PDA

View Full Version : Double-post offense?



johndozark
01-10-2011, 09:21 AM
I think that some of Hibbert's woes might be eased by a double-post offense.

McRoberts is our best candidate for playing the second post alongside Hibbert and should get a dependable 24-28 minutes per game to play it. I don't care if he occasionally slides out to the three-point line for a shot, but his normal position should be in a post position.

Hibbert and McRoberts could each alternate on the high and low positions of the post, keeping the defense honest. This would make it harder for opponents to anticipate and prevent Hibbert's moves.

Hansbrough should get the remainder of the time behind McRoberts, adding variety to the way the double post works, further keeping the defense off balance.

Foster and S. Jones could offer rest for Hibbert.

In this system, I would see the bulk of the assists coming from the point guard and the two posts.

The wings (and point guard) should shoot a mix of threes, mid-range shots, drives, and cutters.

There should be a variety of set plays with multiple options for each play.

What do you think?

sportfireman
01-10-2011, 09:30 AM
I think Tyler should start over Josh. We need a banger inside next to Roy. Our offense isn't lacking its our defense that we need improvement on. But something we need would be trips to the line and getting other teams bigs in foul trouble. Tyler brings that ... not Josh. IMO...

johndozark
01-10-2011, 11:08 AM
I agree that Hansbrough brings the qualities that you mention and deserves to play significant minutes in every game. I think your argument that he ought to start is worthy of consideration. I think that McRoberts is better at getting the whole team involved in offense and would be the better double post candidate. Either way, with the current roster, we need those two getting the vast majority of the minutes at PF. I don't object to seeing Foster or S. Jones getting a little time there when necessary, but I don't want to see Posey there. Nor do I think it is good for the team to wear Granger out there.

sportfireman
01-10-2011, 12:16 PM
Yeah Danny nor Pose need anytime at the 4. We have enough quality guys to play there.

King Phoenix
01-10-2011, 12:38 PM
I like it, and like u said McBob would be best for that system even though Hans is probably the best pf. And a question I have is how Long do u think this system would last or how long do u want it to. And perfect for that would be love, who is probably unrealistic for us.

johndozark
01-10-2011, 01:24 PM
I'm not an expert on offensive patterns, but I think that a double post offense could be the basic pattern for a long time, with variations added as needed to keep the defenses guessing.

I also do not see how we could get Love, but my impression is that he would be ideal for this system. Still, I think that Hibbert, McRoberts, and Hansbrough are all better than their play in the current system shows.

Mackey_Rose
01-10-2011, 01:55 PM
I think Tyler should start over Josh. We need a banger inside next to Roy. Our offense isn't lacking its our defense that we need improvement on. But something we need would be trips to the line and getting other teams bigs in foul trouble. Tyler brings that ... not Josh. IMO...

You are living in the past.

Our offense has definitely been lacking for a good amount of time. The defense can always use improvements, but it has been way ahead of the offense this season.

beast23
01-10-2011, 03:27 PM
I believe a double-post offense is one of the worst things that can be done for the Pacers. Collison currently is not able to run the PnR effectively for the Pacers due to the team not having the big man skill set to support a lot of PnR. A double post would minimize Collison's, TJ's and Price's ability to use their quickness to get by their men and into the lane to create or score.

A double-post might work if the Pacers had an abundance of excellent perimeter shooters, but it would still decrease the ability of the PGs to get into the lane to create.

Mackey_Rose
01-10-2011, 03:32 PM
I believe a double-post offense is one of the worst things that can be done for the Pacers. Collison currently is not able to run the PnR effectively for the Pacers due to the team not having the big man skill set to support a lot of PnR. A double post would minimize Collison's, TJ's and Price's ability to use their quickness to get by their men and into the lane to create or score.

A double-post might work if the Pacers had an abundance of excellent perimeter shooters, but it would still decrease the ability of the PGs to get into the lane to create.

That's pretty much the only thing the Pacers have an abundance of.

Jon Theodore
01-10-2011, 04:39 PM
I think that some of Hibbert's woes might be eased by a double-post offense.

McRoberts is our best candidate for playing the second post alongside Hibbert and should get a dependable 24-28 minutes per game to play it. I don't care if he occasionally slides out to the three-point line for a shot, but his normal position should be in a post position.

Hibbert and McRoberts could each alternate on the high and low positions of the post, keeping the defense honest. This would make it harder for opponents to anticipate and prevent Hibbert's moves.

Hansbrough should get the remainder of the time behind McRoberts, adding variety to the way the double post works, further keeping the defense off balance.

Foster and S. Jones could offer rest for Hibbert.

In this system, I would see the bulk of the assists coming from the point guard and the two posts.

The wings (and point guard) should shoot a mix of threes, mid-range shots, drives, and cutters.

There should be a variety of set plays with multiple options for each play.

What do you think?


When can you start?

pacergod2
01-10-2011, 04:51 PM
I think it depends on what you are talking about. In the term "double post" do you refer to a high-low set? Or a two low/two high set?

I would like to see us utilize the high low better. With guys crashing the offensive glass a whole hell of a lot better. We are too often caught running a one high set or one low set, which I must agree with you, will not work nor has it been working. I haven't caught the last several games due to my year-end schedule. But i fwe focused more on a high-low set, or even a two-low with the weakside post player spread to about 15 feet out, we would control the glass better than we have. We haven't dominated the glass recently and its been a big contributor to our losses. That and our schedule has been ROUGH ovr the last couple weeks. IMO, our schedule eases up starting next week and we could make a push to win some games and get back closer to even. As long as we make a concerted effort to utilize two post players around the key.

johndozark
01-10-2011, 08:40 PM
I'll let better basketball minds than mine figure the details, but I have in mind having the center and the power forward both in the vicinity of the key, spacing themselves so that the defenders cannot end the inside offense by ganging up on one of them.

If each of the two posts had a coordinated rotation of high-low or high-elbow-low, and the defenders knew that either of them could be a scoring threat or a passing threat from any one of those positions, then they would be very hard to defend. The high-elbow-low, when applied to both sides of the lane, would give six positions for post-ups.

In my plan, the point guard would initiate plays to each post, and at times would initiate plays to the wings. The two posts, when they had the ball, would also be looking for the wings, the point guard, and each other.

Each set play would have several options. There would have to be constant work to keep it from getting too predictable, but that would be much more manageable to run than a system with no predictable patterns or with patterns so complex that the players cannot figure out what to do to execute them.

It appears that our present motion offense too often breaks down and then boils down to giving Granger the ball and letting him create. Or feeding the ball to Roy and letting him battle to do something while being the focus of all the interior defense.

We need to have some additional planned centers of action.