| | | |
WASHINGTON
INDIANA |
|
|
186.5
| 82
Final
86 |
|
|
| | |
|
| Eastern Conference - Semifinals - Best of 7 - Game 2 - WAS Leads 1-0 | | |  | |
| 709 | WASHINGTON | 185 | 185 | | 710 | INDIANA | -4.5 | -4.5 |
|
|
|  | |
|
| | | |
|
|
| All Games | 49-39 | -4.7 | 47-39 | 47-41 | 100.3 | 51.0 | 45.8% | 50.4 | 98.8 | 50.0 | 45.5% | 50.5 | | Road Games | 26-19 | +15.1 | 30-15 | 27-18 | 100.4 | 50.7 | 45.4% | 51.5 | 99.5 | 50.2 | 45.3% | 51.3 | | Last 5 Games | 4-1 | +4.5 | 4-1 | 4-1 | 94.6 | 51.8 | 42.7% | 53.8 | 90.6 | 44.2 | 42.0% | 51.8 | | Playoff Games | 5-1 | +6.2 | 5-1 | 5-1 | 95.8 | 51.2 | 43.6% | 53.8 | 91.0 | 45.8 | 42.0% | 50.8 |
|
| |
|
|
| Team Stats (All Games) | 100.3 | 51.0 | 38-84 | 45.8% | 8-20 | 38.2% | 16-21 | 72.8% | 50 | 11 | 23 | 21 | 8 | 14 | 5 | | vs opponents surrendering | 100.4 | 50.3 | 37-83 | 45.3% | 8-22 | 36.1% | 18-23 | 75.6% | 51 | 11 | 22 | 21 | 8 | 14 | 5 | | Team Stats (Road Games) | 100.4 | 50.7 | 38-85 | 45.4% | 8-21 | 39.8% | 15-21 | 70.5% | 51 | 11 | 23 | 21 | 8 | 14 | 5 | | Stats Against (All Games) | 98.8 | 50.0 | 37-81 | 45.5% | 7-21 | 34.8% | 18-23 | 76.5% | 50 | 10 | 22 | 20 | 8 | 15 | 4 | | vs opponents averaging | 99.8 | 49.9 | 37-83 | 45.1% | 8-21 | 35.6% | 18-24 | 75.7% | 51 | 11 | 22 | 21 | 8 | 14 | 5 | | Stats Against (Road Games) | 99.5 | 50.2 | 37-81 | 45.3% | 7-21 | 34.6% | 19-25 | 76.1% | 51 | 11 | 23 | 20 | 7 | 15 | 4 |
|
|
| |
|
|
| All Games | 60-30 | -11.6 | 42-47 | 38-50 | 96.5 | 45.7 | 44.8% | 52.9 | 92.5 | 46.6 | 41.7% | 49.6 | | Home Games | 37-9 | -3.2 | 23-22 | 19-27 | 98.2 | 47.9 | 46.0% | 54.0 | 88.8 | 46.6 | 40.4% | 48.8 | | Last 5 Games | 3-2 | -2 | 3-2 | 2-3 | 94.2 | 43.2 | 44.9% | 51.0 | 93.0 | 48.0 | 38.1% | 51.6 | | Playoff Games | 4-4 | -6.2 | 4-4 | 3-5 | 93.7 | 44.0 | 44.4% | 52.0 | 93.6 | 47.6 | 38.9% | 50.0 |
|
| |
|
|
| Team Stats (All Games) | 96.5 | 45.7 | 36-80 | 44.8% | 7-19 | 35.8% | 18-23 | 77.6% | 53 | 10 | 20 | 21 | 7 | 14 | 6 | | vs opponents surrendering | 101 | 50.5 | 38-83 | 45.7% | 8-22 | 36.1% | 18-24 | 75.6% | 51 | 11 | 22 | 21 | 8 | 14 | 5 | | Team Stats (Home Games) | 98.2 | 47.9 | 37-79 | 46.0% | 6-18 | 35.1% | 19-24 | 78.5% | 54 | 10 | 21 | 20 | 7 | 14 | 6 | | Stats Against (All Games) | 92.5 | 46.6 | 34-82 | 41.7% | 7-20 | 34.7% | 17-22 | 76.0% | 50 | 10 | 19 | 22 | 7 | 13 | 5 | | vs opponents averaging | 100.3 | 50.2 | 37-83 | 45.2% | 8-22 | 35.8% | 18-23 | 75.6% | 50 | 11 | 22 | 21 | 8 | 14 | 5 | | Stats Against (Home Games) | 88.8 | 46.6 | 33-83 | 40.4% | 7-20 | 34.3% | 15-21 | 73.3% | 49 | 11 | 17 | 22 | 7 | 14 | 5 |
|
| | Average power rating of opponents played: WASHINGTON 95.1, INDIANA 94.7 |
| | |
|
|
| 3/28/2014 | INDIANA | 91-78 | W | 1.5 | W | 186.5 | U | 34-87 | 39.1% | 51 | 8 | 28-79 | 35.4% | 59 | 17 | | 3/29/2014 | ATLANTA | 101-97 | W | -6 | L | 198.5 | U | 39-79 | 49.4% | 50 | 13 | 34-80 | 42.5% | 52 | 12 | | 3/31/2014 | @ CHARLOTTE | 94-100 | L | 3 | L | 194.5 | U | 38-79 | 48.1% | 41 | 14 | 34-78 | 43.6% | 53 | 10 | | 4/2/2014 | BOSTON | 118-92 | W | -8 | W | 200 | O | 45-72 | 62.5% | 47 | 21 | 32-81 | 39.5% | 37 | 14 | | 4/4/2014 | @ NEW YORK | 90-89 | W | 5.5 | W | 195.5 | U | 38-78 | 48.7% | 49 | 15 | 34-76 | 44.7% | 40 | 16 | | 4/5/2014 | CHICAGO | 78-96 | L | -2 | L | 183.5 | U | 34-86 | 39.5% | 48 | 11 | 35-79 | 44.3% | 57 | 10 | | 4/9/2014 | CHARLOTTE | 88-94 | L | -5.5 | L | 190 | U | 37-82 | 45.1% | 53 | 12 | 35-92 | 38.0% | 58 | 12 | | 4/11/2014 | @ ORLANDO | 96-86 | W | -7 | W | 194 | U | 35-82 | 42.7% | 57 | 12 | 32-77 | 41.6% | 50 | 16 | | 4/12/2014 | MILWAUKEE | 104-91 | W | -11 | W | 204 | U | 40-84 | 47.6% | 44 | 9 | 32-68 | 47.1% | 51 | 20 | | 4/14/2014 | MIAMI | 114-93 | W | -5.5 | W | 190 | O | 46-78 | 59.0% | 49 | 17 | 36-80 | 45.0% | 36 | 12 | | 4/16/2014 | @ BOSTON | 118-102 | W | -8 | W | 198 | O | 50-88 | 56.8% | 49 | 12 | 39-84 | 46.4% | 45 | 13 | | 4/20/2014 | @ CHICAGO | 102-93 | W | 4.5 | W | 177.5 | O | 36-74 | 48.6% | 54 | 10 | 34-81 | 42.0% | 46 | 8 | | 4/22/2014 | @ CHICAGO | 101-99 | W | 5 | W | 180 | O | 38-80 | 47.5% | 53 | 12 | 38-88 | 43.2% | 57 | 12 | | 4/25/2014 | CHICAGO | 97-100 | L | -2.5 | L | 180.5 | O | 37-86 | 43.0% | 47 | 11 | 34-71 | 47.9% | 55 | 16 | | 4/27/2014 | CHICAGO | 98-89 | W | -2.5 | W | 183.5 | O | 35-86 | 40.7% | 48 | 6 | 35-78 | 44.9% | 53 | 16 | | 4/29/2014 | @ CHICAGO | 75-69 | W | 3.5 | W | 183.5 | U | 30-74 | 40.5% | 56 | 12 | 25-75 | 33.3% | 48 | 11 | | 5/5/2014 | @ INDIANA | 102-96 | W | 4.5 | W | 183.5 | O | 35-84 | 41.7% | 65 | 15 | 33-81 | 40.7% | 46 | 13 | | 5/7/2014 | @ INDIANA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 5/9/2014 | INDIANA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 5/11/2014 | INDIANA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
| |
|
|
| 3/28/2014 | @ WASHINGTON | 78-91 | L | -1.5 | L | 186.5 | U | 28-79 | 35.4% | 59 | 17 | 34-87 | 39.1% | 51 | 8 | | 3/30/2014 | @ CLEVELAND | 76-90 | L | -5.5 | L | 182.5 | U | 29-78 | 37.2% | 50 | 15 | 34-76 | 44.7% | 51 | 15 | | 3/31/2014 | SAN ANTONIO | 77-103 | L | 4.5 | L | 188.5 | U | 26-69 | 37.7% | 46 | 15 | 37-80 | 46.2% | 49 | 8 | | 4/2/2014 | DETROIT | 101-94 | W | -10.5 | L | 191 | O | 39-79 | 49.4% | 55 | 10 | 34-93 | 36.6% | 59 | 5 | | 4/4/2014 | @ TORONTO | 94-102 | L | -1.5 | L | 178.5 | O | 33-78 | 42.3% | 50 | 10 | 40-84 | 47.6% | 49 | 11 | | 4/6/2014 | ATLANTA | 88-107 | L | -8 | L | 186 | O | 32-78 | 41.0% | 46 | 11 | 41-73 | 56.2% | 47 | 15 | | 4/9/2014 | @ MILWAUKEE | 104-102 | W | -1 | W | 186 | O | 41-85 | 48.2% | 51 | 11 | 38-87 | 43.7% | 57 | 11 | | 4/11/2014 | @ MIAMI | 86-98 | L | 5.5 | L | 181 | O | 31-65 | 47.7% | 35 | 16 | 35-75 | 46.7% | 48 | 9 | | 4/13/2014 | OKLAHOMA CITY | 102-97 | W | -1 | W | 192 | O | 38-72 | 52.8% | 53 | 21 | 36-84 | 42.9% | 36 | 9 | | 4/16/2014 | @ ORLANDO | 101-86 | W | 4 | W | 187 | P | 41-88 | 46.6% | 57 | 12 | 32-79 | 40.5% | 47 | 10 | | 4/19/2014 | ATLANTA | 93-101 | L | -8.5 | L | 185.5 | O | 34-81 | 42.0% | 54 | 15 | 33-76 | 43.4% | 48 | 12 | | 4/22/2014 | ATLANTA | 101-85 | W | -7.5 | W | 186.5 | U | 36-68 | 52.9% | 51 | 16 | 31-79 | 39.2% | 40 | 13 | | 4/24/2014 | @ ATLANTA | 85-98 | L | -2 | L | 187 | U | 32-85 | 37.6% | 56 | 13 | 28-73 | 38.4% | 54 | 14 | | 4/26/2014 | @ ATLANTA | 91-88 | W | -2.5 | W | 189 | U | 37-77 | 48.1% | 49 | 10 | 30-84 | 35.7% | 51 | 12 | | 4/28/2014 | ATLANTA | 97-107 | L | -7 | L | 186.5 | O | 36-78 | 46.2% | 43 | 12 | 33-66 | 50.0% | 46 | 16 | | 5/1/2014 | @ ATLANTA | 95-88 | W | 2 | W | 188 | U | 33-77 | 42.9% | 53 | 13 | 29-81 | 35.8% | 50 | 13 | | 5/3/2014 | ATLANTA | 92-80 | W | -6.5 | W | 184 | U | 33-70 | 47.1% | 64 | 17 | 28-92 | 30.4% | 46 | 10 | | 5/5/2014 | WASHINGTON | 96-102 | L | -4.5 | L | 183.5 | O | 33-81 | 40.7% | 46 | 13 | 35-84 | 41.7% | 65 | 15 | | 5/7/2014 | WASHINGTON | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 5/9/2014 | @ WASHINGTON | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 5/11/2014 | @ WASHINGTON | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
| |  | WASHINGTON: GUARDS: Late last year, JOHN WALL finally started to fulfill his promising talent. He got wherever he wanted on the court, and the Wizards were very tough to guard with all the shooters surrounding him . . . BRADLEY BEAL and Wall should mesh beautifully. Beal is a potentially elite shooter, and he rebounds very well for a guard . . . ERIC MAYNOR is fully healthy again after tearing his ACL two seasons ago. He can play some alongside Wall, but mostly he'll be the league's best back-up point guard again . . . GLEN RICE JR. doesn't shoot it nearly as well as his father, but he's an athlete who could break into the rotation down the line . . . GARRETT TEMPLE is insurance in case Wall or Maynor goes down. FORWARDS: The Wizards need NENÊ’S low post offense. It seems inevitable that they'll have to cap his minutes . . . OTTO PORTER is likely to step into the starting lineup early on. They need his defense, as he can guard twos through fours . . . MARTELL WEBSTER will platoon with Porter, providing another outstanding shooter for Wall to feed . . . TREVOR ARIZA is playing out the string on an untradeable deal . . . TREVOR BOOKER has some use as a screener and low-post banger, but not much else . . . AL HARRINGTON may be inefficient, but he can score points in a hurry and is a decent defender'JAN VESELY is still trying to figure out the NBA, though it's too early to give up on his athleticism . . . CHRIS SINGLETON can defend, but he's no more than a garbage-time player due to his atrocious offense. CENTERS: EMEKA OKAFOR may be absurdly overpaid, but he's settled in as a passable starter who helps defensively and doesn't hurt on offense. He'll also miss the beginning of the season with a herniated disc . . . With Okafor's deal expiring at the end of the year, KEVIN SERAPHIN is auditioning to be Washington's center of the future. After showing promise two seasons ago, he was a disaster last season. | | INDIANA: GUARDS: GEORGE HILL is less of a creator and more of a game-manager/scorer, which fits fine in this starting five . . . LANCE STEPHENSON continues to be an enigma. His speed pushing the ball in transition is an asset, but his terrible shooting and bizarre decision-making often makes him a liability in the half court . . . C.J. WATSON has proven to be a capable second-unit point guard, but he's on his third team in three years because he's managed to give away two playoff games with monumentally bad moments . . . ORLANDO JOHNSON is unlikely to see meaningful minutes, but his role should grow slightly now that Gerald Green is gone. FORWARDS: This is PAUL GEORGE'S team. Once a do-it-all role player, he's now polished enough to create his own offense . . . As expected, DAVID WEST bounced back in his second season off a torn ACL. He's still deadly as a mid-range shooter, a savvy passer and a strong rebounder . . . LUIS SCOLA slides into Tyler Hansbrough's old role as a second-unit banger, and insurance for West and Roy Hibbert . . . DANNY GRANGER is in no-man's land. He's not better than Paul George, and probably no longer an upgrade over Lance Stephenson. His best asset may be his expiring deal . . . CHRIS COPELAND can't defend, but gives the Pacers a three-point threat . . . SOLOMON HILL doesn't figure to contribute this season. CENTERS: ROY HIBBERT proved capable of handling more minutes last season, but Indy will likely still be cautious with their asthmatic 7-foot-2 center during the regular season . . . IAN MAHINMI is back to give his six fouls and move some bodies out of the paint. |
| | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ PA SPORTSTICKER NBA PLAYOFF PREVIEW (WASHINGTON-INDIANA) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(Updates with new lead. With AP Photos.)
*Wizards-Pacers Preview* ========================
By MICHAEL MAROT AP Sports Writer
Washington At Indiana, Game Two, 7:00 p.m. EDT
INDIANAPOLIS (AP) -- Roy Hibbert's disappearing act is wearing thin in Indianapolis.
Pacers fans are so angry, they want him benched or traded. Critics have made Hibbert the target of jokes. Teammates are desperately trying to coax their All-Star center out of his funk, and even ultra-positive coach Frank Vogel knows it's time for Hibbert to start playing big.
The Pacers need it now, in Game 2 of the Eastern Conference semifinals, more than ever.
"We tell Roy all the time how much we're going to need him in this series and this playoff run," Paul George said Tuesday. "You know it's up to Roy to just come through and deliver for us."
Lately, the 7-foot-2, 290-pound veteran hasn't been able to do much.
In the seven-game series against Atlanta, Hibbert averaged 5.3 points and 3.7 rebounds and shot just 37.2 percent from the field. His minutes dwindled from 30 in Game 1 to 12 1/2 in Game 6. The runner-up for the league's defensive player of the year award didn't even have a block until Game 4. And for the first time in his playoff career, he finished Game 6 with no points and no rebounds.
Somehow, the Pacers still managed to tie the series, and in Game 7, the old Hibbert returned with 13 points, seven rebounds and five blocks as the Pacers beat Atlanta 92-80. That performance brought back the cheers and rekindled hope that Hibbert had finally exorcised his demons.
Monday night's poor performance against Washington showed everyone that Game 7 was merely an anomaly.
Again, Hibbert got into early foul trouble against the Wizards, missed his only two shots, and got pushed around by the smaller Marcin Gortat. He finished with no points and no rebounds in a 102-96 Game 1 loss and afterward was pulled aside by some of his teammates. On Tuesday, Hibbert promised to be more effective Wednesday night.
"I'll just try to be a little more aggressive on both ends and just not be content with letting their guards and forwards get defensive rebounds," Hibbert said. "I've got to do a good job putting a body on Nene and Gortat, so I'm just going to go out there and pursue."
What's wrong?
Nobody, including Hibbert, has been able to pinpoint the problem, though it's not the first time he has endured something like this.
After Indiana matched Portland's four-year, $58 million offer in the summer of 2012, Hibbert had an abysmal first half of the season. As the struggles wore on, Pacers fans increasingly questioned whether the team made the right move. Some even linked the big contract to Hibbert's struggles, suggesting Indiana's biggest player cared more about getting his money than winning a title.
The truth was Hibbert cared too much about living up to the price tag and eventually got caught thinking too much on the court rather than just reacting to the game.
Now it seems to be happening all over again.
"Roy's just got to clear his mind, demand the ball in the paint and get the ball where he wants it in the paint," George said. "You know when he gets to where he's able to be a threat and he's able to make a move without putting the ball on the ground, it's going in almost every time."
Of course, the Wizards figured out how to prevent that in Game 1.
Gortat finished with 12 points and 15 rebounds on a night the Wizards held a commanding 53-36 advantage on the glass and a 19-5 edge in second-chance points.
"We try to make sure none of their bigs are going to catch the ball in the paint easily, try to make their life a little bit harder and miserable," Gortat said.
Hibbert's job is to find a way to change that, and teammates and coaches are convinced he will.
"I think mentally he wants to do more," Vogel said. "He's giving maximum effort, and he's going to continue to study (film) to see how he can be more productive.
"If Roy Hibbert is on the court," Vogel added, "it's because I think he can help us win the next possession in that stretch of that game and help us win that game."
|
| | Last Updated: 4/26/2024 10:10:38 PM EST. |
|
|
| |
|