PDA

View Full Version : Do the pacers need better shooters, or someone who can help the team get better shots



Unclebuck
01-08-2008, 01:40 PM
This question was addressed in another thread briefly, but it got buried and I think it is a legitimate question. It seems to me that most of you are in favor of the Pacers getting better shooters. But this article in the Star from over the weekend, I believe proves the point that - the offensive problem for this team is not lack of shooting ability, but rather lack of players who can create good shots for the team. The Pacers are really easy to guard in the halfcourt, they rarely if ever have mismatches, they don't have a player they can go to to create something.




http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080105/SPORTS04/801050471/1088/SPORTS04&template=printart

Playing percentages

In a wildly erratic season of losing streaks and hot streaks, the Pacers have shown one area of consistency.

They shoot well when they get open shots.

According to the coaching staff's calculations, they had hit better than 50 percent of their uncontested jump shots and 18 percent of their contested shots entering Friday's game.
The same appeared to hold true against the Hawks, as the Pacers shot 51 percent through the first three quarters before faltering in garbage time.

Getting more uncontested shots out of its offense would improve life for a team that ranks seventh in scoring but just 22nd in field goal percentage.

"It has to do with decision-making," O'Brien said. "Pass when you're covered, shoot when you're open."

O'Brien said some contested shots are inevitable when the 24-second shot clock is about to expire, but ball movement and sharp cuts can minimize those situations.

"In the NBA, no team ever shoots better than 35 percent on challenged shots," he said.


The pacers need more open shots - or I guess if they can get someone who shoots the ball well even they are guarded closely.

I believe one reason why the Pacers have wild swings within games and often loses leads in the 4th quarter is because in the 4th quarter defenses increase their intensity, they force more halfcourt play and it is more difficult to get shots in general. And adding a good shooter isn't going to help much, but adding a creator will. Of coruse this flaw will haunt us in the playoffs even more.

getting back to my original question, of course it would be nice to have both better shooters and better creators

Oneal07
01-08-2008, 01:42 PM
I believe we should attack the basket when the shots aren't falling. Watching the Lakers game, when we got it down to 7. We still settled for jumpshots and bricked 5 in a row. If we are more aggressive in the 4th quarter, we wouldn't have this problem. That my main beef with this team!!! That's why I want Stephen Graham to get some PT, I know he will attack the rim

Young
01-08-2008, 01:56 PM
We need a star. To create and to build off of. I don't really care if it's a guard or a post player get someone who you can build around and who can make others better.

grace
01-08-2008, 02:01 PM
Not that I know much about anything, but I think the Pacers need better defense.

Putnam
01-08-2008, 02:22 PM
Not that I know much about anything, but I think the Pacers need better defense.


Now, now. Here is UncleBuck taking an interest in offense. We ought to encourage him.

This seems like the cogent bit of the article:


Getting more uncontested shots out of its offense would improve life for a team that ranks seventh in scoring but just 22nd in field goal percentage.

The Pacers are doing a lot right this year. If they can cut down on fouls and improve the FG% marginally, they will be alright.

I think the Pacers are good enough shooters. I don't agree with rommie that we need a star. A star draws double teams, and then you still have to kick the ball away so somebody else can score. I would much rather have a balanced scoring threat and five guys who can rotate and find the hole.

kester99
01-08-2008, 02:32 PM
I believe we should attack the basket when the shots aren't falling. Watching the Lakers game, when we got it down to 7. We still settled for jumpshots and bricked 5 in a row. If we are more aggressive in the 4th quarter, we wouldn't have this problem. That my main beef with this team!!! That's why I want Stephen Graham to get some PT, I know he will attack the rim


I tend to agree with that, and I think JT would have been doing the attacking if he was in the game. Seeing Graham contribute there would be nice, if he can find any playing time.

The inside attack always frees up the outside shot as well. One dimensional in either direction lets the opposition key in on your offensive threat.

I think we'll see a team tonight (Utah) that relies too much on inside scoring...we certainly owned them in the first Utah game this season...I watched most of that game again last night, and Marquis and Danny both gave Utah problems at or near the rim.

Roy Munson
01-08-2008, 02:55 PM
But this article in the Star from over the weekend, I believe proves the point that - the offensive problem for this team is not lack of shooting ability, but rather lack of players who can create good shots for the team.

It doesn't prove anything. It's an opinion in a newspaper article. My opinion is that better shooters will cause the defense to spread out more and create more opportunities for everyone.

It's a heck of a lot easier to distribute the ball (in a good way) when defenses are spread out trying to cover a bunch of good shooters who are spotting up than it is to try to create opportunities when the defense is packing in and not worried about the bad shooters who are spotting up.

Your simplistic solution, 'get a better distributor', won't work unless the outside shooting threats, or ball movement, can spread the defense. The Pacers' problem is that they don't have enough threats on the floor at a time. They are too easy to cover.

CableKC
01-08-2008, 03:57 PM
Would alot of ball and player movement ( something that we do occassionally ) make a big difference in getting uncontested shots?

I watched the Warriors/Spurs game....and I was amazed at how well the Spurs and ( obviously ) the Warriors moved the ball and got several open shots. Of course....they had 2 very good PGs in Parker and BDiddy.

So...who is the best players on our team at creating shots for other players?

When they play...do we see better shooting from the other players on the floor?

naptownmenace
01-08-2008, 04:10 PM
Would alot of ball and player movement ( something that we do occassionally ) make a big difference in getting uncontested shots?

I watched the Warriors/Spurs game....and I was amazed at how well the Spurs and ( obviously ) the Warriors moved the ball and got several open shots. Of course....they had 2 very good PGs in Parker and BDiddy.

So...who is the best players on our team at creating shots for other players?

When they play...do we see better shooting from the other players on the floor?

One thing I've noticed is that the Pacers really lack the foot speed and athleticism of teams like the Suns, Warriors, Spurs, and Pistons. It's not just talent, those teams have some really quick and athletic guys that can fly up the court, make quick cuts, and beat their man to the rim.

Dunleavy is the only guy on the team that moves effectively without the ball and even he doesn't do it to the extent that a Barbosa or Monta Ellis does and that's hurting the team.

andreialta
01-08-2008, 04:59 PM
Defense creates offense..

Defensive stops creates momentum

and you guys are right about the athleticism, the quick cuts, quick first steps. only Danny and Jamaal can do that for us, and maybe Mike when he has that switched turned on.

drive and draw plays are what we need. but who would do it??

boykins seems to be avialable? lol

NuffSaid
01-08-2008, 05:08 PM
I believe we should attack the basket when the shots aren't falling. Watching the Lakers game, when we got it down to 7. We still settled for jumpshots and bricked 5 in a row. If we are more aggressive in the 4th quarter, we wouldn't have this problem. That my main beef with this team!!! That's why I want Stephen Graham to get some PT, I know he will attack the rim
I couldn't have said it better myself!

Three things stick out with me concerning the Pacers as constructed:

1) The Pacers lack an aggressive playmaker. Yes, Tinsley will drive the lane or post-up his opponent, and Dunleavy will work his man off baseline screens or even attack the basket when he has got a head full of steam, but this team still needs that one player who can take his man off the dribble or at least has "controlled aggression" and is always in game mode. I have to admit, that's the one thing I did liked about SJax. He was aggressive all the time. He may have been inconsistent from the perimeter, but he was always in game mode. He knew that if his jump shot wasn't working it wasn't anything for him to switch tactics and start working the baseline or driving the lane (the worse part of his game for sure, but he wasn't afraid to use it!).

2) The team needs to learn how to play smarter, not harder. To that, Oneal07 and I see things the same way. When your jump shot isn't working, start driving the lanes more. If it's cruch time, settling for jump shots may not be the smartest thing to do especially if your team has gone cold from the field. Here's my crutch-time rule...you ready fo' it...here go:

"If you're within 10 pts (+/-) with 3 minutes or less on the game clock, DON'T SETTLE FOR JUMP SHOTS! Attack the basket, draw the foul if possible and get to the free throw line. (It also helps if you knock down the free throws on the And1 play.)"

This rule should definitely be enforced once your in the bonus. You should always be in attack mode in this situation, but too often the Pacers have failed to capitalize on this one aspect of the game. In their last game against the Lakers right before the half they were in the bonus long before the Lakers. Yet, it was the Lakers who took full advantage of this opportunity and got to the line more.

If you're winning, the worse thing you can do is settle for jump shots!

If you're trailing but you're within striking distance, the worse thing you can do is settle for jump shots!!

If you're in the bonus - especially if you can get your opponent in early foul trouble - the absolute worse thing you can do is settle for jump shots!!!

Veteran teams take advantage of such opportunities. My Pacers still have alot to learn.

Elgin56
01-08-2008, 05:28 PM
Most successfull teams have a player who can take it to the hole and get to the line. The Pacer's problem is their star, JO, is mainly a jumpshooter who doesn't get to the line and who shoots a low % for a big. Compare Duncan's or Howard's % to JO's % and their number of FT's per game and you will see where the problem lies.

QuickRelease
01-08-2008, 08:15 PM
Marquise is our "take it to the basket guy." He's just playing out of position when asked to consistently do point guard things. His best role is heading to the basket to get his own shot. When JT gets back, all will be right with the world! :happydanc I wouldn't mind another consistent long-range sniper who can create for himself, or continued progress from KRush would be sufficient. But another playmaker who can get guys the ball in the right position would be ideal.

dgranger
01-08-2008, 08:54 PM
In the draft we better get a point gaurd that is like a Mike Conley. Someone who loves to drive the lane, and will dish it out.

JayRedd
01-09-2008, 01:12 AM
Jamaal is the only guy on this team that can create his own shots. Marquis can to a very limited extent, but his defenders sag back so far he can never make it to the rim and is useless from outside 12 feet. So the actual impact of his bounce is minimal.

It really is as gross as our worst fears from the offseason in this respect.

Naptown_Seth
01-09-2008, 02:24 AM
Not that I know much about anything, but I think the Pacers need better defense.
I agree. 40 point quarters are not acceptable. Giving the Lakers their first set of 4 30 pt quarters was also horrible.

Opponents are constantly working from a position of strength due to penetration off the dribble.


While it's true the Pacers have no offensive star to act as a focus, JO still has had his assists running at a very high level (he led the team in a couple of recent games even). Dun also has been able to create a little for others.

The hard fact is that guys are missing a lot of open jumpers, including JO. At the very least they are shots in rhythm. Fix that and everything gets better.

But back to JO, his total collapse as an offensive powerhouse is killing them. It won't be long before teams stop doubling him at all, let alone the triples we saw even last season. Can anyone picture JO having an offensive game like he did vs NJ in the last playoff series or the night he had vs MIL when he challenged for the Pacers all-time single game points record?

He's just not that guy anymore. That more than anything is killing this team. Of course other teams work around issues like this, but at the #2 salary spot is Troy who is even less of an offensive threat.

Bball
01-09-2008, 04:31 AM
Watching how many times a Pacer is seen running out in vain to try and cover an open shooter, I'm thinking no matter how smoothly the offense runs that kind of defense is going to burn us.

It's just not penetration and kickouts that are burning the Pacers. Just the other team's ball movement in general is causing someone to get lost in the shuffle and get a WIDE open shot. Of course the Pacer frantically running out to attempt to cover that man is totally ineffective at that point, potentially fouling the jump shooter, and totally out of the rebounding picture.

Our offense certainly needs to be sharper, but a defense like described above won't give our offense any chance to weather any storms.

-Bball

croz24
01-09-2008, 05:37 AM
THE PACERS NEED MORE THAN ANYTHING ERIC GORDON!!! AND SHOULD DO WHATEVER IT TAKES TO GET HIM!

Doddage
01-09-2008, 07:39 AM
THE PACERS NEED MORE THAN ANYTHING ERIC GORDON!!! AND SHOULD DO WHATEVER IT TAKES TO GET HIM!
No doubt. Dude served Michigan last night.