PDA

View Full Version : One of the smartest things Vogel has ever said



Unclebuck
03-30-2011, 08:02 AM
This is one of the best explanations I've read on why teams lose to bad teams and beat the good teams. That tends to drive most of us crazy, but it seems to me we don't consider that sometimes teams play bad and other times they play really well and I don't just mean the pacers, but the opponents. If you watched the cavs beat the heat last night you saw a Cavs team that only had 14 wins play a really good game.


http://www.indystar.com/article/20110330/SPORTS04/103300347/1062/SPORTS04/Big-night-up-down-Pacers

"Sometimes the opponent has a great game. Sometimes the opponent has a poor game," Vogel said. "I don't think there's as many highs and lows as is made out to be just because you lost to teams with losing records and beat teams with winning records."

.

15th parallel
03-30-2011, 08:14 AM
I believe what Vogel said is correct. Yes, talent and star power are big factors for teams winning more games than the others, but at the end of the day it is more on consistency of the team and the players that drives teams to elite status. LA, Boston, SA, Chicago, Dallas, Miami and other teams are winning more because their players are playing very consistently. There are times they lose games to weaker opponents, but at the end of the day, they just play better than other on more games.

The Pacers are talented, no doubt about it, but they aren't that consistent. We see good games from Danny, Roy, DC, Tyler, Josh, PG, Rush and others, but they also have bad games on an equally same amount of games, and thus the below 0.500 record.

Unclebuck
03-30-2011, 08:24 AM
I think the really good defensive teams have a better chance of being more consistant, but even those teams have bad nights mostly when they are just too tired to play their normal defense.

A good % of the inconsistancy across the NBA is due to the schedule of games - the number of games in a short period of time. Example: I think in their last 7 backs to backs the Celtics are 1-6 in the second game.

However, even within a playoff series when the two teams are playing the exact same schedule (because they are playing each other) it is common to see one team win by 12 points and then the next game the other team win by 11 points

indianapolismarkus
03-30-2011, 08:58 AM
Frank Vogel's pregame interview is a must watch. It gives you the best insight to what's going on with the team.

I enjoyed when he said something like 'basketball is fun when you go after it hard.'

PacerGuy
03-30-2011, 08:58 AM
"Sometimes the opponent has a great game. Sometimes the opponent has a poor game," Vogel said. "I don't think there's as many highs and lows as is made out to be just because you lost to teams with losing records and beat teams with winning records."

Then again...
If your teams "Poor Game" leads to the reason behind your opponents "Great Game", then it IS a "low", and you SHOULD be concerned.

I wonder if he would have said this after the 9 game streatch after he took over, or if it is easier having lost at home to Sac-town, & @ Detroit (to whom they have lost twice, & play again tonight).

BPump33
03-30-2011, 09:30 AM
I like what Vogel had to say about Granger:

"When he puts his mind to it he can be a shut-down defender. And again, just going from being a real volume shooter to playing within the team concept.

http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/blog_brunner.html

DocHolliday
03-30-2011, 10:04 AM
I think the really good defensive teams have a better chance of being more consistant, but even those teams have bad nights mostly when they are just too tired to play their normal defense.

A good % of the inconsistancy across the NBA is due to the schedule of games - the number of games in a short period of time. Example: I think in their last 7 backs to backs the Celtics are 1-6 in the second game.

However, even within a playoff series when the two teams are playing the exact same schedule (because they are playing each other) it is common to see one team win by 12 points and then the next game the other team win by 11 points

I remember back between '94 and 2000 being able to get a feel for when one of those 20+ point blowout games would happen in a playoff series, and not just a series that involved the Pacers. Seattle just lost a heart-breaker to Portland and the series goes back to Seattle? Kemp, Payton and company win by 20+ in that game, take it to the bank. It still happens today, no matter how they schedule the series.

NuffSaid
03-30-2011, 11:18 AM
To me, it's a matter of recognition and execution.

Recognition:

On the defensive side, it's about knowing what defensive strategy your opponent is appplying against you in any give situation. Teams often switch from man-D (isolation plays) to various types of zone defenses, 2-1-2, 2-3, 3-2. If you're able to recognize what defensive scheme you're up against, you can work your offense to break down that defense.

On the offensive side, it's about knowing which offensive strategy works best for your team using certain players. For example, Collison and Hansborough work the PnR very well, but teams have started to pay more attention to Hansborough now. It's incumbant on Collison, Hansborough and coach Vogel to recognize this and make adjustments as necessary. Maybe you fake the pass to Hans and allow Collison to drive the lanes. Maybe you kick the ball back to Hansborough but have him quickly base the ball back to Collison or to someone else whose waiting on the wing or driving to the open spot underneath the basket. Players aren't always going to see who is open immediately when they are open. Still, if after watching game footage and your able to recognize what the defense(s) did when you ran a certain play, you should be able to make the necessary adjustments and get more wins. Eventually, players will begin to recognize what's coming at them and how to work themselves out of a given situation. But for game time situations, that recognition must come primary either from the coach or your PG. Players will mostly see only isolation situations long before they're able to see a defensive play unfold, but a good team that has developed good chemistry can see it faster than an less experienced team. That's the problem the Pacers are facing right now. It's also the reason, I think, most GMs go after 3-4 yr college players...the experience in recognizing certain plays.

Execution:

Usually when one speaks of execution, it relates to the offensive side of the game. To that, I've seen the Pacers attempt to execute some very nice plays. They've gotten their share of wide-open looks that just didn't find the bottom of the net. Their most recent game against the Pistons was one such moment where they executed plays well; their shots just didn't fall. Their last game against the Grizzlies was one such game where the Pacers didn't execute well at all. In fact, I'd say they took the Grizzlies for granted and just couldn't recover. They dug themselves too deep a hole with poor passing, laziness and no defense whatsoever. Still, going back to what Vogel said, sometimes you do just happen to catch a team on a good night where they're executing plays better than you are. And sometimes, it's just a matter of which way the ball bounces, and if you get lucky enough to get more of those good bounces to come your way. We've seen lots of that this year as well.

So, for my take it all comes down to recognition and execution - which team is able to see what's happening on the floor promptly enough and make the adjustments and execute plays. This was the primary reason I wanted coach O'Brien to leave and for someone else to come in because I didn't think O'Brien recognized what was happening on the floor fast enough and made the adjustments to win ball games. I think Vogel will come out ahead when it's all said and done, and so will the Pacers if they just stay together and continue trying to work through their problems as a team.