PDA

View Full Version : LINE CHANGE!!!



Major Cold
03-02-2011, 09:27 AM
I understand having chemistry with the second unit. But sprinkling in some starters in that second unit more often and consistent would go a long way in sustaining momentum.

Do you think that the Hockey style subs helps or hurts? What areas does it help/hurt?

Pacer Fan
03-02-2011, 09:43 AM
Good ? Major Cold
1. Great in game experience for the 2nd unit and for Lance, which will make them much better and a stronger team for the grind of playoffs.
2. Good way to evaluate the talent for future decisions.
3. Don't use the second unit soley if they are struggling and losing a huge lead.
4. Pacers need the wins to make playoffs.
5. Tough juggling act for Coach Vogel.

Speed
03-02-2011, 11:14 AM
I think the second line, could potentially be a crunch time stopper unit, its just that they struggle scoring.

I like the second line getting an extended look in the 4th last nigth.

BillS
03-02-2011, 12:03 PM
Vogel is not doing a line switch, usually he swaps out a couple off the bench first and then gradually builds it to the second unit, usually once the opponents starters are getting off the floor as well.

The thing is that your second unit is not only going to differ in skill from your first unit, it is going to differ in which position holds that skill. A big example is Hibbert/Foster and Rush/George. PG's offense is huge when Foster is at 5 because you lose some offense with Jeff. However, if Hibbert was in with PG and another ball-in-hand PG (and I think AJ and Lance both qualify), PG is now at best the 3rd scoring option, so why would you want to do that?

Some work on mixing your assets is good because there will be plenty of times they all play together. But, for the most part, your bench will have a different flavor than your starters - which is very good because it gives you different ways to play if something isn't working (which is why so many from the bench were in at the end of the Phoenix game).

LetsTalkPacers
03-02-2011, 12:11 PM
Agreed. I think our first unit has too many hands up wantint the ball on offense. That's why the second unit works great. They don't have a dominant offensive player that needs the ball so they let the offense come to them in the flow of the game. Danny, collison, and hibbert tend to force the matter

graphic-er
03-02-2011, 12:27 PM
Last night that entire line change to end the game was one of the dumbest moves Vogel has made so far. It literally almost cost us the game. You can't sub out the entire line up in crunch time and expect them to maintain the intensity and level of play your bench just gave you to get up by 10.

BRushWithDeath
03-02-2011, 12:51 PM
Last night that entire line change to end the game was one of the dumbest moves Vogel has made so far. It literally almost cost us the game. You can't sub out the entire line up in crunch time and expect them to maintain the intensity and level of play your bench just gave you to get up by 10.

The lead was 9 at the end of 3 and 10 when the starters came in at the time out with 6:00 to go. The bench had just played about 12 straight minutes. The starters come in after the Warriors call timeout. Curry comes down and hits a three out of the timeout to make it a 7 point game. Granger misses a bad shot. Curry then hits a midrange jumper to cut it to 5. Rush then misses a 3 which bounces for a long rebound that leads to an Ellis fastbreak miss which is putback by Amundson to cut it to three. Timeout. It would never get closer than that. In a 5 possesssion sequence the starters missed two shots and the Warriors hit 3. A seven point run. If that is the dumbest move Vogel has made so far, he must be a genius.

BillS
03-02-2011, 12:51 PM
Last night that entire line change to end the game was one of the dumbest moves Vogel has made so far. It literally almost cost us the game. You can't sub out the entire line up in crunch time and expect them to maintain the intensity and level of play your bench just gave you to get up by 10.

Umm ... GS was bringing their entire starting lineup back into the game.

I don't think it is a mistake to bring your starters in against the other team's starters.

CableKC
03-02-2011, 12:57 PM
Umm ... GS was bringing their entire starting lineup back into the game.

I don't think it is a mistake to bring your starters in against the other team's starters.
I'll give the standard response....it depends on the situation.

I can agree that in most cases....you'd want your Starting unit against the opposing Team's Starting unit....but if the Goon Squad showed to have caused problems for the Starting Lineup on both ends of the court while "keeping them at bay" due to their defense/energy....then I'd have no problem switching it up. This is especially true if the Goon Squad clawed their way back from a deficit while building a lead ( which they have done before ) and IMHO has earned the right to stay on the court to finish out the game ( assuming that they aren't worn out and aren't effective anymore ).

graphic-er
03-02-2011, 01:03 PM
The lead was 9 at the end of 3 and 10 when the starters came in at the time out with 6:00 to go. The bench had just played about 12 straight minutes. The starters come in after the Warriors call timeout. Curry comes down and hits a three out of the timeout to make it a 7 point game. Granger misses a bad shot. Curry then hits a midrange jumper to cut it to 5. Rush then misses a 3 which bounces for a long rebound that leads to an Ellis fastbreak miss which is putback by Amundson to cut it to three. Timeout. It would never get closer than that. In a 5 possesssion sequence the starters missed two shots and the Warriors hit 3. A seven point run. If that is the dumbest move Vogel has made so far, he must be a genius.

Seriously the starters let them to with-in 3 points in a handful of possessions. It was a terrible move. I'm just saying he should've mixed the subs in a bit more. A better opponent would have stepped on our necks at that point. We got lucky that the best 3pt shooter in the league right now missed a wide open 3.

Major Cold
03-02-2011, 01:14 PM
I really do not like the length the bench is on the court without Danny, Hibbert, or Collison. I think that is the main reason we can't score in the second unit. Having Hibbert and Hans together proves to win. The opponents get sucked on the low block which opens the mid range for Hans.

I would desire a more blend.

Peck
03-02-2011, 02:08 PM
The one thing I did like though was that Michael Grady just said "The starting lineup is back in the game" instead of announcing each player when they did the line sub.

It was a little curious to see everyone come in at once like that but not the dumbest thing I've ever seen (let me talk to you about some games over the past 3 years).

In Frank we trust.

BillS
03-02-2011, 02:37 PM
I'll give the standard response....it depends on the situation.

I can agree that in most cases....you'd want your Starting unit against the opposing Team's Starting unit....but if the Goon Squad showed to have caused problems for the Starting Lineup on both ends of the court while "keeping them at bay" due to their defense/energy....then I'd have no problem switching it up. This is especially true if the Goon Squad clawed their way back from a deficit while building a lead ( which they have done before ) and IMHO has earned the right to stay on the court to finish out the game ( assuming that they aren't worn out and aren't effective anymore ).

In this case, the bench came back pretty much against the bench (fully aware that GS had occasional starters in with their 2nd unit guys, we did as well through that stretch). Also, Vogel stated early on he was going to be doing his best to limit the minutes of everyone to something reasonable due to the road trip.

The starters all came in at 5:55 mark, bench guys started trickling back in for situational matchups at 1:55, so it wasn't a blind "put 'em in and leave 'em in" move.

Major Cold
03-02-2011, 05:00 PM
I totally remember Travis Best, McKey, Croshere, Perkins, and ? out there at the same time for over 5 minutes. That was how we got to the Finals. I know this is not a finals team but I would like to see Granger taken out first and a few minutes brought in for DJones/Lance. Having him penetrate or used in the PnP would free up slashing lanes for PG and the jumper for Hibbert.

PacerHound
03-02-2011, 05:50 PM
The line up change in the 4th last night was an awfully big gamble. We won this time but if one gambles long enough sooner or later he will lose at it. It came close to happening last night.

It makes sense to bring your starters back if your 2nd unit is letting it get away from you (was not happening, in fact just the opposite) and if you can be assured they can come back in and take right off where your 2nd unit left off (no guarantee of that at all which is where the gamble was).

Finally, we have players on our 2nd unit where the reality is, at least at some positions, the players on the bench are better than the starters.

I am not knocking Vogel. I hope he is our coach next year. I am just saying he decided to gamble last night and won by the skin of his teeth.

xIndyFan
03-02-2011, 06:03 PM
much ado about nothing, imo.

the line change was fine. subbing one at a time is fine. whatever floats frank vogel's boat. the advantage to individual subs is allowing for different minutes for different players. josh and tyler will more evenly split the PF minutes than danny and dahntay.