PDA

View Full Version : For as good as Vogel's defensive strategies have been...



Dr. Hibbert
04-21-2011, 09:36 PM
...that final shot was the epitome of every final offensive possession the Pacers have had this year.

If he's going to stick as the Pacers coach, he really needs to figure out how to draw up final possessions. Because that was a repeat of every final possession I've seen from the Pacers this year. Uninspiring, unoriginal, always Granger and always Granger in a terrible position to actually take the shot.

mb221
04-21-2011, 09:38 PM
I just don't understand how they can't have a play to bring someone off of a screen or two for an open jump shot. It's always dribble handoff with terrible screens.

birdsandbats
04-21-2011, 09:39 PM
Agreed, we need some assistants next year that can help us draw up some real clutch plays. Sometimes it's even worth it to throw the opponents off and run a play for PG or something instead of the predictable: feed-the-ball-to-triple-teamed-Granger-even-though-everyone-has-prepared-for-this-play.

Slick Pinkham
04-21-2011, 09:41 PM
Hero ball sucks. I know Danny had made 4 in a row, but those were 4 within the offense. You have to know not to chuck up a 10% shot (and I'm being generous thinking he makes that once in ten tries).

Trust your teammates, trust your offense, and scrap going for the MJ moment.

righteouscool
04-21-2011, 09:42 PM
It was a really stupid move by Vogel to take George off Rose for the last possession. Rose scored a majority of his points against Jones when he was subbed in for George. I'm very annoyed by that.

Vogel is my favorite coach for 3 quarters, but there is a reason that you lose close games like that and "not having a closer" is a pile of dung. It is because the offensive plays are completely predictable.

Anthem
04-21-2011, 09:55 PM
Vogel is my favorite coach for 3 quarters, but there is a reason that you lose close games like that and "not having a closer" is a pile of dung. It is because the offensive plays are completely predictable.
So are Chicago's.

Marlin
04-21-2011, 09:55 PM
I love Vogel, let me preface that. But the Granger play, and the Collison play to a lesser degree, were just bad. No way around it, if you are down by two you don't look only for a jumpshot. It it's there, great, but if it isn't, then the primary goal should be to take it to the rack, draw a foul or make something happen near the basket. You just can't focus only on the jumpshot and live or die with that, it was clear Danny couln't get a quality shot off on that play.
And that's on Darren, too, he should know better than get stubborn trying to force the deal.

By the way, it may be only my opinion, but on those kind of moments I want Jeff on the floor. You can't leave your best screen setter on the bench there. Not even mentioning that he's our best rebounder, particulary so on the offensive end.

Sookie
04-21-2011, 09:58 PM
Vogel has drawn up some really good plays down the stretch. Perhaps it's a matter of the team not executing.

Quite frankly, I think Chicago digs in their heals defensively on those last possession and the Pacers settle for stupid shots instead of running the offense.

Dr. Hibbert
04-21-2011, 10:06 PM
Vogel has drawn up some really good plays down the stretch. Perhaps it's a matter of the team not executing.

Quite frankly, I think Chicago digs in their heals defensively on those last possession and the Pacers settle for stupid shots instead of running the offense.

Disagree. This has been a season-long problem and cropped up more than a few times since Vogel has been the coach. It always goes to Danny, and it always goes to Danny in a bad position. I don't even blame Danny for missing half these shots...he has no chance. The predictability of it all is overwhelming.

imawhat
04-21-2011, 10:09 PM
Vogel has drawn up some really good plays down the stretch. Perhaps it's a matter of the team not executing.

Quite frankly, I think Chicago digs in their heals defensively on those last possession and the Pacers settle for stupid shots instead of running the offense.


Yep. It's 100% poise, imo. They cut off our first option and we panic.

beast23
04-21-2011, 10:12 PM
There was nothing wrong with the final play. I think going after a 3 was a smart choice. However, Danny has to be better at recognizing opportunities. One dribble by Granger to start a drive down the left side of the lane would have drawn Deng a couple of more steps away from Dunleavy.

Dunleavy was open behind the arc on the left side when Granger went up for his shot. Deng was in position to close the space, but one dribble by Granger would have resulted in Dunleavy being wide open. There was probably just enough time for Granger to complete the play by making the pass to Dunleavy for the open 3.

Sookie
04-21-2011, 10:15 PM
Disagree. This has been a season-long problem and cropped up more than a few times since Vogel has been the coach. It always goes to Danny, and it always goes to Danny in a bad position. I don't even blame Danny for missing half these shots...he has no chance. The predictability of it all is overwhelming.

I'm saying it's about execution not the play that's drawn up. The Pacers screw it up, panic, and give it to Danny..who then is intent on taking a shot..which is inevitably a bad shot.

Dr. Hibbert
04-21-2011, 10:17 PM
I'm saying it's about execution not the play that's drawn up. The Pacers screw it up, panic, and give it to Danny..who then is intent on taking a shot..which is inevitably a bad shot.

Gotcha. Hard to say for sure, but a fair argument. To me, it looks like all these shots are supposed to go to Danny at the top of the arc or near it. Was surprised they didn't draw it up for Dunleavy given how obvious going to Granger was and the attention Granger was attracting at that point in the game.

ilive4sports
04-21-2011, 10:26 PM
Its poise and not having someone else who is a threat to score. Danny was double and triple teamed the whole last play and yet him taking a contested shot is still by far the best option we had. We need a consistent scorer to go with Danny right now.

Sookie
04-21-2011, 10:29 PM
Gotcha. Hard to say for sure, but a fair argument. To me, it looks like all these shots are supposed to go to Danny at the top of the arc or near it. Was surprised they didn't draw it up for Dunleavy given how obvious going to Granger was and the attention Granger was attracting at that point in the game.

I'm not sure what it is either, but teams tend to screw up execution, especially young teams. I think Danny at the top of the key is just a bail out move.

Hoop
04-21-2011, 11:05 PM
I bet Vogel's play calling would look like pure genius if Rose was the one executing them.

beast23
04-21-2011, 11:25 PM
Its poise and not having someone else who is a threat to score. Danny was double and triple teamed the whole last play and yet him taking a contested shot is still by far the best option we had. We need a consistent scorer to go with Danny right now.
On the last play of the this game, I would totally agree that Danny would be the first option. However, that is just a single option and the best option known by the players and the coaches before the play is actually executed.

Coaches almost always reveal contingency plans to players in the event that the play as designed cannot be executed with a reasonable chance of success. For example, Danny if you are double-teamed by Collison's man, look for Collison behind the arc a few feet to your right. If you draw Mike's man to double-team you, look for Mike behind the arc to your left.

And this is exactly the point that I made earlier. A coach can provide a good play coming out of a time-out and even discuss its options, but it is always up to the players to execute the play and to recognize their best opportunities to score using play and all of its options.

A player also has to know his limitiations and be willing to both pass up his own opportunity if a teammate has a better opportunity to score. And foremost, he must trust his teammates.

For whatever reason, on that final play either Danny did not see the better opportunity was to create for Dunleavy, or he chose not to use the opportunity available to him.

Unclebuck
04-21-2011, 11:27 PM
...that final shot was the epitome of every final offensive possession the Pacers have had this year.

If he's going to stick as the Pacers coach, he really needs to figure out how to draw up final possessions. Because that was a repeat of every final possession I've seen from the Pacers this year. Uninspiring, unoriginal, always Granger and always Granger in a terrible position to actually take the shot.


You have to have the players and you also have to give the defense a ton of credit.

A coach cannot work magic

At the end of the game it isn't about drawing up a play, it is more about having the players who the defense cannot stop, and right now we do not have that

ilive4sports
04-21-2011, 11:36 PM
On the last play of the this game, I would totally agree that Danny would be the first option. However, that is just a single option and the best option known by the players and the coaches before the play is actually executed.

Coaches almost always reveal contingency plans to players in the event that the play as designed cannot be executed with a reasonable chance of success. For example, Danny if you are double-teamed by Collison's man, look for Collison behind the arc a few feet to your right. If you draw Mike's man to double-team you, look for Mike behind the arc to your left.

And this is exactly the point that I made earlier. A coach can provide a good play coming out of a time-out and even discuss its options, but it is always up to the players to execute the play and to recognize their best opportunities to score using play and all of its options.

A player also has to know his limitiations and be willing to both pass up his own opportunity if a teammate has a better opportunity to score. And foremost, he must trust his teammates.

For whatever reason, on that final play either Danny did not see the better opportunity was to create for Dunleavy, or he chose not to use the opportunity available to him.

Tonight the play they tried failed miserably. I don't even know what they tried, but it clearly didn't work. Collison didn't get open when Danny got doubled. I really didn't see someone open that Danny could safely get the ball too, but I haven't had a great second look at the shot.

For a team that doesn't have a consistent second option in that situation our execution needs to be perfect, but its not which leads to a contested 3 from Danny.

xIndyFan
04-22-2011, 12:07 AM
part of the problem may be the screeners. pacers are about the worst pick setting team in the league. be nice when the guys learn how to set and NBA pick.

ilive4sports
04-22-2011, 12:26 AM
part of the problem may be the screeners. pacers are about the worst pick setting team in the league. be nice when the guys learn how to set and NBA pick.

probably factors into it a lot. I mean Danny was running hard around the screens, yet got little seperation

indyaway
04-22-2011, 12:39 AM
He needs to hire a good assistant to help with the offense. Picket Fence!

http://content6.flixster.com/photo/12/84/23/12842380_gal.jpg

KingGeorge
04-22-2011, 12:51 AM
It seems like everyone is giving Vogel a tough time tonight.

We still have to remember that he is a rookie coach and this is all new to him as well.

It's also hard to blame Vogel for the last play because maybe it was the player's fault. I'm also guessing he didn't tell Danny to take an impossible three ball.

I also don't think we are giving enough credit to the Bulls defense.

gummy
04-22-2011, 01:23 AM
Granger indicates that the coaching staff drew up three or four different options and implies both that the Chicago D stepped up and that the guys failed to execute:

"We had three or four different options. They took them away from us," said Granger. "This is part of lack of ball movement and inexperience. We’re a young team. This is a little disappointing because we need to win at least one of these."

http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/rewind_110421.html