience!

TVI
01-10-2004, 11:27 PM
Originally posted by: Chiwas
Well, the Spurs won, but Indiana looks impressive.

I wonder if they will keep their Pace (i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif ) or get deflated as last season.

22 TO's and no one Spur had more than 4. That's total pressure on the offense. Very good defense by Indiana.Indiana is for real. They are good!

That's one area the Spurs will have to improve on as the season progresses.

ReDIRKulous
01-10-2004, 11:42 PM
89 to 88 overtime victory!?!? Good god. What is wrong with the freakin NBA?? The answer -- physical defense.

TVI
01-10-2004, 11:57 PM
Originally posted by: ReDIRKulous
89 to 88 overtime victory!?!? Good god. What is wrong with the freakin NBA?? The answer -- physical defense.The game was extremely physical, but neither team backed down. It was actually a great game!

ReDIRKulous
01-11-2004, 12:16 AM
Originally posted by: TVI

Originally posted by: ReDIRKulous
89 to 88 overtime victory!?!? Good god. What is wrong with the freakin NBA?? The answer -- physical defense.The game was extremely physical, but neither team backed down. It was actually a great game!

Maybe so... but IMO this is what is detroying the NBA. And it ruins a talented team like Dallas' chances of getting anywhere... and all but assures that Shaq, if healthy, will be winning another championship this seaosn. And it doesn't have to be that way. It is an aesthetic choice. Physical basketball games intesify the drama... also there are more fights... which I think the fans want. I just disagree with it. I would rather see skilled players dominate the league. The idea that a team with Shaq would beat a team with Jordan if all other things are equal disturbs me. What even disturbs me more is that a team with a Ron Artest might win a championship before a team with a Dirk.

EricaLubarsky
01-11-2004, 02:02 AM
man this was an embaracing post. I was hoping no one would quote me so I could quickly change things now but oh well. I was watching stats and they got screwed up and said "end of play" when there was actually :14 left and that changed everything!

i/expressions/face-icon-small-blush.gif x1,000

MavKikiNYC
01-11-2004, 07:53 AM
Originally posted by: ReDIRKulous

Originally posted by: TVI

Originally posted by: ReDIRKulous
89 to 88 overtime victory!?!? Good god. What is wrong with the freakin NBA?? The answer -- physical defense.The game was extremely physical, but neither team backed down. It was actually a great game!

Maybe so... but IMO this is what is detroying the NBA. And it ruins a talented team like Dallas' chances of getting anywhere... and all but assures that Shaq, if healthy, will be winning another championship this seaosn. And it doesn't have to be that way. It is an aesthetic choice. Physical basketball games intesify the drama... also there are more fights... which I think the fans want. I just disagree with it. I would rather see skilled players dominate the league. The idea that a team with Shaq would beat a team with Jordan if all other things are equal disturbs me. What even disturbs me more is that a team with a Ron Artest might win a championship before a team with a Dirk.

Man, I don't know how long you've been watching basketball, but the ability to defend, and the ability to impose (or at least match) physical play on an opponent have been a characteristic of the majority of the better NBA teams, and of most of the NBA champions for at least 30 years.

The level of athleticism has certainly improved, but the more physical team has almost always taken an advantage.


What even disturbs me more is that a team with a Ron Artest might win a championship before a team with a Dirk.

More importantly is whether this possibility disturbs Dirk enough for him to do something about it.

Nash13
01-11-2004, 11:21 AM
I look at the Pacer like I look at the Timberwolves. Both teams normally start out good in the season, then blow it the second half of the season, then lose in the first round. This exact same thing happened with the Pacers last year, so i'm not going to send them praises until they at least finish the season as 1st seed.

TVI
01-11-2004, 03:03 PM
Originally posted by: ReDIRKulous
Maybe so... but IMO this is what is detroying the NBA. And it ruins a talented team like Dallas' chances of getting anywhere... and all but assures that Shaq, if healthy, will be winning another championship this seaosn. And it doesn't have to be that way. It is an aesthetic choice. Physical basketball games intesify the drama... also there are more fights... which I think the fans want. I just disagree with it. I would rather see skilled players dominate the league. The idea that a team with Shaq would beat a team with Jordan if all other things are equal disturbs me. What even disturbs me more is that a team with a Ron Artest might win a championship before a team with a Dirk.I've always enjoyed the finesse game, but basketball stopped being a non-contact sport in the 40s.

Also, stricter interpretation of the rules doesn't begin or end with fouls or physical play. Palming, steps, hops, and other means of "advancing the ball" without dribbling shred that rule to peices on a nightly basis. Jordan himself was one of the worst around, and today, everyone does it. It's accepted. Man, Iverson would be called for travelling 80 times a game if they still enforced that one.

Oh well, it it what it is. I just try to enjoy it.

Chiwas
01-11-2004, 03:05 PM
Maybe the jinx of Indiana was gone alongside Thomas.

I see a better system working in this team. Carslile seems to be more effective using the physical aptitudes of his players, than Thomas did.

ReDIRKulous
01-11-2004, 08:04 PM
Man, I don't know how long you've been watching basketball, but the ability to defend, and the ability to impose (or at least match) physical play on an opponent have been a characteristic of the majority of the better NBA teams, and of most of the NBA champions for at least 30 years.

The level of athleticism has certainly improved, but the more physical team has almost always taken an advantage.

This is my point.

I realize that physical defensive teams are more likely to win... because it is more dramatic of a game. It is essentially violence. Physical games are more heated. Which creates more drama. I just totally disagree with it.

The weird thing is... I was watching the Mavs Pacers game and what really stood out.... why is physical defense allowed... but not physical offense? In the same game that physical defense is allowed? Why can the defender block the offensive player and foul him... but the offensive player can't physically charge the defener? It makes no sense.

All I am saying is that we as fans decide how we want the game to be played. If we want teams that play physical defense to win the championship we can have that. If we want skilled offensive teams to win we can have that. It is an aethetic choice of how we want the game to be played/called.

Would you rather have a league that allows the detroit pistons to win the champiosnhip? Or a league that allows team like the Dallas Mavericks?

Why is physical defense respected... but not talented offense like the Mavs?

Why is aShaq allowed to steam roll people to score... but Antoine Walker isn't? It just boggles the mind.

kingrex
01-12-2004, 06:14 PM
More athletic teams have always been tough for this Mavs teams, and that fact hasn't changed as demonstrated by the Pacers.