PDA

View Full Version : Interesting tidbit about the Pacers offense



rexnom
12-09-2006, 11:04 AM
This is from espn.com's daily dime...

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/dailydime?page=dailydime-061209-10&lpos=spotlight&lid=tab1pos2

One man's take on the Indiana Pacers (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/clubhouse?team=ind), from Dimedom's web of front-office executives, coaches and scouts:

"[Rick] Carlisle is doing a really good job, as usual. A lot of people said he wouldn't be able to open up the game, or that he wouldn't want to, but the Pacers' offense is a lot more random than it used to be. I don't mean like Philadelphia, where it looks totally disorganized. I mean random in a good way. It's a systematic randomness.

"When you used to scout the Pacers, if they ran 90 plays, at least 80 of them would play all the way out. There's not a play call every single time down [the floor] now. I'd say about 60 of the 90 plays are [strictly] executed based on the play call. On the rest, Carlisle is having make reads, looking for early offense, letting them probe. He looks more content with them playing in the open court than he's ever been.

"And he's so good at teaching spacing -- he and Pop [San Antonio's Gregg Popovich] are the best -- that his players are [I]always in the right place. Organization is sometimes perceived as just running the play that's called. But they can look organized even when they're not running a play, because they're so well-coached on how to space themselves in relation to the basketball.

"I know they're having some turnover problems, but I think this style is better for them. They're taking about five more shots a game than they did last year and being more random means they don't have to go through Jermaine O'Neal (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?statsId=3120) every single time down. Their whole game is no longer dependent on O'Neal's effectiveness."

Mourning
12-09-2006, 12:37 PM
Interesting :).

JayRedd
12-09-2006, 12:45 PM
Looks like you beat me in posting this, rexnom. (Mine had paragraphs though.)

Mods can delete the other.

rexnom
12-09-2006, 01:30 PM
Looks like you beat me in posting this, rexnom. (Mine had paragraphs though.)

Mods can delete the other.
Now mine has paragraphs too...*evil laugh*...

You are the James Westfall to my Doctor Kenneth Noisewater...I guess Pacers Digest is our octagon.

JayRedd
12-09-2006, 01:36 PM
Now mine has paragraphs too...*evil laugh*...

You are the James Westfall to my Doctor Kenneth Noisewater...I guess Pacers Digest is our octagon.

Not sure Hicks would like that comparison.

And it's Westphal, thank you very much.

rexnom
12-09-2006, 01:43 PM
Not sure Hicks would like that comparison.

And it's Westphal, thank you very much.
Westphal it is...I think Hicks would love it...the octagon is a legend.

JayRedd
12-09-2006, 05:30 PM
Westphal it is...I think Hicks would love it...the octagon is a legend.

Seeing as how my fantasy football team name is, in fact, The Octagon, I will certainly not argue. I just brought it up because, technically, it is the nickname for a, you know. Anyway, now that we've probably ruined this thread entirely...


I'm glad to hear that a random sampling of NBA experts like what they see with our offense. I'm not savvy enough to have noticed all the "randomness", but I've definitely liked what I've seen, and realized we're calling a lot fewer plays from the bench.

What I've noticed most and really liked is all the free flow and (at times) great ball movement. It really seems like we're getting points organically by just getting the ball to open players in good situations to score, rather than systematically trying to run the offense in a certain way, which often leads to forcing things and playing the "JO ball" that some of you hate so much.

I think it's because of this that we are seeing no consistency in the box scores, as far as pts scored and shots taken. To some, that might seem like a bad thing, but I like it. I think it means that we're not trying to score; we're just scoring however it happens to go that night. You see that with Dallas a lot too with guys like Howard dropping 25 one night, then 8 the next. Harris, Stack and Terry (to a lesser extent) too. I've seen Howard criticized for his up-and-down stat sheet appearances. But to me, it's not a matter of Howard being inconsistent; it's a matter of Avery running a great offense that focuses on everyone.

Let's hope we can get close to their's some day.

rexnom
12-09-2006, 06:06 PM
Seeing as how my fantasy football team name is, in fact, The Octagon, I will certainly not argue. I just brought it up because, technically, it is the nickname for a, you know. Anyway, now that we've probably ruined this thread entirely...


I'm glad to hear that a random sampling of NBA experts like what they see with our offense. I'm not savvy enough to have noticed all the "randomness", but I've definitely liked what I've seen, and realized we're calling a lot fewer plays from the bench.

What I've noticed most and really liked is all the free flow and (at times) great ball movement. It really seems like we're getting points organically by just getting the ball to open players in good situations to score, rather than systematically trying to run the offense in a certain way, which often leads to forcing things and playing the "JO ball" that some of you hate so much.

I think it's because of this that we are seeing no consistency in the box scores, as far as pts scored and shots taken. To some, that might seem like a bad thing, but I like it. I think it means that we're not trying to score; we're just scoring however it happens to go that night. You see that with Dallas a lot too with guys like Howard dropping 25 one night, then 8 the next. Harris, Stack and Terry (to a lesser extent) too. I've seen Howard criticized for his up-and-down stat sheet appearances. But to me, it's not a matter of Howard being inconsistent; it's a matter of Avery running a great offense that focuses on everyone.

Let's hope we can get close to their's some day.
I completely agree. I love how we analyze our team's offense over and over again and complain about various things but the true experts that matter consider us vastly improved. I'm compelled to agree. No whale's vagina on this one.

Naptown_Seth
12-09-2006, 07:30 PM
I'm a huge Rick fan, and it's stuff mentioned here that is why. This year they have been finding their way and honestly I think forcing a running style that wasn't fitting. However when you heard RC talk about it you knew it wasn't his goal, the crazy aggressive sloppy play.

He and Larry have said early offense a lot but consistantly shy away from phrasing like "running game" or "Phoenix Suns style".

Get into the HC quickly, then get a set going soon enough to have the defense still loose and setting up, as well as leaving time enough to run a 2nd or 3rd set if the first one comes up dry.

When you post to draw a double, you have to hold till the double comes. You can't rush it and allow the defense to cheat the spacing. That takes time, so the sooner you do it the sooner you can get a result and look for something else. Same with trying to post a player for the score. Sometimes a guy can't get post position and it takes time to see this.

That's why starting at 17-18 is much better than starting at 12-13 because of low aggression early in the possession.


And in my opinion the best playbook the Pacers ever ran was the 2000 version, and that was all RC as far as I've ever heard. They would constantly add new options to the ends of plays as they got good at things and then got scouted for them.


I would disagree that the team always looks well spaced this year. There's been plenty of confusion and poor execution. But they are getting better and when they run things well I think their sets allow for lots of options.

I totally agree that the varying go-to scorers is a sign of the system.

This team is not a 100 ppg team, I just don't see that as a realistic goal. But I think with their defense they can get to a +4-5 ppg differential in the 98-93 range which would be perfectly good enough to pressure teams for a playoff run.


In the end execution, effort and attitude are going to be the key. Maybe results like ORL and POR will help guys buy into it more. Plus I think the pressure of new players like Al, Quis and Baston help remind everyone that desire to play and win is out there waiting to take your job.

Plus how can you look at a guy like Armstong who's going a million miles a second on the bench and not remember to care about the game?



He looks more content with them playing in the open court than he's ever beenOpen court doesn't mean full-court fastbreak long bomb passing, at least to me. That's early offense before things are fully set along with good movement. It allows guys to break out early from defense to pressure the opponent with a break threat, and that's something they've been much better at. You don't have to get a fastbreak from it, you just need to say to the other team "you better hustle on defense too or you're gonna pay". Keep em honest. This version is doing a lot more of that.

rexnom
12-11-2006, 09:49 AM
I wanted to bump this...because as people are complaining about JO; the team is becoming less and less oriented around him...simply improved by him when he is there...and this is in the eyes of an NBA exec who I'm going to say knows more than I do about basketball.

stew
12-11-2006, 11:21 AM
very nice read...