PDA

View Full Version : What do you think the Starting Lineup and 2nd Units should be against the Bulls?



CableKC
04-07-2011, 03:54 PM
Real simple, specify the Starting Lineup and your 2nd Unit that we should use against the Bulls and explain why.

Here's mine:

Starting Lineup - DC/PG/Granger/McBob/Hibbert
2nd Unit - AJ/BRush/Dunleavy/Hansbrough/Foster

Although I like what Hansbrough has done in the Starting lineup...as mentioned by Vogel ( or was it Granger ), Teams have figured out how to defend against him...thus making him less effective in the Starting Lineup. With Dunleavy's return...one can suggest that we go back to the lineup that Vogel used when we were doing so well and have a return to the Goon Squad in the 2nd Unit. On top of that....it can be argued that the best Offensive lineup that we can use is to return Dunleavy and McBob back to the Starting lineup. This is an option because I think that the defense and energy of the Goon Squad was very good.

However, despite the improved flow of offense that Dunleavy provides, I still dread having Dunleavy in the Starting lineup as the SG in the rotation Yes, the SG rotation of the Bulls is made up of Keith Bogans, CJ Watson, Ronnie Brewer and Kyle Korver...all of which aren't spectactular when it comes to SGs....but Bogans and CJ Watson are the type of "small and quick microwave Guards" that can easily heat up and put up a large # of points if given the chance. My preference is to keep PG in the Starting lineup as the Starting SG ( mainly for defensive purposes while being a less passive scorer compared to BRush ) while keeping Dunleavy in the 2nd Unit as the SF while pairing him with BRush or Inferno ( based off of matchups) to lock down the SG spot. Hopefully, moving Hansbrough back to the 2nd unit could return him to form and make him more effective in the lineup while playing against the backup lineup of the Bulls. This ( of course ) means that McBob will be the Starting PF....but the hope is that his "intangibles" when it comes to his athleticsm and ball movement can benefit the Starting lineup.

In the end....we'd "sort of" return to the more effective lineup that we had when we were doing really well but with a slight "tweak" to the Goon Squad by having Dunleavy and PG change spots.

90'sNBARocked
04-07-2011, 04:00 PM
Personally mine would be

DC
DJ
Granger
McBob
Roy

Bench
AJ
Rush
PG
Dun
TY

deactivate Solo, Lance, TJ

BRushWithDeath
04-07-2011, 04:13 PM
Can my poll option be removed? I must have typed it at the same time as Mackey.

I want our best lineup on the floor the most amount of time.

That is DC/Dunleavy/Granger/McRoberts/Hibbert.

But I don't think any changes will be made now.

BringJackBack
04-07-2011, 04:15 PM
Keep it the same. I think we need consistency.

Josh and Mike are playing with more energy off the bench and Paul George is getting out of the dreaded rookie wall. I want Tyler in because he does a better job of boxing out and not giving up offensive rebounds, not to mention that he can go for 25 on any night.

CableKC
04-07-2011, 04:42 PM
Can my poll option be removed? I must have typed it at the same time as Mackey.
Hicks, Peck or UB; is there anyway for you to do this?

CableKC
04-07-2011, 04:45 PM
Keep it the same. I think we need consistency.

Josh and Mike are playing with more energy off the bench and Paul George is getting out of the dreaded rookie wall. I want Tyler in because he does a better job of boxing out and not giving up offensive rebounds, not to mention that he can go for 25 on any night.
For me, the question as to whether Hansbrough should start or not is who would be better at defending Boozer. :shrug:

Also....in the 2nd unit for the Bulls....Taj Gibson is the PF....whose more athletic and lengthy in the frontcourt....does Hansbrough do well against those types of players?

I recall that Gibson gave us troubles in the 2nd half of the last game we played.

xIndyFan
04-07-2011, 05:29 PM
For me, the question as to whether Hansbrough should start or not is who would be better at defending Boozer. :shrug:


this is one of the things that needs to be found out. can tyler guard anyone in the playoffs. now is as good a time as any to find out. if he can, then the summer's work will be different than if he can't. since this is almost a free playoff appearence, it seems an excellent time to see who is a real player and who is just a regular season guy.

CableKC
04-07-2011, 06:02 PM
Minor point...but my mistake...I didn't realize that I had put Hibbert in the 2nd unit as well.

So to recap....the 2nd option that I created ( incorrectly ):

Starting Lineup - DC/PG/Granger/Hansbrough/Hibbert and Backup - AJ/BRush/Dunleavy/McBob/Foster

Is leading by 10 votes ( this includes vnzla81's "Stop messing up with the lineup leave it the way it is"....which is the existing lineup that we have and what is specified above ).

D-BONE
04-07-2011, 06:09 PM
For me, the question as to whether Hansbrough should start or not is who would be better at defending Boozer. :shrug:

Also....in the 2nd unit for the Bulls....Taj Gibson is the PF....whose more athletic and lengthy in the frontcourt....does Hansbrough do well against those types of players?

I recall that Gibson gave us troubles in the 2nd half of the last game we played.

Gibson definitely gives us fits, but Boozer will too I think. We just don't have a good defensive matchup for either of those guys. I mean rebounding when I say that too, b/c that's where Gibson really feasts due to his length and athleticism.

Combine those two with a healthy Noah and we've got our work cut out inside. If our 4/5 guys can actually hold up to theirs in terms of D and boards, the series should be pretty competitive. I'm not sure that will happen though.

We know Rose will hurts us. We know we can probably break even or maybe win the wing matchups. We have to find a way to put up a fight inside. Generally, we're going to have to play stellar D just to be sure that we're in games. We know their D will be stout.

wintermute
04-07-2011, 06:12 PM
I would add Dahntay into the rotation somehow. Dahntay is one of our few players who have gone on deep playoff runs. He's also IMO the best defensive option that we have for slowing down Derrick Rose.

Doddage
04-07-2011, 06:15 PM
I think our starting lineup should remain the way it is now, but I think that we should find a way to get Dahntay some minutes off the bench. He's good at being a pest on defense and in a series in which we're outmatched from a talent standpoint, it would give us some sort of an advantage. Perhaps split up some of Rush's minutes and give them to Dahntay.

Edit: Didn't see the above reply when I posted this.

wintermute
04-07-2011, 06:17 PM
I think our starting lineup should remain the way it is now, but I think that we should find a way to get Dahntay some minutes off the bench. He's good at being a pest on defense and in a series in which we're outmatched from a talent standpoint, it would give us some sort of an advantage. Perhaps split up some of Rush's minutes and give them to Dahntay.


Great minds and all that :buddies:

PacersRule
04-07-2011, 06:18 PM
I think the starting unit should just stay the same for now, especially after last night's game, it showed that when George plays more assertively good things can happen (although it was against the Wiz). Another thing is that assuming Rose kills DC, I hope Vogel would put PG or DJones on DRose just to see if it works.

CableKC
04-07-2011, 06:28 PM
I think the starting unit should just stay the same for now, especially after last night's game, it showed that when George plays more assertively good things can happen (although it was against the Wiz). Another thing is that assuming Rose kills DC, I hope Vogel would put PG or DJones on DRose just to see if it works.
I don't recall if Inferno was matched up against DRose in the last game....but I do seem to recall BRush defending DRose and ( I think ) it didn't really seem to make that much of a difference.

I don't mind putting Inferno in for that very reason. He's like a smaller and quicker version of Artest when it comes to defense....he really gets in your grill and makes you uncomfortable on the defensive end.

Trophy
04-07-2011, 06:30 PM
I wouldn't change anything around at this point.

I'm pretty confident with what our rotations and lineups will be.

BlueNGold
04-07-2011, 06:32 PM
I'm just glad Posey will not be guarding Boozer.

Thank God for Vogel.

PacersRule
04-07-2011, 06:34 PM
I don't recall if Inferno was matched up against DRose in the last game....but I do seem to recall BRush defending DRose and ( I think ) it didn't really seem to make that much of a difference.

I don't mind putting Inferno in for that very reason. He's like a smaller and quicker version of Artest when it comes to defense....he really gets in your grill and makes you uncomfortable on the defensive end.

I was down in Orland enjoying spring break that week so I didn't watch that last game haha! Rush is a good defender but I feel like Jones can really turn it on when it matters. He defended Kobe pretty well during the WCF when he was still in Denver (if I remember correctly). Probably my biggest worry about letting Jones play is the black hole on offense. Against Chicago's defense you don't get anywhere when you try to do it by yourself...

speakout4
04-07-2011, 06:46 PM
Can my poll option be removed? I must have typed it at the same time as Mackey.

I want our best lineup on the floor the most amount of time.

That is DC/Dunleavy/Granger/McRoberts/Hibbert.

But I don't think any changes will be made now.
Isn't there a slight disconnect with regard to your starting lineup and


Don't play Murphy, Ford, Foster, Dunleavy, Posey, D. Jones, or S. Jones one second.

KingGeorge
04-07-2011, 07:01 PM
Starters:
Collison
Dunleavy
Granger
McRoberts
Hibbert

Bench:
Price
Rush
George
Hansbrough
Foster

Ozwalt72
04-07-2011, 07:05 PM
I think McRoberts and Dunleavy combo help the second team out. Helps Rush.

LucasRL13
04-07-2011, 07:32 PM
You guys think Chicago beat Boston tonight??

I think Boston will gonna win

BRushWithDeath
04-07-2011, 09:15 PM
Isn't there a slight disconnect with regard to your starting lineup and


Don't play Murphy, Ford, Foster, Dunleavy, Posey, D. Jones, or S. Jones one second.

I don't change my signature unless prompted because I don't pay attention to it.

But yes, Dunleavy and Foster have both been shockingly effective this year.

Dunleavy so much so that I'm going to feature him in my latest signature which will last up until it is wrong for long enough that somebody points it out because I will have completely forgotten about it.

I'm going to make another long post about why we're playing the wrong lineup and it will be construed as either anti-Hansbrough, or anti-George, or anti-America like most of my posts are but, in defiance of Kegboy's paradoxical statement earlier, it should not be taken as such.

My favorite stats site 82games.com was just updated to include the last month's games and the numbers have swung even further in my favor.

http://www.82games.com/1011/1011IND2.HTM

I've been saying for sometime that our best lineup is Collison/Dunleavy/Granger/McRoberts/Hibbert.

Now that other lineups have started catching that unit in minutes played, it is even more apparent.

6 Pacers units have played over 100 minutes together.

The best unit, by a mile, is Collison/Dunleavy/Granger/McRoberts/Hibbert. They have played 439.2 minutes together scoring +125 over the opposition. This is the 6th highest total in the entire NBA. No other Pacer lineup is within 20 points of 50th. This group scores 1.14 points per possession and allow 0.99. A net positive of 0.15 per possession.

The second best unit, which has played over 100 minutes together, is the counterpart to this group. The so called "Goon Squad". Price/D.Jones/George/Hansbrough/Foster have played a total of 100.4 minutes together scoring +24 over the opposition. They score 1.16 points per possession and allow 1.03. A net positive of 0.13 per possession.

The only other 100+ minute group that isn't a net negative is our best unit with Hansbrough replacing McRoberts. That group in 152.1 minutes scores 1.02 and allows 0.98 per possession. A net positive of +.04 per possession.

The current starters have played 281.5 minutes. They score 0.99 points per possession and allow 1.10 points per possession. A net negative of .11

Think about that. If all those groups played 100 possessions on offense and 100 on defense, the starters would normally get outscored 99-110. Our original starting lineup would outscore the opposition 114-99. Our bench would outscore the opposition 116-103.

Shouldn't we be trying to maximize the floor time of our two most effective groups?

The argument has been pointed out that Dunleavy and McRoberts help the bench. This is certainly true. Because they help everybody.

The funniest part about the whole thing is that the reasons everybody uses for their argument about why Dunleavy (defense) and McRoberts (offense) shouldn't start is exactly the opposite of how the season has actually progressed.

Both players are more effective both offensively and defensively than their counterparts.

The Pacers points scored/allowed per possession with the following players on the floor:
Player: Off./Def. Net per 48 minutes
Dunleavy: 1.07/1.05 +2.2 per 48
George: 1.07/1.08 -1.6 per 48
D. Jones: 1.06/1.05 -1.4 per 48
Rush: 1.04/1.10 -5.4 per 48

McRoberts: 1.08/1.05 +1.5
Hansbrough: 1.05/1.09 -4.2

Both Dunleavy and McRoberts make us a better team when they are on the floor. If our goal is to have a decent showing in the playoffs, starting them gives us the best shot.

The only argument to not start those two is youth and contract. Dunleavy doesn't have the youth of his counterparts. McRoberts doesn't have the contract of Tyler. I don't think either one will be back next year. So I'm willing to listen to that argument. Though it isn't like starting McRoberts and Dunleavy means Tyler and Paul (and to a lesser extent Rush) don't get any playoff experience. They do. And they get it where they have been most successful. Against opposing benches as primary scoring options.

It won't matter either way. We aren't winning a series with Chicago (or Miami if Chicago slipped up somehow).

But our best shot to steal a game or two is to play our best group. And that means exchanging Dunleavy for George and McRoberts for Hansbrough.

Playing a group that has been as big of an unmitigated disaster as our current starters will cause Chicagoland stores to sell a lot of brooms.

Mackey_Rose
04-08-2011, 12:07 AM
Stats don't tell the whole story, but they do seem to corroborate what I'm seeing.

We should go back to our best lineups.

cdash
04-08-2011, 12:12 AM
I agree with BRush and Mackey. That seems like our best shot at beating the Bulls. I like both of those units actually.

CableKC
04-08-2011, 03:12 AM
BRushWithDeath changed my mind as well. Against one of the best ( if not THE best ) defensive and rebounding Teams in the League....we have to have the most efficient scoring lineup that we can put on the floor. Add in that I think that the Goon Squad does have good chemistry and energy....I'm beginning to think that we have to put the best lineup out there just to keep up and stay competitive.

Although we can keep the "status quo" with the current lineup.....I'm okay with going back to the original Vogel lineup cuz we know that it worked really well.

judicata
04-08-2011, 04:22 AM
Great analysis BWD, very persuasive argument.

I do not offer a direct counter-argument, but just a few things to keep in mind as I am always wary of statistics.

The sample size is pretty small. Hundreds of minutes seems like a lot, but when these line ups see 15-20 minutes a game together we are comparing sets of 20 game performances against each other. With no control for quality of opponent, schedule, home/road, coach, etc., you get some funny things. I do not believe that switching Dunleavy for Rush results in as drastic of a team meltdown as those stats would suggest (.3 swing in ppp).

At any rate, your point is well taken. I do think there is an argument for keeping the lineup the way it is without referencing the contract situation: when PG and Hansbrough were inserted into the starting lineup the team had dropped 4 in a row and 6 of 7. The Vogel honeymoon was over and the playoffs were looking very questionable. I do not think that you reward helping turn around the team and making that final push for the playoffs with a seat on the pine. Granted, Mike was injured, so it really is not a question of your proposed lineup and the current lineup. Maybe the statistically best lineup would have done the same thing, or won more games. But this lineup is the one that appears to have salvaged the season. I don't know that there is a locker room in the country that takes something like that in stride.

MyFavMartin
04-08-2011, 06:10 AM
I thought Dun for the sake of the offense and that he can make Bogans chase him around picks for a while and then start Tyler to defend the PnR with Collison on DRose. I think Roy should take it to Noah in the low post.

Whatever the starting lineup, I want to see the yellow unis in Game 1 to channel our inner GS Warriors.

Mackey_Rose
04-08-2011, 08:47 AM
Great analysis BWD, very persuasive argument.

I do not offer a direct counter-argument, but just a few things to keep in mind as I am always wary of statistics.

The sample size is pretty small. Hundreds of minutes seems like a lot, but when these line ups see 15-20 minutes a game together we are comparing sets of 20 game performances against each other. With no control for quality of opponent, schedule, home/road, coach, etc., you get some funny things. I do not believe that switching Dunleavy for Rush results in as drastic of a team meltdown as those stats would suggest (.3 swing in ppp).

At any rate, your point is well taken. I do think there is an argument for keeping the lineup the way it is without referencing the contract situation: when PG and Hansbrough were inserted into the starting lineup the team had dropped 4 in a row and 6 of 7. The Vogel honeymoon was over and the playoffs were looking very questionable. I do not think that you reward helping turn around the team and making that final push for the playoffs with a seat on the pine. Granted, Mike was injured, so it really is not a question of your proposed lineup and the current lineup. Maybe the statistically best lineup would have done the same thing, or won more games. But this lineup is the one that appears to have salvaged the season. I don't know that there is a locker room in the country that takes something like that in stride.

Even if you look beyond the overwhelming raw numbers, and use the adjusted numbers, it's still striking. They are the 11th best 5-man group in the league. The league's best lineup is no longer available due to Caron Butler's injury, and Miami released Carlos Arroyo. So of groups still possible, they are 9th, behind 2 Boston lineups, 1 Spurs lineup, 1 Miami lineup, 2 Lakers lineups, 1 Houston lineup, and 1 Portland lineup.

There is no question that DC/Dun/DG/Josh/Roy is our best five-man group, no matter how you want to play with the numbers.

1. DAL - Jason Kidd, DeShawn Stevenson, Caron Butler, Dirk Nowitzki, Tyson Chandler

2. BOS - Rajon Rondo, Ray Allen, Paul Pierce, Kevin Garnett, Shaquille O'Neal

3. BOS - Rajon Rondo, Ray Allen, Paul Pierce, Glen Davis, Kevin Garnett

4. SAS - Tony Parker, Manu Ginobili, Richard Jefferson, Antonio McDyess, Tim Duncan

5. MIA - Mario Chalmers, Dwyane Wade, LeBron James, Chris Bosh, Erick Dampier

6. LAL - Derek Fisher, Kobe Bryant, Ron Artest, Pau Gasol, Andrew Bynum

7. MIA - Carlos Arroyo, Dwyane Wade, LeBron James, Chris Bosh, Zydrunas Ilgauskas

8. LAL - Derek Fisher, Kobe Bryant, Ron Artest, Lamar Odom, Pau Gasol

9. HOU - Kyle Lowry, Kevin Martin, Chase Budinger, Luis Scola, Chuck Hayes

10. POR - Andre Miller, Wes Matthews, Nicolas Batum, Gerald Wallac, LaMarcus Aldridge

11. IND - Darren Collison, Mike Dunleavy, Danny Granger, Josh McRoberts, Roy Hibbert

Mackey_Rose
04-08-2011, 09:28 AM
At any rate, your point is well taken. I do think there is an argument for keeping the lineup the way it is without referencing the contract situation: when PG and Hansbrough were inserted into the starting lineup the team had dropped 4 in a row and 6 of 7. The Vogel honeymoon was over and the playoffs were looking very questionable. I do not think that you reward helping turn around the team and making that final push for the playoffs with a seat on the pine. Granted, Mike was injured, so it really is not a question of your proposed lineup and the current lineup. Maybe the statistically best lineup would have done the same thing, or won more games. But this lineup is the one that appears to have salvaged the season. I don't know that there is a locker room in the country that takes something like that in stride.

You could say that the lineup change was what salvaged the season, but I think you'd be very wrong.

The first game (at Minnesota) that the change was made was possibly the worst game I've ever seen the Pacers play. The next game wasn't any better at Toronto. Of course things did get better against New York, thanks largely due to Hansbrough's great play in those two games. That kind of production from him was fun to watch, and was one of the only bright spots during that part of the season, but as I said at the time, it was never sustainable over the long haul.

But as far as salvaging the season? I think the chemistry issue getting resolved had more do with that. Really, I don't think the season even needed to be salvaged. They had a tough stretch, against a very tough stretch of schedule. I believe things would have turned around once the locker room issue was resolved, no matter what happened with the lineups. I think we overreacted to a bad stretch of games from the team, and we overreacted to a good stretch of games from Tyler individually.

wintermute
04-08-2011, 09:30 AM
I'm generally a fan of 5-man plus-minus stats, but I think some of you are leaning on it a little too much.

If the question was, "What in general is the best Pacer lineup for winning games against a diverse bunch of opponents", then yes, the numbers suggest that the Collison-Dunleavy-Granger-McRoberts-Hibbert lineup should be out there as much as possible.

On the other hand, for the specific question "What is the best Pacer lineup for playing the Bulls", the answer is not so clear. For one thing, it's probably difficult to find any good lineup at all considering we were blown out in 3 out of 4 games against the Bulls, and our only victory was an OT game. And even if someone goes back to work out the 5-man +/- for those games from the play by play (not me, thank you), the sample size would be too small to be conclusive.

And so, to quote our former coach, remember that the plus-minus is a tool, not the tool :devil:

kielbeze
04-08-2011, 10:00 AM
PG Mark Jackson SG Reggie Miller SF Dale Davis PF Antonio Davis C Rik Smits

naptownmenace
04-08-2011, 10:17 AM
I don't recall if Inferno was matched up against DRose in the last game....but I do seem to recall BRush defending DRose and ( I think ) it didn't really seem to make that much of a difference.

I don't mind putting Inferno in for that very reason. He's like a smaller and quicker version of Artest when it comes to defense....he really gets in your grill and makes you uncomfortable on the defensive end.

Brandon isn't fast enough to cover a quick point guard like DRose. I don't think Dhantay is either but he is quicker than Brandon and has playoff experience. Ultimately, the Pacers will probably have to run different guys at him to keep him uncomfortable.

CableKC
04-08-2011, 10:39 AM
Brandon isn't fast enough to cover a quick point guard like DRose. I don't think Dhantay is either but he is quicker than Brandon and has playoff experience. Ultimately, the Pacers will probably have to run different guys at him to keep him uncomfortable.
I agree with you there.....the key is making DRose uncomfortable. BRush is a good defender....but when I look at both Players....BRush seems to be more of a smart and effective "text book" defender...whereas as I look at Inferno more as a Artest-like instinctive defender that will maker you feel uncomfortable.

Mackey_Rose
04-08-2011, 10:51 AM
I'm generally a fan of 5-man plus-minus stats, but I think some of you are leaning on it a little too much.

If the question was, "What in general is the best Pacer lineup for winning games against a diverse bunch of opponents", then yes, the numbers suggest that the Collison-Dunleavy-Granger-McRoberts-Hibbert lineup should be out there as much as possible.

On the other hand, for the specific question "What is the best Pacer lineup for playing the Bulls", the answer is not so clear. For one thing, it's probably difficult to find any good lineup at all considering we were blown out in 3 out of 4 games against the Bulls, and our only victory was an OT game. And even if someone goes back to work out the 5-man +/- for those games from the play by play (not me, thank you), the sample size would be too small to be conclusive.

And so, to quote our former coach, remember that the plus-minus is a tool, not the tool :devil:

You're right. It is only a tool.

However, my opinion isn't based solely on the statistics. I watch the games, so my opinion is usually based off of my impressions from watching the games. In this case, the statistics corroborate what I have gleaned from watching, and thus it helps to further my belief that our original starting lineup, and the original "Good Squad," is by far, our best set up. Hence, I believe that going that route, gives us the best chance to be competitive against the Bulls.

Of course, nothing should ever be set in stone. In game substitutions should be fluid, and change relative to the situation. During the regular season, you can be a little more rigid with your rotation, but in the playoffs you need to adjust to what is going on in each individual game.

It's another reason I'm glad we have Vogel instead of O'Brien. He is probably the worst in-game coach I've ever seen. He couldn't make tactical adjustments, he couldn't make lineup adjustments, he simply was out of touch with what was occurring on the floor. I haven't gotten that feeling from Vogel.

Simply put, even if I ignore all the statistics (which are all in my argument's favor) I would still believe that going with Collison/Dunleavy/Granger/McRoberts/Hibbert backed up by Price/Rush/George/Hansbrough/Foster is the best way for us to start out. What happens from there should be dependent on how things are working, and which match-ups we can exploit.

Sookie
04-09-2011, 02:22 PM
I don't think you touch it, keep the starting lineup for consistency reasons.

However, Vogel needs to understand when he needs to make an adjustment, and to do it swiftly.

neosmndrew
04-09-2011, 02:30 PM
PG : DC
SG: Rush
SF: Danny
PF: Tyler
C: Roy

2nd Unit:
PG: AJ
SG: Dunleavy
SF: PG
PF: McBob
C: Foster

This is how it has gone since Vogel got here, and I really just can't think of any other one. Maybe give Posey some minutes at the 3/4 or whatever he feels like playing to defend Deng, but other than that, I don't see us varying from our recent line ups. I think we also need to be able to pull the trigger and throw TJ in for AJ if AJ gets too overwhelmed by Rose, which is somewhat likely.