# Well if TicN9neZ8 is back...



## Pooh (Jun 1, 2003)

I guess I'll have to start posting more now too!  But I'm sure "MillerTime" will make sure that I visit here on a more frequent basis. Less than a week away from the season opener against the Pistons

I don't know about anyone else, but I'm sick of all the prognosticators (if its spelled wrong...  haha) who are saying that we're the third best team in the East and 9th or 10th over all. That's a load of crap.

Clearly we're a solid 2nd in the East, and I would put us up at or near 7th or 8th in the overall standings. So lets get this thing going.


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Pooh</b>!
> I guess I'll have to start posting more now too!  But I'm sure "MillerTime" will make sure that I visit here on a more frequent basis. Less than a week away from the season opener against the Pistons
> 
> I don't know about anyone else, but I'm sick of all the prognosticators (if its spelled wrong...  haha) who are saying that we're the third best team in the East and 9th or 10th over all. That's a load of crap.
> ...


So you are saying you are better than the Nets and or Pistons????


----------



## TLR (May 28, 2003)

I think we are better than the Pistons.


----------



## Starbury03 (Aug 12, 2003)

No your not the Pistons are to big they have too many good big men.


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TLR</b>!
> I think we are better than the Pistons.


How so? You lost an integeral part of your team in Brad Miller, Oneal's back is not 100%, Bender is hurt and Pistons lost no one and even gained some valuable pieces.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

I also think we are better than the pistons. We lost Miller but gained a great coach and coaching was our biggest problem last year.


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>R-Star</b>!
> I also think we are better than the pistons. We lost Miller but gained a great coach and coaching was our biggest problem last year.


So gaining Carlisle and losing Miller and Oneal and Bender being hurt is better than the Pistons gaining, LARRY BROWN, Darko Milicic, Elden Campbell, Bob Sura and Darko Milicic makes you guys better than the Pistons?


----------



## TLR (May 28, 2003)

Brad Miller is just slightly above average. There is not that big of a drop off production wise between him and Pollard. O'Neal's back will be just fine. In proffesional sports there is no such thing as being 100% healthy. Guys will play every game with nagging injuries. Bender will be back soon. I think we have always been more talented than the Pistons, but we had inept coaching. Now we have an awesome coach and I think we will represent the east in the Finals this year.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BEEZ</b>!
> 
> 
> So gaining Carlisle and losing Miller and Oneal and Bender being hurt is better than the Pistons gaining, LARRY BROWN, Darko Milicic, Elden Campbell, Bob Sura and Darko Milicic makes you guys better than the Pistons?


Larry Brown is not a better coach than Rick Carlisle, Darko will do nothing this year, Campbell is not as good as Pollard IMO and Sura is past the time where he will be a big factor. So yes, I do think that made us better.


----------



## Pooh (Jun 1, 2003)

Yes we are equal if not a little better than the Nets. Clearly we're better than the Pistons.

We have a coach who is familar with the team, and the organization. He won't be treated like he did while over at Detroit. The Pistons now have a coach who changes teams like a woman changes her mind...

The Nets are just an injury away from losing it all. Mourning wasn't an upgrade. He's a major "question mark". Kidd is running out of steam. The only great move Kidd did during the off season was bend the Spurs over and do a "Ned Beatty" on them.

Right now, we have a lot of players hurt and yes, JO isn't 100 percent right now, but I would rather him get healthy as the season goes on rather than fall apart when we need him most.


----------



## TLR (May 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>BEEZ</b>!
> 
> 
> So gaining Carlisle and losing Miller and Oneal and Bender being hurt is better than the Pistons gaining, LARRY BROWN, Darko Milicic, Elden Campbell, Bob Sura and Darko Milicic makes you guys better than the Pistons?


Brad Miller is the most overated player in the league. If we don't win the east this year it will not be because we lost Brad Miller. Carlisle is a better coach than Larry Brown. O'Neal will play the whole season and have a monster year. He is the second best player in the East, behind T-Mac IMHO. Bender will be back in like 2 weeks or so. Darko Milicic will be Nikoloz Skitishvili v. 2 in his first year. There is no way this guy is gonna come in and have a major impact. He doesn't even speak english yet. Bob Sura is a downgrade from Uncle Cliffy. and I'm not gonna lose sleep over Elden Campbell.


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TLR</b>!
> 
> 
> Brad Miller is the most overated player in the league. If we don't win the east this year it will not be because we lost Brad Miller. Carlisle is a better coach than Larry Brown. O'Neal will play the whole season and have a monster year. He is the second best player in the East, behind T-Mac IMHO. Bender will be back in like 2 weeks or so. Darko Milicic will be Nikoloz Skitishvili v. 2 in his first year. There is no way this guy is gonna come in and have a major impact. He doesn't even speak english yet. Bob Sura is a downgrade from Uncle Cliffy. and I'm not gonna lose sleep over Elden Campbell.


well your argument is null and void because of your statement right here
http://basketballboards.net/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=39465

You said he was the best center in the east. Now Jermaine Oneal is better than Paul Pierce, Allen Iverson and Vince Carter. Carlisle a better coach that Brown is laughable


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Pooh</b>!
> ...
> 
> The Nets are just an injury away from losing it all. Mourning wasn't an upgrade. He's a major "question mark". Kidd is running out of steam. The only great move Kidd did during the off season goes on rather than fall apart when we need him most.


This statement is hearsay wouldnt you say. If thats the case Indiana is one injury away(Oneal) from losing it all. AM I correct?


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>R-Star</b>!
> 
> 
> Larry Brown is not a better coach than Rick Carlisle, Darko will do nothing this year, Campbell is not as good as Pollard IMO and Sura is past the time where he will be a big factor. So yes, I do think that made us better.


Carlisle's been a head coach how long? Hes been to how many finals. Larry Brown's been a coach how long? Hes been to how many finals?


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BEEZ</b>!
> 
> 
> Carlisle's been a head coach how long? Hes been to how many finals. Larry Brown's been a coach how long? Hes been to how many finals?


Rick was in the finals the year before Brown was. Everyone knows Bird was only a figure head coach who was there to inspire. Carslisle wrote the plays and told the players what to do. Last time he was here we made the finals, look at it that way.


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>R-Star</b>!
> 
> 
> Rick was in the finals the year before Brown was. Everyone knows Bird was only a figure head coach who was there to inspire. Carslisle wrote the plays and told the players what to do. Last time he was here we made the finals, look at it that way.


Thats not answering the question.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

He hasent been a head coach very long, and hes been to the Finals once. Theres your questions answered.


----------



## Brian. (Jul 11, 2002)

Come on Beez cleary the pacers are better. I mean Brad Miller only averaged 10 and 7 last year who wouldn't want to replace him with Pollard who averaged 5 and 5. I am sure Carlisle will get along with the pacers much better than the pistons I mean Ron Artest seems like such a great guy and its not like Reggie Miller is getting any older. On a serious note though I don't think either team is much better than the other at this point. It will probably come down to the last few games of the season.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Brian</b>!
> Come on Beez cleary the pacers are better. I mean Brad Miller only averaged 10 and 7 last year who wouldn't want to replace him with Pollard who averaged 5 and 5. I am sure Carlisle will get along with the pacers much better than the pistons I mean Ron Artest seems like such a great guy and its not like Reggie Miller is getting any older. On a serious note though I don't think either team is much better than the other at this point. It will probably come down to the last few games of the season.


I can agree with us being head to head, unless theres another melt down by the team this year. I think you are under appreciating Pollard though. He was 5-5 on the Kings, he will see his minutes go through the roof this year and he will also see lighter competition.


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>R-Star</b>!
> 
> 
> I can agree with us being head to head, unless theres another melt down by the team this year. I think you are under appreciating Pollard though. He was 5-5 on the Kings, he will see his minutes go through the roof this year and he will also see lighter competition.


He didnt put up major minutes when he was with the Pistons


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BEEZ</b>!
> 
> 
> He didnt put up major minutes when he was with the Pistons


:curse:Ill kill you Beez, Ill kill you!:upset:


----------



## TLR (May 28, 2003)

He was the best center in the east but that is not saying much. Beez, that's like you saying your girlfriend is the prettiest girl in the whole trailor park. It's not saying much. He will put up the same kind of numbers in Sacramento that a healthy Pollard did. Pollard won't put up 13 and 8 numbers, but I am realisticly expecting around 8 and 8. That is the same number of rebounds and it gives more shots to guys like Harrignton and Bender. We are a better team than last year based simply on our coach and players improving like Jermaine, Bender, and Harrington. 

I will say it is a two horse race in the division between us and Detroit. Chicago is kidding themselves. But on paper it looks like we have more talent. They don't play games on paper, so we will have to wait and see until about March or April. 

Carlisle is a better coach than Brown. Brown is a traveling salesman who will be gone on to another team in 3 years to tell more lies to their front office. He also can never build on a team, just tear it down and start again. He also does not develop people well. Can you tell me one rookie or young player that he has given significant mintutes to and let them grow? If they fired Carlisle because he didn't develop Prince, than do they excpect Brown to come in there and make him a starting calibe player? 

And Jermaine being the second best player in the conference is a matter of opinion. If you think Iverson is better more power to ya. But, I wouldn't say a guy who has barely played the last 2 years is better than Jermaine.


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TLR</b>!
> He was the best center in the east but that is not saying much. Beez, that's like you saying your girlfriend is the prettiest girl in the whole trailor park. It's not saying much. He will put up the same kind of numbers in Sacramento that a healthy Pollard did. Pollard won't put up 13 and 8 numbers, but I am realisticly expecting around 8 and 8. That is the same number of rebounds and it gives more shots to guys like Harrignton and Bender. We are a better team than last year based simply on our coach and players improving like Jermaine, Bender, and Harrington.
> 
> I will say it is a two horse race in the division between us and Detroit. Chicago is kidding themselves. But on paper it looks like we have more talent. They don't play games on paper, so we will have to wait and see until about March or April.
> ...


hmmm your post is flawed. He turned Snow into a good PG, hes made Iverson what he is today. To even THINK that at this stage in his career that Oneal is better than Iverson is ridiculous. You said a guy who has barely played the last 2 years. Iverson played all 82 games last year plus playoffs and 60 the year before plus playoffs. He will play with his arm hanging off if he could. Iverson played in a possible 140 regular season games the last 2 years Oneal 149. Sorry Try again.

Also you still have not said why Carlisle is a better coach than Larry Brown


----------



## TLR (May 28, 2003)

You misunderstood me. I was refferring to Vince Carter when I said a guy who has barely played the last two years. And like I said, if you think Iverson is better then I have no problem. But, personally if I was building a team I would take Jermaine over AI.

Carlisle is a better coach because he took a team that was 32-50 and made them the best defensive team, central division champions, and 50 game winners. Also Carlisle beat Brown in the playoffs last year which should count for something.


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TLR</b>!
> You misunderstood me. I was refferring to Vince Carter when I said a guy who has barely played the last two years. And like I said, if you think Iverson is better then I have no problem. But, personally if I was building a team I would take Jermaine over AI.
> 
> Carlisle is a better coach because he took a team that was 32-50 and made them the best defensive team, central division champions, and 50 game winners. Also Carlisle beat Brown in the playoffs last year which should count for something.


So because he did this in a few years. Hes a proven commodity to be be better than Larry Brown whose been doing what you said for years? Sorry about the Ai thing


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BEEZ</b>!
> 
> 
> So because he did this in a few years. Hes a proven commodity to be be better than Larry Brown whose been doing what you said for years? Sorry about the Ai thing


Your lucky you didnt reply to my post. Im comming for you.

And Brown has been doing nothing significant for years. Taking the Sixers to the East finals is great and all, but like I've said Carlisle did the same thing the year before with the Pacers. Only difference is, the Pacers took the Lakers to 6 games, and had a blowout in game 5, which no one else has done in the playoffs against them. Larry took them to 5 games.


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>R-Star</b>!
> 
> 
> Your lucky you didnt reply to my post. Im comming for you.
> ...


The Lakers the year the Pacers played them were better than the Lakers team that beat the Sixers. And the year the Pacers went to the Finals and they beat the Sixers didnt they have a better team than the 2001 Finals Sixers team


----------



## TLR (May 28, 2003)

It's no question who's had the better career. Larry Brown has. But, right now I would take Carlisle. He's the best young coach out there.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BEEZ</b>!
> 
> 
> The Lakers the year the Pacers played them were better than the Lakers team that beat the Sixers. And the year the Pacers went to the Finals and they beat the Sixers didnt they have a better team than the 2001 Finals Sixers team


I agree, they were better playing the Pacers, with Glenn as a viable 3rd option at the time.


----------



## MLKG (Aug 25, 2003)

Hahaha, Pollard. You guys are killing me. Take it from a Pistons fan, Pollard is absolute junk. 

I can't believe you guys think Carlisle is a better coach than Larry Brown. Larry Brown is plain and simple the best coach in the NBA. He has already made a difference in Detroit in terms of making players better. Have fun this year when Carlisle forbids your team from fast breaking and forbids your point guard from calling any of his own plays- the stuff extended scoring droughts are made of.

Just wait until you see what Brown and his staff have done with Wallace's offensive game.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

I love how you Pistons fans are so quick to dismiss what Carslile did for you. Just last year I remember alot of you making comments to Pacer fans about how we were stupid for letting him go. Dont forget you were a garbage bottom feeder team before he came. I would think thats something that would have you singing his praise. 

How quickly some forget............


----------



## MLKG (Aug 25, 2003)

Hey, I like Rick Carlisle and think he's a great coach. But he absolutely stiffled Chauncey Billups last year. 

Nobody is downplaying what Carlisle did, just saying you are CRAZY if you think he is a better coach than Larry Brown.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mike luvs KG</b>!
> Hey, I like Rick Carlisle and think he's a great coach. But he absolutely stiffled Chauncey Billups last year.
> 
> Nobody is downplaying what Carlisle did, just saying you are CRAZY if you think he is a better coach than Larry Brown.


At this stage in their careers, I would still pick Rick.


----------



## MillerTime (Jul 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Mike luvs KG</b>!
> Hahaha, Pollard. You guys are killing me. Take it from a Pistons fan, Pollard is absolute junk.


Pollard is better defensivly and a better rebounder then BMiller. Exactly what Carlisle likes. Bender and Harrington will score more, and we will give us less points.


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>MillerTime</b>!
> 
> 
> Pollard is a better rebounder then BMiller.


Since when????


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BEEZ</b>!
> 
> 
> Since when????


Since always. Look at any article and it will say Pollard is the better defender and rebounder, but Miller is better on the offence and not nearly as bad at getting fouls.


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>R-Star</b>!
> 
> 
> Since always. Look at any article and it will say Pollard is the better defender and rebounder, but Miller is better on the offence and not nearly as bad at getting fouls.


Pollard has avg more rebounds in his career than Miller?


----------



## MillerTime (Jul 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>BEEZ</b>!
> 
> 
> Pollard has avg more rebounds in his career than Miller?


Pollard: 14.1 minutes/game = 4.6 rebounds per game
BMiller: 31.1 minutes/game = 8.3 rebounds per game

So...... do the math buddy. Btw, Pollard will be getting over 30 minutes per game this season. I'll let you grab a calculater and digest it for a while.


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>MillerTime</b>!
> 
> 
> Pollard: 14.1 minutes/game = 4.6 rebounds per game
> ...


I just asked a question? I didnt know


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

No need for this to turn ugly. Lets all be civil (Ill still kill you though Beez, sleep with one eye open buddy).

I dont think we will miss Miller as much as alot of people think. Millers numbers will go down from being out west, and Pollards will go up from being in the east. Simple as that.


----------



## DetBNyce (Jul 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>R-Star</b>!
> 
> 
> Since always. Look at any article and it will say Pollard is the better defender and rebounder, but Miller is better on the offence and not nearly as bad at getting fouls.


How can you say look at any article when you blatantly ignore any article or gms' that say Brown is the better coach...


----------



## jvanbusk (Jun 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>R-Star</b>!
> I love how you Pistons fans are so quick to dismiss what Carslile did for you. Just last year I remember alot of you making comments to Pacer fans about how we were stupid for letting him go. Dont forget you were a garbage bottom feeder team before he came. I would think thats something that would have you singing his praise.
> 
> How quickly some forget............


I think you need to be bad more than one year to be classified as a 'garbage bottom feeder' team. Before the 30-52 year, we were a playoff team every year.

I like Rick. I think he's a good coach, but his substitution patterns are crazy. He showed in Detroit that he doesn't develop young players. We might have had a chance in the Eastern Finals, had Prince and Okur been more polished throughout the season. Larry Brown will do that for us. He is widely regarded as a top 3 coach in the NBA, and he will develop the talent we have. There is a reason many around the league are calling the Mehmet Okur's breakout year. If Carlisle was still in town calling the shots, I would be willing to bet that the Pistons starting center would be Elden Campbell. Not that there would be anything too terribly wrong with that, but the Pistons need to develop and play their young guns. 

As far as Brad Miller vs. Scot Pollard, I hope this is a sick joke. If you think that Scot Pollard is anywhere near the player that Brad Miller is, your wrong. Pistons fans saw first hand what kind of player Pollard was.


----------



## TLR (May 28, 2003)

And what did Larry Brown do in Philly that makes you think he will suddenly turn your young players into all stars? Larry Brown never plays rookies or young players that will make mistakes. 

Also another thing you guys haven't mentioned once is *Rick Carlisle beat Larry Brown in the playoffs*. That counts for nothing?

Today, if I had to pick one coach I would take Rick Carlisle.


----------



## TLR (May 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>jvanbusk</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> As far as Brad Miller vs. Scot Pollard, I hope this is a sick joke. If you think that Scot Pollard is anywhere near the player that Brad Miller is, your wrong. Pistons fans saw first hand what kind of player Pollard was.



I agree that Brad Miller is a better player than Pollard. But you guys are way overrating Brad. He is not god's gift to the center position. Pollard will just do his job. Grab a lot of rebounds and play defense. It leaves more shots to Harrignton and Bender, who I would rather have shooting than Brad Miller anyways.


----------



## jvanbusk (Jun 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TLR</b>!
> And what did Larry Brown do in Philly that makes you think he will suddenly turn your young players into all stars? Larry Brown never plays rookies or young players that will make mistakes.
> 
> Also another thing you guys haven't mentioned once is *Rick Carlisle beat Larry Brown in the playoffs*. That counts for nothing?
> ...


Larry Brown did a very good job with Allen Iverson and Rick Carlisle didn't beat Larry Brown in the playoffs. The Detroit Pistons beat the Philadelphia 76ers. If their roles were reversed, there is no doubt in my mind that the Pistons still would have won that series.



> I agree that Brad Miller is a better player than Pollard. But you guys are way overrating Brad. He is not god's gift to the center position. Pollard will just do his job. Grab a lot of rebounds and play defense. It leaves more shots to Harrignton and Bender, who I would rather have shooting than Brad Miller anyways.


Therefore, you downgraded at the center position. You said it yourself, "Brad Miller is a better player than Pollard." Thank you for atleast admitting that.


----------



## MLKG (Aug 25, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>TLR</b>!
> And what did Larry Brown do in Philly that makes you think he will suddenly turn your young players into all stars? Larry Brown never plays rookies or young players that will make mistakes.
> 
> Also another thing you guys haven't mentioned once is *Rick Carlisle beat Larry Brown in the playoffs*. That counts for nothing?
> ...


Ummm, Eric Snow? 

Larry Brown is the best teacher in the game. People always assume that means he can turn bad rookies into good players, and although that has happened, he doesn't only teach rookies. Larry Brown has the ability to make you a better player no matter how old you are. Ben Wallace is already a vastly improved post player and he has been working with him for little more than a month. 

Larry Brown is also a much better X's and O's coach than Carlisle. Rick's plays simply didn't do well to play to the teams strengths- which is Rip Hamilton. Last year people said Rip would dissapear in the fourth quarter of games, well that was because he wasn't getting the ball in his hands and, as Carlisle called every play off the bench, that is the fault of the coach. So far this year Rip is getting the ball a lot more and a lot closer to the basket and he is scoring more.

Also, Rick Carlisle did not beat Larry Brown last year. Tayshaun Prince and Chauncey Billups beat Larry Brown last year. Detroit was simply a better team. It's also fun to note that Tay and Chauncey have quickly become his favorite players in Detroit.

You guys have said that Rick Carlisle was the reason for Indy's success when Bird was coach. Well, it also can be said that Kevin O'Neal was the reason for Carlisle's success in Detroit. Detroit won games last year with defense, and O'Neal handled all of the defense. Carlisle's job was the offense, which struggled mightily last year.


----------



## TLR (May 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>jvanbusk</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Addition by subtraction. Less shots for the center makes more shots for Harrington and Bender who I would rather have taking shots than Brad Miller anyways.


----------



## TLR (May 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Mike luvs KG</b>!
> 
> 
> Ummm, Eric Snow?
> ...



Gee golly willickers. Eric Snow? He turned a below average player into an average player. Eric Snow wasn't even a rookie. He had been Gary Payton's backup for a number of years. Tayshaun Prince was the 22nd player drafted in 2002. It's not like Carlisle was refusing to play Michael Jordan or somethin. He wanted to win so he didn't play a rookie because he didn't want to put up with his mistakes. Larry Brown may be "teaching" these rookies and everything, but that does not mean he will play them. At least he hasn't yet in his billion year career that spans over a million teams.


----------



## MLKG (Aug 25, 2003)

Isn't that what I just said? That Larry Brown can even take a player who's been in the league for a number of years and greatly improve their game. He turned Eric Snow from a bench warmer with a bleak future into one of the leagues more underrated players. Eric Snow is a LOT better than Jamal Tinsley.

I never said anything about playing rookies, but since you brought it up..... A lot of people critisize Carlisle for not playing Prince last year, I don't have much of a problem with not playing rookies in favor of helping your team win games- the problem was that Carlisle completely ignored the rookies and didn't do anything in practice to help develop them. Larry Brown may not give Darko a ton of playing time this year, but he at times lets his assitants run the team drills while Larry works with Darko 1 on 1. A teacher can't take just any guy and teach him how to play, but for guys who want to learn he can greatly improve their game.

Don't get me wrong. I think Rick will make the Pacers a better team. But he is NOT Larry Brown.


----------



## DetBNyce (Jul 23, 2002)

L.B.'s rookies have been John Salmons (#26), Samuel Delembart (#26), Speedy Claxton (#20), Todd MacCulloch (#47), Jumaine Jones (#27), Larry Hughes (#8)... 

Dalembart loks to be a bust, the jury stills out on Salmons (rookies now a days just don't make a big impact early on even seniors out of college, only the special ones, i.e.: Carmelo Anthony, who are truly gifted.) Speedy Claxton was playing early on for the 76ers before he injured his knee (so he was playing as a rookie), Jumaine Jones was at least turned into a decent role player and he played a big part on that finales team, Todd MacCulloch was picked in the second round ( he turned him into a decent player), the only picked that can be said to be a dissapointment, at least right now is Larry Hughes. Larry Brown played him, he just didn't play well enough and didn't fit with AI. Hughes still hasn't fdulfilled his potential so I wouldn't necessarily attribute that to Larry Brown. So L.B. wasn't working with Michael Jordan's either. 

Kenny Thomas, Aaron McKie, Derrick Coleman, Eric Snow, even on the old Pacer teams with Antonio Davis and Dale Davis... the list goes on and on of players he has help to reach that next level. That has to count for something.

As for the Brad Miller departure-- of course B. Miller is better than Pollard and you guys probaly do have enough scoring, but to act like B. Miller leaving is nothing is just crazy. He was an All Star center, in the East, but an All Star nonetheless. Yea it'll free up more shots for Harrington and Bender, but when was the last time you could actually depend on Bender, that's a cop out. When did he all of a sudden fulfill his potential. Can he even stay healthy?

Brown has won wherever he has been. It doesn't mater if he's been there 3 years at a time, his track record speaks for itself. Now I do think Carlisle is going to be a great coach and I didn't want him to go to Indy for this sole reason, but as we stand right now he is not a better coach then Larry Brown.


----------



## PacersguyUSA (Sep 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Starbury03</b>!
> No your not the Pistons are to big they have too many good big men.


Wallace Vs. Jermaine *Jermaine*
Campbell Vs. Pollard *Pollard*
Milicic Vs. Bender *Bender*
Williamson Vs. Harrington *Harrington*
Okur Vs. Artest *Artest*
Rebraca Vs. Croshere *Croshere*

Then Indiana has Foster


Yeeeaaaahhh, we'll have a _real_ hard time facing that [/sarcasm]


----------



## MLKG (Aug 25, 2003)

What is funny is you are serious.


----------



## TLR (May 28, 2003)

The only one he was wrong about was Campbell and Pollard. I don't like his comparisons between players that play different positions, but as far as who is the better player between the two he is comparing he is mostly right.


----------



## PistonFAN81 (May 30, 2003)

I was just told the funniest joke!!! someone said that they thought that the Indiana Pacers were gonna be the winners of the east.....HA HA HA HA HAHA HA HA HA....oh I am sorry it was just so funny I just can't beleive it!!!


----------



## MLKG (Aug 25, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>TLR</b>!
> The only one he was wrong about was Campbell and Pollard. I don't like his comparisons between players that play different positions, but as far as who is the better player between the two he is comparing he is mostly right.


That's only because he stacked the comparisons in Indiana's favor.

Artest vs Okur? Please. Comparing a starting guard/forward to a bench center/forward.

A more realistic comparison would be

Wallace > O'Neal
Campbell > Pollard
Milicic > Bender
Williamson < Artest
Okur = Harrington
Rebraca = Croshere

Jermaine has never gotten his team out of the first round of the playoffs. He is the second best big man in the east, but not better than Wallace.

I don't think there is even a question between Campbell and Pollard.

I'm sorry, but Jonathan Better is a slap. Tell me with a straight face you'd rather have him than Milicic.

No question between Artest and Williamson.

Harrington is more athletic, but Okur is a better rebounder, shot blocker, and outside shooter. They both have their strengths and weaknesses, and a solid case could be made for either one being better. Which is why I called them equal.

Coshere got a chance for minutes a couple years ago and was largely mediocre. Rebraca shot 55% from the field last year but was sidelined with an irregular heartbeat. If Rebraca can stay healthy he is very talented in the post, but invisible on defense. I'd say they are equal.


----------



## DetBNyce (Jul 23, 2002)

Comparing players on paper is generally not a good idea anyway. If games were played on paper the Pistons wouldn't have won the last two division titles. It's all a matter of production on the court. 

Okur > Pollard
Wallace < O'neal
Prince < Harrington
Hamilton = Artest
Billups > Tinsley

So does this mean our starting lineups are equal?

Bench: Sura, Atkins, Hunter, Milicic, Campbell, Williamson, Zelly, Ham > Kenny Anderson, Bender, Austin Croshere, Jeff Foster, Reggie Miller, etc.

Brown > Carlisle

So we must be better...


----------



## TLR (May 28, 2003)

It's stupid to compare teams on paper like that. I never do it. 


Okur is not a good player. c'mon the guy missed a game winning *layup* in the playoffs aginst the Nets. I would take anyone in our front court minus Brezec over him.


----------



## Tactics (Mar 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>DetBNyce</b>!
> Comparing players on paper is generally not a good idea anyway. If games were played on paper the Pistons wouldn't have won the last two division titles. It's all a matter of production on the court.
> 
> Okur > Pollard
> ...


You're right about comparing players on paper isn't really a good idea, but IMO we have a better bench than the Pistons and after seeing what Carlisle did for you guys last year I believe he is a better coach than Larry Brown, I mean Larry Brown is much more well known then him, but I think Carlisle is a much better coach.


----------



## TLR (May 28, 2003)

> *PistonFAN81*



:nonono:


----------



## DetBNyce (Jul 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TicN9neZ8</b>!
> 
> 
> You're right about comparing players on paper isn't really a good idea, but IMO we have a better bench than the Pistons and after seeing what Carlisle did for you guys last year I believe he is a better coach than Larry Brown, I mean Larry Brown is much more well known then him, but I think Carlisle is a much better coach.


I can respect your opinion on that, but mostly I was pointing out how useless comparing teams on paper is. I mean the roster can be compared in so many different ways to one teams advantage, what's really the point in doing so? But I do think our bench is better than Indy's.


----------



## TLR (May 28, 2003)

Harrington, Bender, Croshere, Anderson, and Foster is about equal to Atkins, H. davis, M. Curry, Milicic, and Campbell.


----------



## DetBNyce (Jul 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TLR</b>!
> Harrington, Bender, Croshere, Anderson, and Foster is about equal to Atkins, H. davis, M. Curry, Milicic, and Campbell.


That would be okay if half the people you named actually played or was on the team.

H. Davis will be on IR and M. Curry is on the Raptors.


----------



## MLKG (Aug 25, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>TLR</b>!
> Harrington, Bender, Croshere, Anderson, and Foster is about equal to Atkins, H. davis, M. Curry, Milicic, and Campbell.


Davis is an IR guy, Curry plays for Toronto, and Campbell looks like the starter.

Atkins, Sura, Williamson, Okur, Darko, Rebraca, and Lindsey Hunter will likely be the guys on Detroits active bench. Everyone of those guys are solid players and have a chance to crack the 9 players rotation Brown wants to use.

Harrington and Anderson are the only worth while guys on Indiana's bench. Maybe if Bender can pull his head out of his *** he can contribute, but Crochere and Foster are both about as good as Rebraca.


----------



## TLR (May 28, 2003)

Before IT came along, Croshere was better than anyone besides Ben Wallace in Detroit's front court is right now. And Foster was second in the league in rebounds per 48 min last year. He only played 10 min a game, but that's just because our frontcourt is so good. I think that qualifies him as more than a "stiff".


----------



## TLR (May 28, 2003)

Sorry I'm not an expert on Detroit's team.


----------



## MLKG (Aug 25, 2003)

10 minutes to 48 minutes is a pretty huge extrapolation and shouldn't even be counted.


----------



## TLR (May 28, 2003)

He has a history of being one of the best rebounders in the league. Look throughout his career. 

And the point is not to "explorate" or whatever the hell you said. The point is for every 48 minutes he played he had about 17 rebounds including 7 offensive rebounds.


----------



## PacersguyUSA (Sep 1, 2002)

> Bench: Sura, Atkins, Hunter, Milicic, Campbell, Williamson, Zelly, Ham > Kenny Anderson, Bender, Austin Croshere, Jeff Foster, Reggie Miller, etc.


What's funny is that you are serious.


----------



## MLKG (Aug 25, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>TLR</b>!
> He has a history of being one of the best rebounders in the league. Look throughout his career.
> 
> And the point is not to "explorate" or whatever the hell you said. The point is for every 48 minutes he played he had about 17 rebounds including 7 offensive rebounds.


He has a history of playing in limited minutes. 'Extrapolation' means to take a set of data and try to project what would happen past what is known.

Jeff Foster may put up great per 48 minutes numbers, but it takes him 5 games to get 48 minutes. If he had to strech himself over 30 minutes a night he couldn't keep those numbers up. He is a good energy rebounder off the bench, but he has no game outside of that. Kind of like how Rebraca can score like crazy in the post but is your prototypical soft European everywhere else. Crochere, Foster, and Rebraca are all at about the same level. Foster rebounds, Rebraca scores in the post, Crochere can hit from the perimeter. They are all one-dimensional guys who usually crack the rotation, but as the last guy of the bench.

And you are not that deep up front anymore. You have JO and Harrington. Pollard, Crochere, and Foster are bench talent. Who knows with Bender.



> What's funny is that you are serious.


How original. 

You've made a couple statements like this but have never once even attempted to back them up. Come on man, at least try.


----------



## TLR (May 28, 2003)

Before IT came along, Croshere was good for about 15 and 8. With Carlisle and Bird running the show I think he will get back to his old form. 

Your right about Bender. I have no idea what he will do this year. Your body is connected to your head and will only do what your head tells you to. Bender has confidence issues. He can dribble very well for a 7 foot guy, but when he gets in the game he is uncomfortable with the ball in his hands. He is taller and can jump higher than everybody but he is too timid to go get the ball for rebounds. This would have been his first year in the league had he gone to college for four years. Hopefully he has matured mentally and grown up a little. 

Foster was once described as the white Dennis Rodman. If you subtract all of the antics, then i agree.


----------



## DetBNyce (Jul 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>PacersguyUSA</b>!
> 
> 
> What's funny is that you are serious.


No my point is you cannot compare teams on paper based on your own opinion, put a > sign and that automatically makes your team better. If that was the case, we should give the trophy to the Lakers right now. And I guarentee I'm not the only person who thinks Detroit's bench is better than Indiana's.


----------



## Darko Sucko (Oct 27, 2003)

Indianas bench is far superior. Sorry Pistons fans, but its time to stop living in denial and accept reality.


----------



## MLKG (Aug 25, 2003)

Reality? You mean like the fact that you live in Indianapolis, not Detroit, and are a complete sock?


----------



## PacersguyUSA (Sep 1, 2002)

I think I think he's the new form of Artestaholic.


----------



## PacersguyUSA (Sep 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DetBNyce</b>!
> 
> 
> No my point is you cannot compare teams on paper based on your own opinion, put a > sign and that automatically makes your team better. If that was the case, we should give the trophy to the Lakers right now. And I guarentee I'm not the only person who thinks Detroit's bench is better than Indiana's.


And I was just making fun of the guy that said that it was funny when I said the Pacers front court was better than the pistons.


----------



## bananas (Apr 20, 2003)

I actually read this whole thread (sadly) and man this looks like The Simpsons board with all the Homers around here..

I like how people keep saying that Carlisle is a better coach than Larry Brown but never back up their oppinion. I guess you can claim ignorance as you did not have to withstand Rick's putrid offense and substitutions. Regular fans outside of Detroit claim he was the one that improved Detroit's defense but those of us around here would argue that the acquisition of Ben Wallace and the coachings of Kevin O'Neil were the center pieces of the Pistons impressive D. Information was also let out after his firing that he did not get along with his players and the front office at all (I guess that's why Bird likes him so much, both are a$$holes). Now I didn't come here to bash Rick, I think he is an upgrade over Thomas as the HC but he is not the savior you Pacer fans are making him out to be. On the other side, Piston followers are excited about Brown being here because of his superb basketball knowledge (IE X and Os) and his uncanny teaching of the game. He came here because it was his best shot at getting to the finals and hopefully winning a championship, no one is fooled into thinking he is going to be here six or seven years down the line - more like four years tops and by that time Detroit will already have a coach in training (Laimbeer possibly) and he will have already helped Darko, Memo, Prince and even veterans like Wallace, Billups and Hamilton progress towards their potential. Brown has succeeded with more than one team, while Rick had to impressive seasons - I wish him well and think he will improve the Pacers. I can see a rivalry starting this year that could last a long time between the Pistons and Pacers.

Other random comments;

Calling Foster the white Dennis Rodman is ludacris, I'm not going to even bother commenting.

I really fail to see how Croshere was good for 15 and 8 when the most points he has ever averaged is 10 and the most rebounds 6.

I'm sorry but how can anyone say that the Pacers bench is better than Detroit's? Anderson and Miller are literally on their last leg but should provide average production in limited minutes. But your bench big men are far from solid. I'm not one to label players busts very quickly but Bender is defefenitely a season a way from that deserved title. I thought he was one of the players that would revolutionize the swing man postion but he has failed miserably. Croshere is an average player with a horrid salary, In would not take him on my favorite team for anything. I like Foster but he isn't the rebounding machine you are all making him out to be. I wouldn't mind him as my fourth big man (10 mpg) but as your primary backup for a team contending for their confrence- come on.

Call me a home but I'll take; Atkins (Solid starter, ideal backup PG), Sura (Ofter injured but produces when healthy), Williamson (Offensive spark via post game and defends, rebounds well), Milicic (Can already score from inside and out but is lost on the defensive end) and Campbell (Big body that can give a little post offense along with strong rebounding and inside defensive presence). Not to mention Rebraca as the fourth 7 footer on the depth chart who can bang with anybody down low but is foul prone. The only questionable player is Sura who is often injured and probably wont play alot this season.


----------



## PacersguyUSA (Sep 1, 2002)

We (or at least I) think Carlisle is a better coach for two reasons:

1. Brown only got us to the conference finals, while Carlisle (under Bird, but Carlisle did most of the work) got us to the finals.

2. Carlisle has gone farther these past years than Brown.


----------



## bananas (Apr 20, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>PacersguyUSA</b>!
> We (or at least I) think Carlisle is a better coach for two reasons:
> 
> 1. Brown only got us to the conference finals, while Carlisle (under Bird, but Carlisle did most of the work) got us to the finals.
> ...


For your first reason, I don't understand how you can compare Browns success with the Pacers vs. Carlisles. They had different players and played different teams, whos to say how one would have done with the other situation, we dont know for sure.

Do you think coaches deserve all the credit for a teams success. Brown got what he could out of Philadelphia - this past year he turned Coleman and Thomas into two quality big men (One thought of as pretty much done in the league and the other a young player who has gotten only better under Brown's teachings). As someone else said, I would bet money that if coaching roles were switched, the Pistons would have still won under Brown. Philly was just beat by the better team.

Rick came in the right situation with Detroit, I do think he gets alot of undeserved credit by fans that were looking from the outside these past couple years. Dumars deserves the majority of praise, he has built this team that will compete for a title in the present and the future as well. All in all, I think both teams got the coach they wanted - as of now it's debatable as to which got the better man.. we'll have to wait and see starting tomorrow.


----------



## PacersguyUSA (Sep 1, 2002)

Brown and Carlisle had pretty much the same team in Indiana.


----------



## DetBNyce (Jul 23, 2002)

Billups/Tinsley comparison thread:


http://basketballboards.net/forum/s...tinsley+billups


----------



## Tactics (Mar 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>DetBNyce</b>!
> Billups/Tinsley comparison thread:
> 
> 
> http://basketballboards.net/forum/s...tinsley+billups


The link doesn't work.


----------



## jvanbusk (Jun 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>PacersguyUSA</b>!
> We (or at least I) think Carlisle is a better coach for two reasons:
> 
> 1. Brown only got us to the conference finals, while Carlisle (under Bird, but Carlisle did most of the work) got us to the finals.
> ...


So Carlisle is going to get all the credit for the Bird coached teams. But, you are going to completely dismiss the notion that Kevin O'Neill was the true defensive coach of the Pistons team?

What is up with that?


----------



## MillerTime (Jul 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>jvanbusk</b>!
> 
> 
> So Carlisle is going to get all the credit for the Bird coached teams. But, you are going to completely dismiss the notion that Kevin O'Neill was the true defensive coach of the Pistons team?
> ...


Nobody ever dismissed O'Neill's credit to Detriot. But Carlisle was the head of the Pacers under Bird. Bird quit because he wanted Carlisle to be the head coach, that's how much he helped him.


----------



## DetBNyce (Jul 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TicN9neZ8</b>!
> 
> 
> The link doesn't work.


 Hmmm, I don't know why it didn't work, but here it is:

http://basketballboards.net/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=44275&highlight=tinsley+billups

It says that Tinsley is better than guys like Billups, Tony Parker, and Gilbert Arenas.


----------



## PacersguyUSA (Sep 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>jvanbusk</b>!
> 
> 
> So Carlisle is going to get all the credit for the Bird coached teams. But, you are going to completely dismiss the notion that Kevin O'Neill was the true defensive coach of the Pistons team?
> ...


I never denied O'Neill's role, I only gave a reason why I think Carlisle is better. It can't hurt that he got to the conference finals.


----------



## PacersguyUSA (Sep 1, 2002)

> It says that Tinsley is better than guys like Billups, Tony Parker, and Gilbert Arenas.


And don't forget Snow.


----------



## jvanbusk (Jun 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>PacersguyUSA</b>!
> 
> 
> And don't forget Snow.


And Marbury and Nash?


----------



## jvanbusk (Jun 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>PacersguyUSA</b>!
> 
> 
> I never denied O'Neill's role, I only gave a reason why I think Carlisle is better. It can't hurt that he got to the conference finals.


If were going to say that Carlisle got the Pacers to the Finals, then let's say that O'Neill was the man that turned the Pistons from 30-52 to 50-32, and got them to the ECF.


----------



## TLR (May 28, 2003)

This is pointless. Let's just wait to see who wins more games and goes farther in the playoffs.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TLR</b>!
> This is pointless. Let's just wait to see who wins more games and goes farther in the playoffs.


Agreed. We are never going to agree on any of this until we see how the season goes.

Also, about Tinsley, I would rather have him on my team than Parker, Billups and Arenas, but only because hes a better pure point guard. Hes a great assist man and good rebounder for the point. Im not denying that all 3 are above Tinsley on the top point guards list in my books, as well as 95% of the rest of the world. We just feel on a team full of capable scorers, we dont realy need a big time scoring threat at the 1 spot.


----------



## Tactics (Mar 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>DetBNyce</b>!
> 
> 
> Hmmm, I don't know why it didn't work, but here it is:
> ...


I don't know why it wasn't working either, I remember that thread now, I made it. I'm high on Tins to, but he has this year to show me something or else my faith will be gone. I actually became a fan of the team because I was impressed with his Triple Doubles his rookie year.


----------



## PacersguyUSA (Sep 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>jvanbusk</b>!
> 
> 
> And Marbury and Nash?


Marbury and Nash are actually better.


----------



## TLR (May 28, 2003)

If we are running then I would rather have Tinley, but in a half court game Tins becomes useless because he is afraid to shoot.


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TLR</b>!
> Brad Miller is just slightly above average. There is not that big of a drop off production wise between him and Pollard. O'Neal's back will be just fine. In proffesional sports there is no such thing as being 100% healthy. Guys will play every game with nagging injuries. Bender will be back soon. I think we have always been more talented than the Pistons, but we had inept coaching. Now we have an awesome coach and I think we will represent the east in the Finals this year.


lol @ there not being a big dropoff between Miller and Pollard:laugh:


----------



## MillerTime (Jul 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>BEEZ</b>!
> 
> 
> lol @ there not being a big dropoff between Miller and Pollard:laugh:


lol @ anyone who thought Carlisle was not a good coach.


----------



## jvanbusk (Jun 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>MillerTime</b>!
> 
> 
> lol @ anyone who thought Carlisle was not a good coach.


Very few if anybody said that. I know I didn't.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BEEZ</b>!
> 
> 
> lol @ there not being a big dropoff between Miller and Pollard:laugh:


Yea, that kind of blew up in my face. I predicted everyone else would step up to fill his shoes on offence, which came true, but Pollard does stink, and I thought he would be a rebounding machine. Lucky for us Foster is comming into his own this year.


----------



## TLR (May 28, 2003)

I admit it. Tinsley and Pollard blow. I might care more if we weren't in 1st place though.


----------

