PDA

View Full Version : Biggest fear



Speed
10-11-2010, 08:44 AM
Let start off by saying I know it's only preseason. I know that they won't go 13-15 players deep in a rotation when the real games start.

With that said, here is my concern. Players falling into losing habits. Watching what I've seen so far I can understand the lack of familiarity with the offensive/defensive concepts. I can understand lacking chemistry with each other.

What bothers me is when I watch Danny shake his head and then stand and watch. Or worse, go one on five and take a contested off balance jumper. It applies to several players who when things start to go bad they fall into losing basketball.

Case in point, end of the Houston game. Roy is still in the game and gets the ball in the post. Everyone stops moving. Not Roy's fault, but you risk players falling into a pattern where they aren't engaged and start to play selfish. I'm not going to quote stats or join the ongoing chorus of fire Obrien, but from a psychological standpoint, if you aren't engaged, then this spills over to defense and rebounding. That's losing basketball.

Lastly, without getting into schemes etc, too much. Isn't there a way to incorporate things that excentuate what players are good at. I watched Nash with Phoenix this weekend, he had the ball in his hands almost the entire time. I'm not advocating this for DC, but doesn't it make sense to let him make plays in an environment he's proven that he's good at? I'm okay with expanding players game, I think it's a really good idea. I'm not for not putting guys in a situation where they aren't as engaged. It goes back to what we talked about last year, basically if you are going to run what the Pacers run, you don't need a Point Guard offensively, you need a guy who brings the ball up the court and is another wing.

Anyway, the concept I'm talking about isn't a rehash of coaching dynamics, it's about putting guys in a situation where they are engaged and invested with each other and with doing the right thing as a result.

Too early to make any determination, but this is my fear that it's like a mental snowball going downhill for this squad. Losing begets losing, imo. More importantly it's human nature if something isn't working to change, but if it's a change to a losing type mindset, it's self defeating.

I guess a good win on Wednesday would help, even if it doesn't count.

Is anyone else concerned about the mental degredation piece of this, so far?

Unclebuck
10-11-2010, 08:46 AM
I will say that getting into bad habits anytime whether it is in practice, summer league, pickup games, preseason games, regular season games, playoff games is always a bad thing.

I do however expect the intensity to be a lot lower in the preseason especially with the vets

owl
10-11-2010, 08:57 AM
I think it is a big concern. The problem with saying it is only preseason is that other teams
are basically giving the same effort and every team will ratchet up the intensity come regular
season. So to pin our hopes on really trying in the regular season I think is false hope.
I see a lot of immaturity affecting this years team. I am concerned about our coach asking
the team to be something they really are not especially at the point guard. As much as I hate changing coaches if this team is floundering 20 games in the problem should fall in the lap of Obrien.

nerveghost
10-11-2010, 09:03 AM
I find myself coming to terms with this reality - this is an extremely young team and evidence supports that it takes experience to win in the NBA.

We have a lot of young pieces - in our starting lineup alone we have three players 24 or younger. Add to that a core mix of George, Hansbro, AJ, Lance and Rush - that is a young, inexperienced team. It takes 5 players to execute an offense/defense - one or two weak links can hurt you.

Can Grang, Dun, Foster, TJ and Inferno balance that inexperience? I'm not sure. I'm starting to think that the first half of this season will be a struggle as the Pacers get beat by veteran teams. It may not be until the second half of the season that the team starts showing its potential.

Rogco
10-11-2010, 09:10 AM
I'm concerned about the coaching. If we can be competitive for the first 2 quarters then we should be competitive in the 3rd.

Tom White
10-11-2010, 09:31 AM
I will say that getting into bad habits anytime whether it is in practice, summer league, pickup games, preseason games, regular season games, playoff games is always a bad thing.

I do however expect the intensity to be a lot lower in the rpeseason especially with the vets

Should it not be the opposite, though? Shouldn't this be the time when the vets take LEADERSHIP by showing the younger players "This is how hard you need to be working."? Be it working hard on defense, diving on the floor, blocking out on the boards and getting after the rebounds, or whatever?

It would seem to me this is the time to show the younger players how they need to go at it hard from the start, the time to show they need to be involved and aware on every possession (defensive or offensive).

I disagree about it being OK to have a lower intensity level. This is when you set the tone for how you are going to play in the regular season, rather than have to teach them how to "switch gears" later on. Send a message that EVERY GAME COUNTS, and THIS IS HOW WE ARE GOING TO PLAY right from the get-go.

graphic-er
10-11-2010, 09:34 AM
I don't think I seen Danny try to go one on 5 at any point in these 3 games, i've seen him make some bad passes trying to get other involved though. I've also seen him make some great passes that his teammates totally screwed up on and either missed an easy dunk or lost the ball...ala Roy Hibbert.

Now I have seen him stand around and watch instead of crashing the boards, or get his pocket picked and not chase after the fast break. Which is a bit infuriating.

The biggest bad habit I've seen is that they are not rotating on defense, and leaving shooters wide open on the perimeter, and generally just not staying home on their man. They have been sagging off those 3 point shooters. I don't know if its just in anticipation for the rebound, or if they are just braining farting. Also they are not going under the picks and screens letting the point guard have his way into the lane. Best way to defend the pick and roll is go under the screen instead of trying to fight through it. You might give them a better look at a long 2, but atleast you are cutting off the path to the basket better. I can't believe JOB isn't emphasizing this consider most teams in the league will run PnR at us all year long if we show we can't defend it. Simply no reason to fight thru the pick unless you are faster than the PG you are covering.

Unclebuck
10-11-2010, 09:46 AM
Should it not be the opposite, though? Shouldn't this be the time when the vets take LEADERSHIP by showing the younger players "This is how hard you need to be working."? Be it working hard on defense, diving on the floor, blocking out on the boards and getting after the rebounds, or whatever?

It would seem to me this is the time to show the younger players how they need to go at it hard from the start, the time to show they need to be involved and aware on every possession (defensive or offensive).

I disagree about it being OK to have a lower intensity level. This is when you set the tone for how you are going to play in the regular season, rather than have to teach them how to "switch gears" later on. Send a message that EVERY GAME COUNTS, and THIS IS HOW WE ARE GOING TO PLAY right from the get-go.

I certainly agree with you in theory. But what you are suggesting just isn't realistic.

Foster dove for a loose ball as did a few other players. But in preseason you don't prepare for your opponent, you don't play your regular rotation, the game doesn't count in the standings. It is impossible to try and convince your players every game counts when it doesn't.

Like if you go to work tomorrow and they tell you, nothing you do today counts, it is all practice for next week when it counts. Your approach will be different. Not to suggest you would dog it, but you might try some new things, it would be very difficult to get the same productivity as a work day that does count.

Putnam
10-11-2010, 10:02 AM
My biggest fear is getting into an elevator and Supertramp's "Logical Song" coming over the PA.

But, Speed, I think you are right to fear this. The Pacers have improved their athletic potential by quite a lot, but they still aren't very good. It will be hard work to keep them playing at their potential even while losing a lot of games.

As far as Granger's head shaking goes, does he shake his head as much as Peyton Manning does?

BillS
10-11-2010, 10:05 AM
I wouldn't start worrying too much until it gets closer to the regular season, especially issues with losing leads or not playing well later in the game. I missed the games over the weekend but in general you use lineups in preseason that will never hit the floor during the season, and you leave lineups in the game longer than you would otherwise.

Wait until the games closer to the season opener as the rotation starts to solidify and the players start to get focused.

That said, I agree that DG needs to step up his intensity a bit, especially if that whole "leader" thing is supposed to stick.

OakMoses
10-11-2010, 10:05 AM
I do however expect the intensity to be a lot lower in the preseason especially with the vets

If you listened to the announcers during the Houston game, Drexler pretty much said that he faked injuries to get out of playing in preseason games and would tell his coaches things like "I can go 15 minutes tonight."

Do I think that guys like Dunleavy and Granger are putting forth dramatically less effort than they will in November? Absolutely.


Lastly, without getting into schemes etc, too much. Isn't there a way to incorporate things that excentuate what players are good at. I watched Nash with Phoenix this weekend, he had the ball in his hands almost the entire time. I'm not advocating this for DC, but doesn't it make sense to let him make plays in an environment he's proven that he's good at? I'm okay with expanding players game, I think it's a really good idea. I'm not for not putting guys in a situation where they aren't as engaged. It goes back to what we talked about last year, basically if you are going to run what the Pacers run, you don't need a Point Guard offensively, you need a guy who brings the ball up the court and is another wing.


My biggest fear is that these preseason results will destroy the positive atmosphere and good chemistry that we've seen reported so far this offseason. Your thoughts about a losing culture have some validity too.

I don't think you can really compare the Phoenix situation to ours for several reasons:

1. Steve Nash is great. He's arguably the best offensive PG in the world. Phoenix would be a retched team if Nash didn't routinely create wide open shots for highly mediocre players. Nash controls the ball because it is the best way for the Suns to win games.

2. Darren Collison is not Steve Nash. When Paul was down last season, Collison was in a system that allowed him to thrive statistically. However, the Hornets only won about 1/3 of the games he started.

3. O'Brien is trying to incorporate things that Collison is good at into our system. Collison listed his offensive strengths as 1. Transition, 2. PnR. I don't think anyone is going to argue that O'Brien doesn't want this team to get out in transition. Also, over the first 2 preseason games, I've seen DC involved in a fair number of PnR. However, it just so happens that our bigs don't know how to execute right now. Hibbert, Hansbrough, and McRoberts played in college systems that did not utilize PnR. Their pro careers have been spent with the Pacers who've used it sparingly under O'Brien. From what I've seen, Foster, Rolle, and S. Jones are the best 3 bigs we have at executing PnR and they're all bit players this season.

Another thing to remember is that, as much as anything in basketball, the PnR relies a lot on chemistry, which takes time to develop.

BillS
10-11-2010, 10:14 AM
My biggest fear is that those noises in my closet are vnzla and 90sNBA screaming for JOB's head...

:shudder:

What I don't understand is the cognitive dissonance between:

1) losing in preseason, while the young guys are being given huge amounts of floor time and different lineups are left in place in spite of their effectiveness, will destroy any chance of a winning attitude and hurt players on the floor

and

2) losing through the season, as long as you give the young guys plenty of playing time and use lineups in spite of their effectiveness, will develop youngsters and have no effect on their attitude.

Speed
10-11-2010, 10:29 AM
My biggest fear is that those noises in my closet are vnzla and 90sNBA screaming for JOB's head...

:shudder:

What I don't understand is the cognitive dissonance between:

1) losing in preseason, while the young guys are being given huge amounts of floor time and different lineups are left in place in spite of their effectiveness, will destroy any chance of a winning attitude and hurt players on the floor

and

2) losing through the season, as long as you give the young guys plenty of playing time and use lineups in spite of their effectiveness, will develop youngsters and have no effect on their attitude.

I mean I see what your saying and I agree it's a time to learn for the youngsters and that effects everything.

However, I'm concerned the vets start saying 'oh no, here we go again' and revert back to not doing things the right way. Just the human component of it and that it could go viral is my concern. Losing can wear on a players phsyche, I think.

If the players start to feel like this is another lost season, I don't want it to effect effort and action.

I think two years ago when the Pacers competed in most games and won some that were against quality teams, this didn't happen. Last year I think this happened often.

I'm concerned that we've seen some of this body language already. It could just be it's 3 games in 4 nights and guys are worn out, but I think it's something to watch and hopefully managed by the leadership.

90'sNBARocked
10-11-2010, 10:30 AM
My biggest fear is that those noises in my closet are vnzla and 90sNBA screaming for JOB's head...

:shudder:

What I don't understand is the cognitive dissonance between:

1) losing in preseason, while the young guys are being given huge amounts of floor time and different lineups are left in place in spite of their effectiveness, will destroy any chance of a winning attitude and hurt players on the floor

and

2) losing through the season, as long as you give the young guys plenty of playing time and use lineups in spite of their effectiveness, will develop youngsters and have no effect on their attitude.

Yes, I am lurkin in the closet as you sleep :)

I was thinking about it this weekend. The main problem I have is I think the coach wants to game plan in an unorthodox way hoping that he will come out as agenius, somewhat like Mike D'antonio goes aginst convential wisdom and some feel he was ahead of the curve.

Examples are playing Stephenson at the PG, when he is clearly a SG. PLaying Posey at PF, and other non PF's. just a few examples, but the "unique" things he tries dont seem to work

It always seems like he is trying to force a square peg in a round hole

OakMoses
10-11-2010, 10:50 AM
The main problem I have is I think the coach wants to game plan in an unorthodox way hoping that he will come out as agenius, somewhat like Mike D'antonio goes aginst convential wisdom and some feel he was ahead of the curve.


I don't think O'Brien cares about public perception at all. I firmly believe that his main goal is to win basketball games, and that he does the things he thinks will give the team the best chance to win.

McKeyFan
10-11-2010, 10:50 AM
I think Granger's body language has, for a long time, communicated that he barely tolerates O'Brien because that's what professionals do and he signed a contract (Danny's a man of his word.)

I hope things turn out really well in the long run, but if they don't, I think a lot of blame can be placed on Bird for encouraging a culture of not-very-fundamental basketball for way too long.

90'sNBARocked
10-11-2010, 10:53 AM
I don't think O'Brien cares about public perception at all. I firmly believe that his main goal is to win basketball games, and that he does the things he thinks will give the team the best chance to win.

Do you think he does some uncovential things and times, and if so have they generally worked out?

90'sNBARocked
10-11-2010, 10:54 AM
I think Granger's body language has, for a long time, communicated that he barely tolerates O'Brien because that's what professionals do and he signed a contract (Danny's a man of his word.)

I hope things turn out really well in the long run, but if they don't, I think a lot of blame can be placed on Bird for encouraging a culture of not-very-fundamental basketball for way too long.

I agree 110%, and I really alos feel Granger can't stand Jim

I dont have any evidence to back it up and its pure speculation, but I agree with McKey fan that Danny looks at times like a 10 year old who just lost his new puppy

MLB007
10-11-2010, 11:01 AM
Let start off by saying I know it's only preseason. I know that they won't go 13-15 players deep in a rotation when the real games start.

With that said, here is my concern. Players falling into losing habits. Watching what I've seen so far I can understand the lack of familiarity with the offensive/defensive concepts. I can understand lacking chemistry with each other.

What bothers me is when I watch Danny shake his head and then stand and watch. Or worse, go one on five and take a contested off balance jumper. It applies to several players who when things start to go bad they fall into losing basketball.

Case in point, end of the Houston game. Roy is still in the game and gets the ball in the post. Everyone stops moving. Not Roy's fault, but you risk players falling into a pattern where they aren't engaged and start to play selfish. I'm not going to quote stats or join the ongoing chorus of fire Obrien, but from a psychological standpoint, if you aren't engaged, then this spills over to defense and rebounding. That's losing basketball.

Lastly, without getting into schemes etc, too much. Isn't there a way to incorporate things that excentuate what players are good at. I watched Nash with Phoenix this weekend, he had the ball in his hands almost the entire time. I'm not advocating this for DC, but doesn't it make sense to let him make plays in an environment he's proven that he's good at? I'm okay with expanding players game, I think it's a really good idea. I'm not for not putting guys in a situation where they aren't as engaged. It goes back to what we talked about last year, basically if you are going to run what the Pacers run, you don't need a Point Guard offensively, you need a guy who brings the ball up the court and is another wing.

Anyway, the concept I'm talking about isn't a rehash of coaching dynamics, it's about putting guys in a situation where they are engaged and invested with each other and with doing the right thing as a result.

Too early to make any determination, but this is my fear that it's like a mental snowball going downhill for this squad. Losing begets losing, imo. More importantly it's human nature if something isn't working to change, but if it's a change to a losing type mindset, it's self defeating.

I guess a good win on Wednesday would help, even if it doesn't count.

Is anyone else concerned about the mental degredation piece of this, so far?

No, you're worrying about nothing.
And you aren't the coach. ;)
Guys that stand around when Roy has the ball obviously don't understand the concept of getting it back if you cut.
We played the rookies and 2nd year players most of the 4th quarter against Orlando.
Don't sweat it.

MLB007
10-11-2010, 11:03 AM
I don't think I seen Danny try to go one on 5 at any point in these 3 games, i've seen him make some bad passes trying to get other involved though. I've also seen him make some great passes that his teammates totally screwed up on and either missed an easy dunk or lost the ball...ala Roy Hibbert.

Now I have seen him stand around and watch instead of crashing the boards, or get his pocket picked and not chase after the fast break. Which is a bit infuriating.

The biggest bad habit I've seen is that they are not rotating on defense, and leaving shooters wide open on the perimeter, and generally just not staying home on their man. They have been sagging off those 3 point shooters. I don't know if its just in anticipation for the rebound, or if they are just braining farting. Also they are not going under the picks and screens letting the point guard have his way into the lane. Best way to defend the pick and roll is go under the screen instead of trying to fight through it. You might give them a better look at a long 2, but atleast you are cutting off the path to the basket better. I can't believe JOB isn't emphasizing this consider most teams in the league will run PnR at us all year long if we show we can't defend it. Simply no reason to fight thru the pick unless you are faster than the PG you are covering.

You can't go under it and not leave the guy open. You have to be close enough to your man to slide through the pick.
It's basic defense.

MLB007
10-11-2010, 11:08 AM
I think Granger's body language has, for a long time, communicated that he barely tolerates O'Brien because that's what professionals do and he signed a contract (Danny's a man of his word.)

I hope things turn out really well in the long run, but if they don't, I think a lot of blame can be placed on Bird for encouraging a culture of not-very-fundamental basketball for way too long.

I think Danny is the one not doing the fundamentals that any reasonable coach would expect.
Quit dogging it on defense and crash the freaking boards for a change.

If anyone has gotten used to losing, but getting his shots up, it's Danny.

Get back to doing the little things that made him a borderline all star and then we'll talk about the coach.

MLB007
10-11-2010, 11:10 AM
I agree 110%, and I really alos feel Granger can't stand Jim

I dont have any evidence to back it up and its pure speculation, but I agree with McKey fan that Danny looks at times like a 10 year old who just lost his new puppy

IF Danny can't be excited about what this team can become (and I have no reason to think he can't) then he should be the one to go elsewhere.

graphic-er
10-11-2010, 11:12 AM
You can't go under it and not leave the guy open. You have to be close enough to your man to slide through the pick.
It's basic defense.

Thats if you can slide through the pick. We dont' have players who are able to do this. We got burnt on this vs. Houston alot.

NuffSaid
10-11-2010, 11:34 AM
I find myself coming to terms with this reality - this is an extremely young team and evidence supports that it takes experience to win in the NBA.

We have a lot of young pieces - in our starting lineup alone we have three players 24 or younger. Add to that a core mix of George, Hansbro, AJ, Lance and Rush - that is a young, inexperienced team. It takes 5 players to execute an offense/defense - one or two weak links can hurt you.

Can Grang, Dun, Foster, TJ and Inferno balance that inexperience? I'm not sure. I'm starting to think that the first half of this season will be a struggle as the Pacers get beat by veteran teams. It may not be until the second half of the season that the team starts showing its potential.

JOB is still trying to figure out exactly what that "balance" should be. He still has four more pre-season games to try and figure that out. I like that he started Hansborough w/Hibbert. That allows Hibbert to work inside and gives Hansborough the opportunity to rome and help clean up the offensive glass. I worry about finding that "balance" among other groups of players. For example, do you go with Granger, Collison and Dunleavy or Granger, Price and Rush? It's an interesting question from my perspective (atleast) because with the first trio you get player movement and better ball movement; Collison will pass the ball whereas Price generally won't. But in Price's defense, he is a very efficient scorer and I think he's a slightly better defender. So, for me it's not just about chemistry, it's also about matching the right skill sets together than compliment each other.

To that based on what I've seen of the players so far, my starters would be:

Hibbert - C
Hansborough - PF
Granger - SG
Collison - PG
Dunleavy - SF

Now, why Dunleavy at SF over Granger? They're both inner-changable honestly, but I think Dunleavy moves better and has the ability to either take the deep shot or work his way inside to score. Granger is the bigger scoring threat from outside. The defense will step out and respect him more than they would Dunleavy. I also believe Collison would work better with these two because he will pass the ball whereas Price and Ford tend to hold the ball more. If you have players who move well without the ball, you DON'T want a PG among them who has to have the ball in his hands more in order to be effective.

I think the 2nd Unit should consist of:

Foster - C
McRoberts - PF
Dahntay/Posey - SF
Price or Ford - PG
Rush/Stephenson (or Price, if going small) - SG

This group is abit more skiddish, but I think it could work mostly because this group is "scrappy". Unfortunately, the only real offense here is Price w/Rush and McRoberts being the next offensive threats in line.

If JOB wanted to go small, he could go with:

? - C
Granger - PF
Dunleavy - SF
Collison - PG
Price/Stephenson - SG

The odd men out, of course, are Rolle, George and S. Jones. I suppose if Solo sticks around you could plug him in at Center should JOB go small. I'm not sure what to do with Rolle right now except to say he's behind McRoberts in the PF rotation. If he played more at SF or C, I could see working him in for more minutes. But right now, I can't see him getting any meaningful minutes until the roster thins out some (next year). As for George, is he a SF or SG? I'm still not sure where he fits just yet. So, he gets the "wait until next year" vote from me for now.

Speed
10-11-2010, 11:36 AM
Over, under, or through depends on the player you're guarding, where you are on the floor, type of pick being set, and defensive concepts. It's really just basketball when it comes down to it.

A good defender can mix it up and keep the offense off guard. A bad defender gets worked consistently. It's much like the picker should read the situation and roll, pop, or open up and post, depending on what the defense does. Again, it's just basketball when it's all said and done.

It becomes instinctive when you get experience, it seems like rocket science when you don't know what you're doing.

The one thing that doesn't or shouldn't change is the max effort to work through that pick, no matter how you defend it.

My point is though, there isn't one right way to do it, but there is a bunch of wrong ways.

Brad8888
10-11-2010, 11:38 AM
The only thing we have to fear is fear itself, or so we've been told in the past. :hmm:

How you practice is how you play, which is what we have heard straight from O'Brien who supposedly has the players even practice hard on game days IIRC. So, yes, the preseason for the Pacers is not the same as the preseason for the Colts most years, and it does matter, and could easily influence the culture if fundamentally sound play is not being emphasized now, and team cohesion is not nurtured in the very near future. Lineup tinkering, and even a lineup abomination or two, is totally understandable during the early part of preseason, and losses and even blowouts are to be expected. But, the work being done during those times is key to successful implementation of the team strategy when the regular season quickly starts. Either that work doesn't seem to be very effective so far, or is still purely in its "evaluation" phase, or our players are so inept (as I assume O'Brien supporters tend to believe) with respect to picking up what the coaching staff is trying to implement that it is glaring even at this early stage, to a level that is of increasing concern in my view if improvements, especially defensively, are not seen in the next 3 or 4 games.

After being more hopeful for a short period prior to seeing the Pacers play both in person against Orlando, and then on TV against the Rockets, I have resumed feeling that until we see the Pacers almost inevitably fail to "Protect the Promise" and make the final and most critical change of all (hopefully just the coach being changed and the rest of our cap space being spent, whatever that amount will actually end up after the CBA changes, as opposed to the Pacers home city changing) that the only way for me to watch games and get enjoyment from them instead of heartburn is to focus on players who play the game the way I like seeing it played, and, if that fails, focusing on the guys who have the hot hand offensively and rooting for them to outscore the guy they are matched up with, and enjoy the highlight reel plays that occur along the way regardless of whether it is a Pacers player getting embarrassed or a Pacers player getting a dunk or blocking a shot, or enjoying periods when the shots fall and mask the inadequacies of the overall team strategy and its inherent weaknesses. That, as my decidedly negative posting indicates, is an iffy proposition for me, at best.

I am stopping just short of saying the season is doomed and that the record for the season will be as bad or worse than what we saw last year despite "upgrading" our talent, and also am not going to make an actual record prediction until the last week of preseason in the official prediction thread, but it may be that I have, as a typical human being, enough fingers and toes to give a good run at using them to tally the majority of the W's the Pacers might end up this season with unless an unforeseen change occurs with respect to leadership and culture within the franchise.

A lack of change is what frightens me the most. :shudder: :(

OakMoses
10-11-2010, 11:40 AM
Do you think he does some uncovential things and times, and if so have they generally worked out?

He does some things that do not fit in with a traditional view of basketball, especially in terms of positional roles. However, these things are not unprecedented new inventions. They are strategies that have been around for a long time and that are frequently used by other NBA coaches who have been both more and less successful than O'Brien.

As for working out, I don't know. I've not been happy with the W/L record or with some of the decisions concerning playing time for certain players. However, I can't say that I honestly believe it would have turned out markedly better with a different coach.

Hicks
10-11-2010, 01:40 PM
Warning, I'm going to write this on-the-fly:

My biggest fear is that our schemes on both sides of the ball are too complex and/or overcompensating (thinking of the D) for their own good.

Could be nothing, but it bugged me when I saw DC go OVER the pick defensively, when the P&R was happening in the corner, which allowed his man to go straight to the hoop on the other side. Whenever I think to look, it seems we always try to go over screens like that, wherever they are on the court.

I've read that teams what want to appear "aggressive" choose to do this, but I don't like it, personally. I wish we'd just go under and dare them to beat us with jumpers. We of all fan bases should know that eventually those shots will stop dropping after a while, and going under makes it easier to protect against dribble penetration and feeding the post.

Which leads me to the other concern I have with the D: When we do defend against the offensive presence in the paint, we over-compensate and drop everybody in there to flood the area. Sounds good, until you realize the other team knows that's our modus operandi, and they now have several players wide open.

I realize this is a philosophical difference, but that doesn't make it bug me any less. IIRC, both Popovich and Phil Jackson (guys who might know a thing or two) believe in encouraging the other team to shoot over the defense (obviously wanting to contest those shots as much as possible, but ultimately give up the jumper before you give up dribble penetration), and frankly, so do I.

That's usually an easier defense to execute, I think, because I believe (and admittedly could be mistaken) it's more about sticking with your man, not worrying about switching in situations where the other guy may not realize he has to cover for you (like against Orlando last week, when Mike picked up Danny's man to prevent the fastbreak layup should the point guard get Lewis the ball, but Danny didn't recognize it, kept chasing Lewis, and then the PG fed a wide-open Vince Carter on the other side of the floor for a 3).

But my biggest fear is this offense.

The more I watch it, the less I like it, and this goes for how it was the past two years, and this seemingly modified version we're going with this year.

I just don't like the concept of an offense that requires all five guys to be on the same page, moving, knowing when to pass versus when to shoot, being able to actually make said passes at all or on time, be in sync with one another, AND be able to spontaneously run a pick and roll or dribble penetrate in a timely, effective manner. It just seems like there's too many cogs moving at once, with any one of them capable of ruining the clock by getting stuck or moving at the wrong pace.

Most of our alleged "pick and rolls" suck because the timing is off, and/or the spacing isn't as good as it could be, and/or the picks are frankly a joke and worthless.

I've become more and more of a fan of meat-and-potatoes offense, meaning to always space the floor with something resembling 3 perimeter players, a mid-range post, and a low post, and from there either run picks and roll/pop, post up, and have a punch list of counters to what the defense may do to stop you. Rinse, repeat. I believe execution trumps unpredictability, and execution to me means being able to run what you do effectively and efficiently, while being ready at any moment to initiate a counter measure to whatever the defense tries to throw at you.

No, that probably won't instantly make the Pacers a good offensive team necessarily, but at least it should be easier for them to run, much easier to learn and try to perfect, and there should be less things that can go wrong to screw it up on any given possession.

As the talent increases and matures, so the offense will improve. Which really is true no matter what you run, but I'm a fan of keeping it as streamlines/simple as possible because that allows you to better/more quickly learn and understand it to a level where you'll eventually (in theory) be extremely good at handling anything a defense throws at you.

pacer4ever
10-11-2010, 01:44 PM
Warning, I'm going to write this on-the-fly:

My biggest fear is that our schemes on both sides of the ball are too complex and/or overcompensating (thinking of the D) for their own good.

Could be nothing, but it bugged me when I saw DC go OVER the pick defensively, when the P&R was happening in the corner, which allowed his man to go straight to the hoop on the other side. Whenever I think to look, it seems we always try to go over screens like that, wherever they are on the court.

I've read that teams what want to appear "aggressive" choose to do this, but I don't like it, personally. I wish we'd just go under and dare them to beat us with jumpers. We of all fan bases should know that eventually those shots will stop dropping after a while, and going under makes it easier to protect against dribble penetration and feeding the post.

Which leads me to the other concern I have with the D: When we do defend against the offensive presence in the paint, we over-compensate and drop everybody in there to flood the area. Sounds good, until you realize the other team knows that's our modus operandi, and they now have several players wide open.

I realize this is a philosophical difference, but that doesn't make it bug me any less. IIRC, both Popovich and Phil Jackson (guys who might know a thing or two) believe in encouraging the other team to shoot over the defense (obviously wanting to contest those shots as much as possible, but ultimately give up the jumper before you give up dribble penetration), and frankly, so do I.

That's usually an easier defense to execute, I think, because I believe (and admittedly could be mistaken) it's more about sticking with your man, not worrying about switching in situations where the other guy may not realize he has to cover for you (like against Orlando last week, when Mike picked up Danny's man to prevent the fastbreak layup should the point guard get Lewis the ball, but Danny didn't recognize it, kept chasing Lewis, and then the PG fed a wide-open Vince Carter on the other side of the floor for a 3).

But my biggest fear is this offense.

The more I watch it, the less I like it, and this goes for how it was the past two years, and this seemingly modified version we're going with this year.

I just don't like the concept of an offense that requires all five guys to be on the same page, moving, knowing when to pass versus when to shoot, be in sync with one another, AND be able to spontaneously run a pick and roll or dribble penetrate in a timely, effective manner. It just seems like there's too many cogs moving at once, with any one of them capable of ruining the clock by getting stuck or moving at the wrong pace.

I've become more and more of a fan of meat-and-potatoes offense, meaning to always space the floor with something resembling 3 perimeter players, a mid-range post, and a low post, and from there either run picks and roll/pop, post up, and have a punch list of counters to what the defense may do to stop you. Rinse, repeat. I believe execution trumps unpredictability, and execution to me means being able to run what you do effectively and efficiently, while being ready at any moment to initiate a counter measure to whatever the defense tries to throw at you.

No, that probably won't instantly make the Pacers a good offensive team necessarily, but at least it should be easier for them to run, much easier to learn and try to perfect, and there should be less things that can go wrong to screw it up on any given possession.

As the talent increases and matures, so the offense will improve. Which really is true no matter what you run, but I'm a fan of keeping it as streamlines/simple as possible because that allows you to better/more quickly learn and understand it to a level where you'll eventually (in theory) be extremely good at handling anything a defense throws at you.

The NBA has changed JOB has not. The new NBA is an Iso. based game get your best players one on one on a mis match. Some teams play a two man game which is the PnR and couple other varations. Which work pretty well wonder when JOB will figure this out?

Unclebuck
10-11-2010, 01:51 PM
The NBA has changed JOB has not. The new NBA is an Iso. based game get your best players one on one on a mis match. Some teams play a two man game which is the PnR and couple other varations. Which work pretty well wonder when JOB will figure this out?

Won't comment on the JOB part of this.

I see you are 17 years old, but the NBA has changed it is a lot less iso, a lot less two man game. You probably weren't watching the NBA in the 90's though - you see much more 5 on 5 after the new rules were put in place earlier this decade.

has there been a change in the past 2 or 3 years? I don't see it, I see more and more teams playing 5 on 5 as you cannot iso as much because the defense is aloowed to play a zone for the most part

Trophy
10-11-2010, 01:52 PM
I think they'll get out of this slump once the regular season starts because even last season, the role players never played this bad and careless.

We have a way better team now and no one is playing like they would if it matters.

Also when the season starts, the starters' minutes will increase.

It's only preseason so I'm not worried yet unless it does carry into the regular season.

pacer4ever
10-11-2010, 02:00 PM
Won't comment on the JOB part of this.

I see you are 17 years old, but the NBA has changed it is a lot less iso, a lot less two man game. You probably weren't watching the NBA in the 90's though - you see much more 5 on 5 after the new rules were put in place earlier this decade.

has there been a change in the past 2 or 3 years? I don't see it, I see more and more teams playing 5 on 5 as you cannot iso as much because the defense is aloowed to play a zone for the most part

Most teams i watched last year played a 2 man game the mavs,LA(sort of), cavs and several other that is just what i observed.To me the new nba and its rule is more about getting your stars the ball and letting them go to work.

Unclebuck
10-11-2010, 02:03 PM
Most teams i watched last year played a 2 man game the mavs,LA(sort of), cavs and several other that is just what i observed.To me the new nba and its rule is more about getting your stars the ball and letting them go to work.

Not nearly as much as it was in the 90's when the defensive rules made it much more difficult to guard one great player either on the perimeter or especially in the post. (although this was a little offset by no handchecking)

When do you remember starting to watch the NBA?

Putnam
10-11-2010, 02:04 PM
I've become more and more of a fan of meat-and-potatoes offense, meaning to always space the floor with something resembling 3 perimeter players, a mid-range post, and a low post, and from there either run picks and roll/pop, post up, and have a punch list of counters to what the defense may do to stop you. Rinse, repeat.


Would that put one or two players being pretty much stationary during the possession?


I can see the value of one player out of five holding his position. The ball handler can count on him to be there no matter what else happens. On the other hand, Brandon Rush draws a lot of criticism here already for standing still instead of moving with the offense. How much worse could that get? (Supposing the change was made and the wins didn't start coming immediately after.)

graphic-er
10-11-2010, 02:23 PM
Warning, I'm going to write this on-the-fly:

My biggest fear is that our schemes on both sides of the ball are too complex and/or overcompensating (thinking of the D) for their own good.

Could be nothing, but it bugged me when I saw DC go OVER the pick defensively, when the P&R was happening in the corner, which allowed his man to go straight to the hoop on the other side. Whenever I think to look, it seems we always try to go over screens like that, wherever they are on the court.

I've read that teams what want to appear "aggressive" choose to do this, but I don't like it, personally. I wish we'd just go under and dare them to beat us with jumpers. We of all fan bases should know that eventually those shots will stop dropping after a while, and going under makes it easier to protect against dribble penetration and feeding the post.

Which leads me to the other concern I have with the D: When we do defend against the offensive presence in the paint, we over-compensate and drop everybody in there to flood the area. Sounds good, until you realize the other team knows that's our modus operandi, and they now have several players wide open.

I realize this is a philosophical difference, but that doesn't make it bug me any less. IIRC, both Popovich and Phil Jackson (guys who might know a thing or two) believe in encouraging the other team to shoot over the defense (obviously wanting to contest those shots as much as possible, but ultimately give up the jumper before you give up dribble penetration), and frankly, so do I.

That's usually an easier defense to execute, I think, because I believe (and admittedly could be mistaken) it's more about sticking with your man, not worrying about switching in situations where the other guy may not realize he has to cover for you (like against Orlando last week, when Mike picked up Danny's man to prevent the fastbreak layup should the point guard get Lewis the ball, but Danny didn't recognize it, kept chasing Lewis, and then the PG fed a wide-open Vince Carter on the other side of the floor for a 3).

But my biggest fear is this offense.

The more I watch it, the less I like it, and this goes for how it was the past two years, and this seemingly modified version we're going with this year.

I just don't like the concept of an offense that requires all five guys to be on the same page, moving, knowing when to pass versus when to shoot, being able to actually make said passes at all or on time, be in sync with one another, AND be able to spontaneously run a pick and roll or dribble penetrate in a timely, effective manner. It just seems like there's too many cogs moving at once, with any one of them capable of ruining the clock by getting stuck or moving at the wrong pace.

Most of our alleged "pick and rolls" suck because the timing is off, and/or the spacing isn't as good as it could be, and/or the picks are frankly a joke and worthless.

I've become more and more of a fan of meat-and-potatoes offense, meaning to always space the floor with something resembling 3 perimeter players, a mid-range post, and a low post, and from there either run picks and roll/pop, post up, and have a punch list of counters to what the defense may do to stop you. Rinse, repeat. I believe execution trumps unpredictability, and execution to me means being able to run what you do effectively and efficiently, while being ready at any moment to initiate a counter measure to whatever the defense tries to throw at you.

No, that probably won't instantly make the Pacers a good offensive team necessarily, but at least it should be easier for them to run, much easier to learn and try to perfect, and there should be less things that can go wrong to screw it up on any given possession.

As the talent increases and matures, so the offense will improve. Which really is true no matter what you run, but I'm a fan of keeping it as streamlines/simple as possible because that allows you to better/more quickly learn and understand it to a level where you'll eventually (in theory) be extremely good at handling anything a defense throws at you.

As I have said it earlier. I agree that they need to go under that pick and take their chance with the jumper. A fast guard like DC should be able to recover and limit the open shots when going under.

As far as the defensive complexity, I also agree. I think in the past JOB has implemented this massive help defense system because we just simply didn't have the players capable of playing man to man very well. I think this year he needs to let everyone athleticism shine through more and let them face up, or atleast play the passing lanes better. I won't mind them getting beat if they are trying for the deflection, but the idea that they get beat every play because 1person makes the mental error of not switching or not picking up somebody just seems like its a self defeating philosophy.

Now for the offense. I think the main problem is that they are very predictable. As in certainly players will always do one thing the majority of the time. Danny will take a 3pointer hand in face or not. 2 years ago Danny Granger loved taking the mid-range shot coming off a screen or curl. Take for instance Hibbert's new role so far. They get him the ball now in the high post/elbow and want him to pass it to cutters or shoot the mid range J. He has hit that shot pretty good, but he had separation. You can be sure that teams are going to catch on and basically blanket hibbert in the high post to keep him from making a play, its not like he is going to drive around the defender out there. So you can play him tight all day long.

Down in the low post his game is predictable there as well. He backs his man down and almost always goes for the Jump hook. Its a hard shot to defend against, but just 2 nights ago Jared Jefferies came from the weak side and blocked that jump hook all because of anticipation. Next possession Jefferies again came from the weak side and tried to block this time Roy spun base line off his defender and took a fade-away jumper. Which is not a great shot in my opinion from our 7-2 center. But the point is that teams already know whats going on and its down to execution.

Speed
10-11-2010, 02:34 PM
Whats sad to me growing up in Indiana having the luck to play and coach basketball all my life, the stuff Obie's trying to do is just basketball or basketball the way I learned it. The way it's been taught for generations here.

On offense, the whole is greater than the sum of it's parts. You move with purpose, do things to get teammates open, work together to get a layup/dunk or a really good open shot. Its the motion offense and it's almost unguardable when executed correctly by the right people.

On defense, help side defense. Doesn't give up layup/dunks, makes the opposition take contested jump shots.

Watch IU under Bob Knight during the 81 and 87 championships to see it in it's purest form.

For every fundamental thing you practice there's a practical application.

I understand why Dunleavy probably gets frustrated.

To me it's just basketball and it's really frustrating to fathom why professionals can't grasp it. Sure there are variations of the same concepts with emphasis on certain details. Isiah tried to call it the quick and act like he invented it, but it's really just basketball.

With all that said, Hicks is probably right, dumb it down so it can be effective.

I though, will always believe there is a right way to play and a wrong way. It's pretty black and white for me.

pacer4ever
10-11-2010, 02:35 PM
Not nearly as much as it was in the 90's when the defensive rules made it much more difficult to guard one great player either on the perimeter or especially in the post. (although this was a little offset by no handchecking)

When do you remember starting to watch the NBA?

2000 when we went to the finals loved watching the trailblazers that year lol. But arent the rules even worse now you cant even hand check?

pacer4ever
10-11-2010, 02:37 PM
Whats sad to me growing up in Indiana having the luck to play and coach basketball all my life, the stuff Obie's trying to do is just basketball or basketball the way I learned it. The way it's been taught for generations here.

On offense, the whole is greater than the sum of it's parts. You move with purpose, do things to get teammates open, work together to get a layup/dunk or a really good open shot. Its the motion offense and it's almost unguardable when executed correctly by the right people.

On defense, help side defense. Doesn't give up layup/dunks, makes the opposition take contested jump shots.

Watch IU under Bob Knight during the 81 and 87 championships to see it in it's purest form.

To me it's just basketball and it's really frustrating to fathom why professionals can't grasp it.

It is how college game should be played and highschool but the NBA is a different game. I love watching Purdue play because thats how they play.

Unclebuck
10-11-2010, 02:40 PM
I'm not a fan of going under the pick and roll. Sure maybe against a few of the point guards who are not good shooters, but you cannot give most point guards wide open 18 ft jumpers. Beyond that obvious point, I don't like going under the pick because it encourages soft defense when you do this you have two players the guy defendign the point guard and the big guy defending the pickee both in no man's land - not guarding anyone.

The best way to defend it is when the point guard fights over the pick and with Collison and Price, we should be able to do that. In general though as long as whatever way your defense decides to defend it just be aggressive and do not allow the point guard to get into the lane.

A lot depends on who the opponent is, you cannot defend it just 1 way. Sometimes you have to switch it, sometimes you have to trap it, sometimes you have to force it baseline, sometimes you have to have the big guy hedge and allow the defending point guard to get back on his man.

It takes a lot of practice though to perfect the defense - it is something that teams need to work on almost everyday in practice. Also vital what the other 3 players are doing.

The only constant you see with the really good defensive teams is that they play aggressive, no matter how they defense and PnR - they are aggresive and have complete team commitment. I think the Celtics the past 3 seasons have put on a clinic in team defense. But they are on such a higher level than the pacers it is hard to compare

Speed
10-11-2010, 02:52 PM
It is how college should be played and highschool but the NBA is a different game. I love watching Purdue play because thats how they play.

It's a good observation, but why doesn't it work in the NBA?

I think it's because you have 15 guys who were almost all the focal point of there teams growing up. You don't have the role players at an elite level. Guys who will sacrifice and set true picks, rotate the ball with the pass before the assist. Everybody is working towards the next contract, there's no stat for helping your teammate by causing the guy they are guarding to take a tough shot when playing help side.

The only other reason I could see that it doesn't work in a pure form at the NBA level is the shot clock. It's difficult or really impossible to keep running it until you get a lay up, sometimes you just don't have enough time in 24 seconds to get THAT good of a shot.

Listen, with my background I see basketball different than some on here.

I see it from team psychological perspective and from basic fundamentals as I learned them since I was 5. Again, I was lucky to be around people who understood the game.

It's not necessarily better or worse, but stats aren't as valuable to me as they are to some.

I put more value on the Derrick McKeys and Shane Battiers of the world than the AIs or Antione Walkers.

It's also the reason I think Larry Brown is probably the best coach on the planet. Although maybe the craziest too.

I still believe if you have guys who will buy into these ideas it will work at the NBA level. Yes you still need talent, but thats not the end all be all, it's still a team sport.

pacer4ever
10-11-2010, 02:57 PM
It's a good observation, but why doesn't it work in the NBA?

I think it's because you have 15 guys who were almost all the focal point of there teams growing up. You don't have the role players at an elite level. Guys who will sacrifice and set true picks, rotate the ball with the pass before the assist. Everybody is working towards the next contract, there's no stat for helping your teammate by causing the guy they are guarding to take a tough shot when playing help side.

The only other reason I could see that it doesn't work in a pure form at the NBA level is the shot clock. It's difficult or really impossible to keep running it until you get a lay up, sometimes you just don't have enough time in 24 seconds to get THAT good of a shot.

Listen, with my background I see basketball different than some on here.

I see it from team psychological perspective and from basic fundamentals as I learned them since I was 5. Again, I was lucky to be around people who understood the game.

It's not necessarily better or worse, but stats aren't as valuable to me as they are to some.

I put more value on the Derrick McKeys and Shane Battiers of the world than the AIs or Antione Walkers.

It's also the reason I think Larry Brown is probably the best coach on the planet. Although maybe the craziest too.

I still believe if you have guys who will buy into these ideas it will work at the NBA level. Yes you still need talent, but thats not the end all be all, it's still a team sport.


purdue is unself thats why it works but in the nba they have stars and people or want touches. JOB should of coached the 04 pistons

Tom White
10-11-2010, 03:01 PM
It is how college game should be played and highschool but the NBA is a different game.

No, it isn't. Although I think a lot of people like to think it is.

All the principles are the same. What is so different about the NBA vs. college ball?

The objectives are still the same. Try to make it as difficult as possible for your opponent to get a good shot. Make them earn what they get. Try to make it as easy as possible to get your own team good shots. Play hard. Block out. Be aware. It is the same thing. Too many people think the NBA is a bunch of super-human players out there that don't fall prey to the same laws of physics as other people. It simply isn't true.

Now, what I will say is different from the college game is the freedom given to some players do "do their own thing". This has to do with money more than anything else. In college, a coach might pull the reins in on a star player who tends to freelance more than the coach wants. In the NBA, if a coach tries to do that to his star, generally the coach will be the one to suffer the consequences, not the player.

So, the game is the same. However there are differences in the game-within-the-game.

spazzxb
10-11-2010, 03:06 PM
I don't think O'Brien cares about public perception at all. I firmly believe that his main goal is to win basketball games, and that he does the things he thinks will give the team the best chance to win.

the only way to do his job correctly is to ignore fans perception. If Larry listened to the publics opinions we wouldn't be in the position we are in right now. Young talented core with a lot of money about to be available. The common fan has 0 concern for the long term or strategy, its all about instant gratification.

naptownmenace
10-11-2010, 03:47 PM
I think it is a big concern. The problem with saying it is only preseason is that other teams
are basically giving the same effort and every team will ratchet up the intensity come regular
season. So to pin our hopes on really trying in the regular season I think is false hope.
I see a lot of immaturity affecting this years team. I am concerned about our coach asking
the team to be something they really are not especially at the point guard. As much as I hate changing coaches if this team is floundering 20 games in the problem should fall in the lap of Obrien.

I'm in this boat. I've watched the Heat during their first 2 games and they are bringing it will regular season force. Of course they have Bosh and Lebron but all their peripheral guys are playing well and with tons of energy. It was a preseason game for Houston too but they played great. This isn't the NFL. The preseason excuse doesn't quite work the same.

I don't care that much if they win or lose during the preseason but they shouldn't be playing this poorly all the way across the board. There was no trust on offense and they failed to challenge shots on defense. I understand that they are trying to implement new players and are trying out different rotations to see if they work but the lack of defensive effort and ball movement on offense was extremely troubling.

MLB007
10-11-2010, 03:58 PM
The NBA has changed JOB has not. The new NBA is an Iso. based game get your best players one on one on a mis match. Some teams play a two man game which is the PnR and couple other varations. Which work pretty well wonder when JOB will figure this out?

:bs:

The STARS can pull off consistant isolation games, and even then the margin for error is extremely high as it's a very limited offense.
If you don't have the star talent it is easy to defend an incredibly predictable.

MLB007
10-11-2010, 04:02 PM
Thats if you can slide through the pick. We dont' have players who are able to do this. We got burnt on this vs. Houston alot.

Well that's just execution.
It's HARD work.
And you will get popped.
But you can't say "Ok, we'll just pass under", they'll kill you with open jumpers!!!

Hicks
10-11-2010, 04:07 PM
Fighting through picks can also let them drive right into the lane. I'd rather take my chances with them hitting jumpshots.

MLB007
10-11-2010, 04:08 PM
Over, under, or through depends on the player you're guarding, where you are on the floor, type of pick being set, and defensive concepts. It's really just basketball when it comes down to it.

A good defender can mix it up and keep the offense off guard. A bad defender gets worked consistently. It's much like the picker should read the situation and roll, pop, or open up and post, depending on what the defense does. Again, it's just basketball when it's all said and done.

It becomes instinctive when you get experience, it seems like rocket science when you don't know what you're doing.

The one thing that doesn't or shouldn't change is the max effort to work through that pick, no matter how you defend it.

My point is though, there isn't one right way to do it, but there is a bunch of wrong ways.

There's different philosphies, but I don't know of many coaches that would agree on doing it differently based on situations. Whichever way they believe in, that's what they want you doing ALL the time.
Consistancy leads to improvement.
Changing it situationaly leaves too much up the player to judge.
MAYBE with your stud defender (if you have one) but not with most of the team.

Nobody is going to choose to ride through a pick set my a very large guy.
That just leads to taking the easy way out.
And crappy defense. :)

MLB007
10-11-2010, 04:10 PM
Fighting through picks can also let them drive right into the lane. I'd rather take my chances with them hitting jumpshots.

"can" well sure.
So can falling down.
But if you PLAY DEFENSE and do it right, nobody gets an open shot as the defender STAYS with their man through the pick.
The REAL killer is when you switch.
There will always be a split second of clean air to get a shot off on the switch, if not a break down that leads to a layup.
That's what makes it almost impossible to defend it against STAR talent.
A Dwayne Wade or Kobe WILL get that sniff of open space that is all they need.
EVEN when other teams know what is coming, but teams without STAR talent at one of the two positions (both is better) just wont' be consistent enough as the defense swarms on it.
It's NOT hard to defend against "normal" type players.
VERY PREDICTABLE.
If you think NBA teams won't kill you if you give them 15' open jumpers, don't know what to tell you. :p

Hicks
10-11-2010, 04:13 PM
I don't think NBA players are disciplined enough to keep going back to the well more than a few times in a row, and I also don't think it's likely they'll keep hitting it long enough to not want to try something else.

And that's all assuming they're even open each time. Fast PGs can get around the picks quickly, and you can still use your other players to help if need be, starting of course with the man guarding the pick setter. You can often have him hedge and recover, and if need be have help ready if he can't recover.

Since86
10-11-2010, 04:15 PM
There's different philosphies, but I don't know of many coaches that would agree on doing it differently based on situations. Whichever way they believe in, that's what they want you doing ALL the time.
Consistancy leads to improvement.
Changing it situationaly leaves too much up the player to judge.
MAYBE with your stud defender (if you have one) but not with most of the team.

Nobody is going to choose to ride through a pick set my a very large guy.
That just leads to taking the easy way out.
And crappy defense. :)

Coaches change this up situationally even at the high school level. I know we did.

If Jamaal Tinsley is on the other team, and they're running a PnR scheme, I know I want to go under the screen, and cut him off before he gets in the lane. I will let him step back and shoot coming off the screen every single time, until he shows he can consistantly knock down the shot.

A player like Stephen Curry, I'm going to fight over the screen and try to put my hand in his face if he goes for the shot, and if he doesn't I'm going to bust my *** to get back into position.

It's not hard to understand player scouting reports, especially at the NBA level where all these guys know each other pretty well and know their strengths and weaknesses.

It might get a little complicated when you have to deal with defensive rotations and when Rush gets switched out on to a PG and DC on a SG, and then you have your set ways on how to react, but knowing your opposing players strengths/weaknesses and taking away the strength making them beat you with their weakness isn't asking too much, especially at the NBA level.

I would rather pound my head against my desk than watch our PG go over the top against players that can't shoot a lick from outside. That's just Basketball 101, and it definately can, and should be done different depending on what player has the ball and what player is setting the screen.

Unclebuck
10-11-2010, 04:18 PM
Fighting through picks can also let them drive right into the lane. I'd rather take my chances with them hitting jumpshots.

Look at it this way. If you allow the point guard to get a point blank shot (keep in mind if you go under the pick, teams will force the pick and roll closer and closer to the free line area - watch where the Celtics run their pick and roll when Rondo is in the game and teams back off him) (if you trap the pick and roll teams like to move the high pick and roll out further to spread the defense out). Oops sorry to get off on that tangent. But if you just allow the point guiard to get wide open 15ft shots, not only will they hit a lot of those, but you also will create very few turnovers, if you force the point guard to pass the ball more turnovers will occur - you have a big guy handling the ball.

Overall though I think the approach you are suggesting is a defeatis approach. beyond that I don't know if any team that goes under the pick as their normal course of defending the PnR. Once again, sure against certain point guards you cando it, most teams defend Rondo that way.

When you fight through the pick it is the big guys job to hedge and slow the ballhandler down to allow the defender to fight through and back to his man.

I've always liked trapping the pick and roll. make the offense make another pass, force a big guy to handle the ball .

Hicks, with Collison and Price, I would love teams to go udner the pick, give those two guys wide open looks would be nice, and you still can move the ball easily as there is no pressure on the ball handler

TheDon
10-11-2010, 04:39 PM
What worries me the most is that the way things are going in the pre-season is a bigger problem than some want to think. Even Roy in his tweets is strongly discouraged about his ability out there on the court the last two that I remember seeing from him was an apology for "letting pacer nation down" and that he needs to change something about his game. I understand I would rather him be worried and acknowledge the problems and want to change them but it seems to me at least like it's a big deal to the players the way things are going.

Midcoasted
10-11-2010, 04:41 PM
I'm going to start countering this doom and gloom, we are going to win 10 games attitude with some serious homer sunshine. I mean for every one extreme there needs to be the opposite to balance it.

We are going to win 50 games. We are going to have 2 All Stars this year, either Collison and Granger or Collison and Hibbert, Hansbrough will play 82 games and really be the answer at PF, with McBob sweeping up any minutes left. Collison's assists numbers won't be great, but he will average 20 and 7, and win way more than a third of his games. Paul George is going to be rookie of the year, and Rush is going to come out blazing. Dunleavy will return to his old form which we will acquire another piece of the puzzle with due to his expiring deal and the ability to help a playoff team short on offensive wings. He will probably be packaged with TJ Ford.

Foster will ride the pine and retire for a player development position, and Magnum Rolle will be the athletic backup big we've so desperately needed. Espescially when he is teamed with McRoberts. Jmac + Rolle equals second team domination. Price and Stephenson off the bench in the backcourt also create loads of matchup problems for opponents second unit. Our 10 man rotation will be as follows.

Collison
Price
Stephenson
Rush
George
Granger
Hansbrough
McRoberts
Rolle
Hibbert.

I'm hoping Posey and Solo are cut, and the rest of the players are buried on the bench.

Gotta love the sunshine predicitions...;):D:happydanc:dance::laugh::cool::-p:buddies:

Justin Tyme
10-11-2010, 04:42 PM
I don't think O'Brien cares about public perception at all. I firmly believe that his main goal is to win basketball games, and that he does the things he thinks will give the team the best chance to win.

I agree about how he thinks about public perception. And I feel he thinks his way of coaching is the only way to the point of just being down right stubborn. For 3 years, I've watched his helter skelter run n gun with little "D" fail, and yet he kept right on doing it. A record of 104-142 should suggest to the most stubborn with an acute case of tunnel vision that it just ain't work'n! Keep do'n the same thing getting the same poor results should say something to even the most stubborn. His thinking that his coaching will get the best possible results has failed for THREE YEARS. I don't care if he was successful in Boston or Philly, it as obvious as the nose on his face it ain't work'n here.

I've never asked for Jimmy to be fired, but I can say his tenure as the Pacers coach can't end fast enough for me. I still feel Monty Williams would have been a good replacement for O'Brien this year. JMOAA

BillS
10-11-2010, 04:49 PM
What worries me the most is that the way things are going in the pre-season is a bigger problem than some want to think. Even Roy in his tweets is strongly discouraged about his ability out there on the court the last two that I remember seeing from him was an apology for "letting pacer nation down" and that he needs to change something about his game. I understand I would rather him be worried and acknowledge the problems and want to change them but it seems to me at least like it's a big deal to the players the way things are going.

You'd rather have them not care?

The funny thing to me is that I would bet this isn't unusual, we are just hearing about it more because of things like twitter.

I would EXPECT a professional in any area to be concerned when his or her performance isn't up to the standards he or she has set for him or her self. Why would an NBA player be any different?

I think we'll have to add to the old "never get too high over a win or too low over a loss" the new adage "never get too concerned about a tweet in the heat of the moment"

TheDon
10-11-2010, 05:12 PM
You'd rather have them not care?

The funny thing to me is that I would bet this isn't unusual, we are just hearing about it more because of things like twitter.

I would EXPECT a professional in any area to be concerned when his or her performance isn't up to the standards he or she has set for him or her self. Why would an NBA player be any different?

I think we'll have to add to the old "never get too high over a win or too low over a loss" the new adage "never get too concerned about a tweet in the heat of the moment"


I said as much as my post that I understand and would rather them acknowledge their problems and fix them. What bothers me is when people chalk up all these pre-season failures to not a big deal when it is clearly a big deal to the players.

I get what you're saying Bill, I think maybe that I think there is a happy medium somewhere to my concerns and the people wanting to look the other way. I would not be so worried about pre-season if this was a team like the Colts who just coast through pre-season hoping to rack up as little injuries as possible while just getting a feel for things and sharpen their own game. This is a very young team though, and lots of new pieces. So I think that what we are seeing now will reflect at least early on what we are going to see during the early parts of the season. I hope that i'm just more worried than I need to be

Peck
10-11-2010, 05:15 PM
I think a fear, how big I don't know, is that the front part of our schedule is very hard and if we stay competative then no big deal per say.

But if you see several blow outs with us having a 20 point deficit each game then I do think that there might be some long term problems for the players and certainly the fans.

As long as the team stays in it each game I don't see a problem but we just can't have 20 & 30 point losses frequently.

I mean nobody was happy about Fridays loss to Orlando but I think almost everyone shrugged it off. Saturdays thrashing by Houston on the other hand was a little more hard to just forget about.

Pre-season sure, but still.....

BillS
10-11-2010, 05:28 PM
I said as much as my post that I understand and would rather them acknowledge their problems and fix them. What bothers me is when people chalk up all these pre-season failures to not a big deal when it is clearly a big deal to the players.

I get what you're saying Bill, I think maybe that I think there is a happy medium somewhere to my concerns and the people wanting to look the other way. I would not be so worried about pre-season if this was a team like the Colts who just coast through pre-season hoping to rack up as little injuries as possible while just getting a feel for things and sharpen their own game. This is a very young team though, and lots of new pieces. So I think that what we are seeing now will reflect at least early on what we are going to see during the early parts of the season. I hope that i'm just more worried than I need to be

The players, especially at this time of year, are going to look very short-term and are going to be affected by every flaw that manifests on the court as soon as it manifests. That's good, because the "not worried about it" long term view depends heavily on the players and staff noticing and correcting those problems that always exist after a long off-season and with a very changed roster.

When stated the way they are stating it, their concern is what supports a longer-term more copacetic view. If they were saying (as players have been known to say) "We'll never measure up, we suck and there's nothing we can do about it" - OK, that's the time to worry BIG.

Brad8888
10-11-2010, 06:02 PM
Rush is going to come out blazing.

"Blazing"????? You have got to be kidding...what a choice of words. :laugh:

Sookie
10-11-2010, 06:28 PM
I think with screens it really depends on the player. For godsakes go under screens when going up against Rondo or Rose. But I think I'd yank a player instantly if they started going under screens for say..Steve Nash (although, when Nash plays PnR, Phoenix is more than likely going to score. Good luck stopping it.)

The offense. We have a ton of high IQ players, but they are young. (And I'm questioning whether Granger is one of them - which is a problem. If you're running an offense that requires our best player to have a high IQ on the bball court.) So really, there's positives and negatives. I would prefer a more traditional offense, but I'm not sure that completely fits with our players either. I think we need a coach that can adust to the needs of the team.

cordobes
10-11-2010, 08:03 PM
Whats sad to me growing up in Indiana having the luck to play and coach basketball all my life, the stuff Obie's trying to do is just basketball or basketball the way I learned it. The way it's been taught for generations here.

On offense, the whole is greater than the sum of it's parts. You move with purpose, do things to get teammates open, work together to get a layup/dunk or a really good open shot. Its the motion offense and it's almost unguardable when executed correctly by the right people.

On defense, help side defense. Doesn't give up layup/dunks, makes the opposition take contested jump shots.

Watch IU under Bob Knight during the 81 and 87 championships to see it in it's purest form.

For every fundamental thing you practice there's a practical application.

I understand why Dunleavy probably gets frustrated.

To me it's just basketball and it's really frustrating to fathom why professionals can't grasp it. Sure there are variations of the same concepts with emphasis on certain details. Isiah tried to call it the quick and act like he invented it, but it's really just basketball.

With all that said, Hicks is probably right, dumb it down so it can be effective.

I though, will always believe there is a right way to play and a wrong way. It's pretty black and white for me.

I think most of that stuff are things that every basketball coach tries to do: defensively, eliminate the easy baskets, force contested shots; the whole is greater than the parts, move with purpose, get the open shot, move the players, move the ball... who doesn't want that?

Getting it done it's an whole different issue. And some stuff ones uses to try to achieve that may get it done at a level but it wont' work at a different level or in a different level.

Taking the example you give: Knight had those teams going underneath the screen defending the screen/roll game, as Hicks also proposes. It's a simple way of defending that play, prevents rotations, keeps everybody in good position for rebounding. Problem is that lots of NBA guards these days will destroy any team that defends their pick'n'roll like that. They're too athletic, too explosive and too good making open jump-shots.

Another good example: Knight teams would play help-defense on the weakside by staying one step to the ball-side when the ball was below the free-throw line extended. That's impossible to do in the NBA because of the defensive 3 seconds rule; but even if it was possible, it's often permeable against NBA offenses that are able to reverse the ball cleanly and quickly from side to side and have naked wing shooters who can hit open shots very accurately (curiously the Pacers overcommit quite a bit in their help positioning - probably a consequence of the lack of quickness from the bigs and 1x1 defensive skills from the wings). In fact, Knight's teams defensive proficiency declined as his career went further probably due to his stagnant defensive schemes vs. the ever increasing athleticism of the players.

cordobes
10-11-2010, 08:15 PM
A lot depends on who the opponent is, you cannot defend it just 1 way. Sometimes you have to switch it, sometimes you have to trap it, sometimes you have to force it baseline, sometimes you have to have the big guy hedge and allow the defending point guard to get back on his man.

I agree that you need to change your approach for some situations. However, I also think you need to have a core philosophy. Also seemed to me that teams that tried to defend the screen/roll in a different way for any different situation - this way on the wing, that way the high pick'n'roll, the 5 drops down, the 4 hedges hard, etc - never had very good results. There's limited time to practice and the players ability to execute something well is also limited.

A side note but somewhat related: defending the pick'n'roll is a lot about experience. It's a lot about recognition/reaction and synchronization. Young players generally tend to do poorly defending this play - so for a team with a young roster like Indiana this may be a problem.

Justin Tyme
10-11-2010, 08:17 PM
I think we need a coach that can adust to the needs of the team.

AMEN!!!!!!

You might add that the team shouldn't have to adjust to the coach in this situation.

Kemo
10-11-2010, 08:55 PM
I'm in this boat. I've watched the Heat during their first 2 games and they are bringing it will regular season force. Of course they have Bosh and Lebron but all their peripheral guys are playing well and with tons of energy. It was a preseason game for Houston too but they played great. This isn't the NFL. The preseason excuse doesn't quite work the same.

I don't care that much if they win or lose during the preseason but they shouldn't be playing this poorly all the way across the board. There was no trust on offense and they failed to challenge shots on defense. I understand that they are trying to implement new players and are trying out different rotations to see if they work but the lack of defensive effort and ball movement on offense was extremely troubling.


I agree.. But I really think that alot of the guys .. especially the ones coming off of just healing from a major injury , are a bit skiddish about going all out during the preseason..

Seriously... how bad would that suck to get re-injured during a preseason game that doesn't even count...

Speed
10-11-2010, 09:04 PM
I think most of that stuff are things that every basketball coach tries to do: defensively, eliminate the easy baskets, force contested shots; the whole is greater than the parts, move with purpose, get the open shot, move the players, move the ball... who doesn't want that?

Getting it done it's an whole different issue. And some stuff ones uses to try to achieve that may get it done at a level but it wont' work at a different level or in a different level.

Taking the example you give: Knight had those teams going underneath the screen defending the screen/roll game, as Hicks also proposes. It's a simple way of defending that play, prevents rotations, keeps everybody in good position for rebounding. Problem is that lots of NBA guards these days will destroy any team that defends their pick'n'roll like that. They're too athletic, too explosive and too good making open jump-shots.

Another good example: Knight teams would play help-defense on the weakside by staying one step to the ball-side when the ball was below the free-throw line extended. That's impossible to do in the NBA because of the defensive 3 seconds rule; but even if it was possible, it's often permeable against NBA offenses that are able to reverse the ball cleanly and quickly from side to side and have naked wing shooters who can hit open shots very accurately (curiously the Pacers overcommit quite a bit in their help positioning - probably a consequence of the lack of quickness from the bigs and 1x1 defensive skills from the wings). In fact, Knight's teams defensive proficiency declined as his career went further probably due to his stagnant defensive schemes vs. the ever increasing athleticism of the players.


Knights teams were example of pureness, as I had stated. So the concepts could and do still apply, imo. I completely disagree that increased athleticism diminishes the effectiveness of these things, again its still basketball. I think individualism and lack of williness to sacrifice do, though.

Sookie
10-11-2010, 09:06 PM
I agree that you need to change your approach for some situations. However, I also think you need to have a core philosophy. Also seemed to me that teams that tried to defend the screen/roll in a different way for any different situation - this way on the wing, that way the high pick'n'roll, the 5 drops down, the 4 hedges hard, etc - never had very good results. There's limited time to practice and the players ability to execute something well is also limited.

A side note but somewhat related: defending the pick'n'roll is a lot about experience. It's a lot about recognition/reaction and synchronization. Young players generally tend to do poorly defending this play - so for a team with a young roster like Indiana this may be a problem.

One thing I have noticed about AJ..Last year, he was terrible at defending the PnR. He'd just get bounced out of the way, or make the same mistake. I thought it was just an effect of him being small (Like Collison is often bounced out of the way.) He's been pretty good with it in preseason though. Maybe he figured something out..If he has, he might want to share it to the rest of the group..

pacers74
10-11-2010, 09:17 PM
I came into this topic late, so I haven't read all of everybody posts, but my biggest fear is JOB not letting Collison paly his game, or Collison having a sophmore slump type of year. I just think he could become a really great PG and don't want him to be a let down.

vnzla81
10-11-2010, 09:43 PM
My biggest fear is that those noises in my closet are vnzla and 90sNBA screaming for JOB's head...

:shudder:


:guillo: :chuckle:

vnzla81
10-11-2010, 09:46 PM
My biggest fear is that Larry would let this guy coach the team during the whole season not matter if they are getting blowout every game, not teaching the young guys how to play the right way is going to affect this team for a long long time.

Hicks
10-11-2010, 10:28 PM
Look at it this way. If you allow the point guard to get a point blank shot (keep in mind if you go under the pick, teams will force the pick and roll closer and closer to the free line area - watch where the Celtics run their pick and roll when Rondo is in the game and teams back off him) (if you trap the pick and roll teams like to move the high pick and roll out further to spread the defense out). Oops sorry to get off on that tangent. But if you just allow the point guiard to get wide open 15ft shots, not only will they hit a lot of those, but you also will create very few turnovers, if you force the point guard to pass the ball more turnovers will occur - you have a big guy handling the ball.

Overall though I think the approach you are suggesting is a defeatis approach. beyond that I don't know if any team that goes under the pick as their normal course of defending the PnR. Once again, sure against certain point guards you cando it, most teams defend Rondo that way.

When you fight through the pick it is the big guys job to hedge and slow the ballhandler down to allow the defender to fight through and back to his man.

I've always liked trapping the pick and roll. make the offense make another pass, force a big guy to handle the ball .

Hicks, with Collison and Price, I would love teams to go udner the pick, give those two guys wide open looks would be nice, and you still can move the ball easily as there is no pressure on the ball handler

I should mention that I was thinking more of a P&R near or at the 3-point line. If they manage to get a P&R going at 15 feet, then yes, I'd probably agree with you. But from long range, I say go under.

Speed
10-14-2010, 01:14 PM
Pertains to the discussion about the motion offense the Pacers run and the NBA players.

This on Chicago under Tom Thibodeau about the Motion offense or Obie calls it something else, but it's still this.

Motion Offense Creating More Assists For Chicago (http://realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/69557/20101014/motion_offense_creating_more_assists_for_chicago/)

Oct 14, 2010 11:42 AM EST

http://realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/69557/20101014/motion_offense_creating_more_assists_for_chicago/ (http://realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/69557/20101014/motion_offense_creating_more_assists_for_chicago/)


The Bulls primarily ran screen and rolls and ISOs for Derrick Rose during the 09-10 season, but they are now running a motion offense under Tom Thibodeau.


In wins over Toronto and Washington, the Bulls averaged 27 assists. As a comparison, the highest assist total in the NBA during the preseason is 30 by Philadelphia.


“Everybody's loving the offense," Rose said. “It's great. If I don't have the ball, I'm always moving. Everybody is moving, so that it's hard to guard. We're looking pretty good right now."


Via Daily Herald (http://realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/69557/20101014/motion_offense_creating_more_assists_for_chicago/#)<SCRIPT type=text/javascript>tweetmeme_source = 'realgmcom';</SCRIPT><SCRIPT src="http://tweetmeme.com/i/scripts/button.js" type=text/javascript></SCRIPT>

pacer4ever
10-14-2010, 01:55 PM
winning 33gms and the young players not playing much

Pacers4Life
10-14-2010, 03:49 PM
stumbling out of the gate to another dismal record... like 6-16 or something.

BillS
10-14-2010, 05:46 PM
stumbling out of the gate to another dismal record... like 6-16 or something.

Just resign yourself to the fact that we are going to be wildly inconsistent for the first month or two. We'll beat a team we shouldn't and lose really ugly to a team of scrubs.

The 1993-1994 team started out 10-16.