PDA

View Full Version : Pacers "new offense" more like "the Quick"



Unclebuck
10-14-2004, 09:09 AM
:confused::confused::confused::confused::confused:

If you read the article in the star this morning, you'll see the reference to "the Quick"

I don't have time to post the article

Suaveness
10-14-2004, 09:22 AM
I dont think its like the quick, but its opening the offense a little more than it was last year.

Kegboy
10-14-2004, 10:48 AM
Pacers plan to open up offense (http://www.indystar.com/articles/4/186223-6614-179.html)


Tinsley will be trusted more; shots are expected to be spread among more players.

By Mark Montieth
mark.montieth@indystar.com
October 14, 2004

The changes won't be drastic or obvious, but the Indiana Pacers' offense will take on a different look this season.

There will be less standing around and lobbing the ball into the post, more movement and balance, fewer plays called and more penetration.

They hope that translates to more and easier baskets without sacrificing defense.

"We need to move the ball more," said coach Rick Carlisle, whose squad averaged 91.4 points per game last season, 20th in the NBA. "We have a team of guys who can do a lot of things. The more different guys we can have touching (the ball), it usually means a better situation."

The need for change was evident in last season's Eastern Conference finals loss to Detroit, when the Pacers averaged 72.7 points on 35 percent shooting. Had they been able to make just a few more shots each game, they could have been playing for the NBA championship. And the best way to overcome the Pistons' brutal defense was to get easier shots and avoid the half-court slugfests.

Carlisle is tweaking his system because he has had a season to become acquainted with his personnel, he has more faith in starting point guard Jamaal Tinsley, who started last season on the bench, and he wants to integrate Stephen Jackson's style and skills.

The players, some of whom occasionally chafed under last season's more structured approach, aren't complaining.

Jermaine O'Neal and Ron Artest will remain the focal points, but more of their post-ups will come off movement rather than stationary lob passes, and other players will have more opportunities as well.

That's fine with O'Neal and Artest, so it's sure to be fine with everyone else.

"It's equal opportunity," O'Neal said. "Everybody's a threat now. Last year our offense became stagnant and we ran into some scoring droughts. This year I don't think we'll have a problem at all."

Artest was the most vocal critic last season, dubbing the offense "boring" after a particularly frustrating loss at Minnesota in December. He said he looks forward to more motion, even if he winds up with fewer shots.

"As long as I'm playing with a bunch of guys who know how to play, I don't need the offense to run through me," he said.

"But if we're losing, I'm going to step up my game."

The primary emphasis will be to get quicker shots in transition off missed shots and turnovers. O'Neal or Artest can post up if they get downcourt quickly enough. But the big men, including the centers, will be setting screens for ballhandlers to create pick-and-roll opportunities and clear the way for others to penetrate.

The result, they hope, is more movement.

According to Carlisle, the Pacers had a losing record when they had fewer than 20 assists in a game.

The primary beneficiary of the changes should be Tinsley, who brought a quicker pace to the offense last season after he became the starting point guard Dec. 30. Tinsley thrives in an open-court game, and Carlisle is ready to trust him with the keys to the offense.

"Overall it will be pretty much the same, but there will be a little more penetration and me getting to spots and getting everybody easier shots," Tinsley said.

"It's opened up for me to create. They're putting the ball in my hands."

The Pacers weren't exactly one-dimensional last season. Four players averaged in double figures, five others averaged six points or more and that group didn't include proven scorer Austin Croshere.

Carlisle expects slightly more balance this season, however. O'Neal, who averaged 20.1 points, and Artest, who averaged 18.3, are likely to remain the leading scorers, but Jeff Foster and the perimeter players could get more shots this season.

"We'd like to have great balance," Carlisle said. "That's always one of the goals of any team I've been involved with.

"Knowing the personnel better, hopefully we can find the right balance between being able to play off our better players and the other guys."

The approach reminds some of the players of the Quick offense, instituted by former coach Isiah Thomas. Carlisle doesn't have a name for this one, primarily because it offers mechanics for creating shots rather than a series of plays.

"We're not reinventing basketball," he said. "We're just trying to play the game as well as we can play it and keep everybody involved."

Call Star reporter Mark Montieth at (317) 444-6406.


Sidebar:

Tweaking the attack
The Pacers will make some subtle changes to their offense this season. Here's what fans can expect to see:
The big men will be in motion more often, setting and receiving screens to open the court for penetration.
Point guard Jamaal Tinsley will have more freedom to push the ball in transition and initiate a play for a quick basket, and more opportunities to penetrate in the half-court sets.
Ron Artest and Jermaine O'Neal still will be primary scoring options in the low post, but only after the transition offense has pulled back and set up.

Upcoming
Saturday: Preseason game, Pacers at Memphis, 7 p.m.
Sunday: Pacers Fan Jam at Conseco Fieldhouse, 4:30-7 p.m. Admission is free.
Tuesday: Preseason home opener, Pacers vs. Minnesota, 7 p.m.


comments forthcoming...

BillS
10-14-2004, 10:51 AM
I think it reminds players of it because it is less play-oriented. It doesn't sound at all like the Quick, just that Rick is letting go of the reins a little on play calling. I can't imagine him giving it up altogether.

Unclebuck
10-14-2004, 10:57 AM
I have no fears that this offense will be anything like the Quick, I just wanted to get some discussion going.

Offense sounds good to me. More player and ball movement is never a bad thing. Pacers have extremely quick and athletic big men, so why not use them.

However, when thngs get tough late in close playoff games, I still believe a team needs a player who can create a shot, draw a foul or create an easy shot for a teammate. Artest is the best at doing that.

MagicRat
10-14-2004, 11:02 AM
"As long as I'm playing with a bunch of guys who know how to play, I don't need the offense to run through me," he said.

"But if we're losing, I'm going to step up my game."


:cringe:

Hicks
10-14-2004, 11:03 AM
Yeah I hear that. Translation: "But if we're losing, I'm going to hog the ball"

ChicagoJ
10-14-2004, 11:03 AM
This is still pretty elementary, more pick-and-roll and give-and-go and drive-and-dish than the iso's and postups we saw last season.

This sounds a lot like the 1980's-era Celtics offense to me.

EDIT - Tinsley is starting to fulfill his promise as "the next Dennis Johnson."

ChicagoJ
10-14-2004, 11:06 AM
However, when thngs get tough late in close playoff games, I still believe a team needs a player who can create a shot, draw a foul or create an easy shot for a teammate. Artest is the best at doing that.

Better than JO? I think you've got the Ron-colored-glasses on again. :flirt:

Kegboy
10-14-2004, 11:10 AM
Alright, first a disclaimer. For you kiddies who weren't around back then, I was just about "The Quick"'s biggest fan. When it worked, which, admittedly, was rarely, it really was a thing of beauty. And I still like it, now that the name has been changed to "Cleveland Cavaliers offense."

That's where UB and I differ. I assume his apprehension expressed above is not because of spectors of seasons' past, but because he's afraid there won't be anymore 70-60 barnburners like his favorite game from last season, the Denver game where I just about shot myself due to extreme offensive ineptitude on our part.

But for those scared of the taint of Zeke, I wouldn't be. The context here is that they're just getting away from Rick calling every play and more into a read-and-react system. I highlighted in the sidebar the note about the screens, but unless they're running UCLA cuts off of them (which is doubtful, since we don't have Brad anymore), I doubt this will look like Isiah's system. Our spacing is good enough that we don't need triangle or motion principles to open up the floor. I just take this as Rick saying he's finally giving Jamaal the keys to the offense, which is a good thing. Of course, if Carlisle actually follows through with it is another matter entirely. :shrug:

McKeyFan
10-14-2004, 01:14 PM
"As long as I'm playing with a bunch of guys who know how to play, I don't need the offense to run through me," he said.

"But if we're losing, I'm going to step up my game."


:cringe:





I agree with Ron on this one. But I disagree with him saying it publicly.

He should talk with the coaching staff directly. I suspect the current changes are in part motivated by his past criticisms. You know, he's only 24 so he needs some space to mature on such things. On the other hand, JO was 24 two years ago and demonstrated a bit more maturity here. But maybe not that much more.

Also, I agree with UB that Ron is the best to create at the end. JO is obviously the MAN, but someone has to get the ball to him. He can't start things when a must scoring situation emerges.

It's like Kareem and Magic. Kareem's the mega-scorer, but the ball has to be in a playmaker's hands at the end for something to happen.

Anthem
10-14-2004, 01:58 PM
I agree with Ron and am fine with him saying it. Ron wants to win, and in his mind, if nobody else is going to score the ball, then he should.

Larry Bird says he's a top-10 player... isn't that what a top-10 player should think?

ChicagoJ
10-14-2004, 03:29 PM
Let's take those last two thoughts one step further... Pat Riley and Lakers fans never worried if Magic was going to keep the ball when he was supposed to give it to Kareem.

Ron isn't just a top-10 player, he's a top-10 player on a roster with an MVP candidate. Top-10 or not, he's still second banana.

Many games, he's the player in the best position to shut down our MVP candidate... just like Kobe was the only player that could stop Shaq and Pippen could've been the only guy that could stop MJ.

I'm not a big fan of him saying it or thinking it. I'm trying to convince myself that he didn't mean it the way he said it and just has no clue whatsoever how to be a teammate. I should probably walk away from this conversation now.

fwpacerfan
10-14-2004, 04:51 PM
However, when thngs get tough late in close playoff games, I still believe a team needs a player who can create a shot, draw a foul or create an easy shot for a teammate. Artest is the best at doing that.

Better than JO? I think you've got the Ron-colored-glasses on again. :flirt:



I would say that Artest is as good and maybe a little better at creating his own shot and drawing a foul than JO is. Part of that is because Ron is generally going towards the basket when he is creating his own shot and thus forces the officials to make a call. JO is often backing down his opponent or shooting over them.

sweabs
10-14-2004, 05:04 PM
What concerns me about Artest having the ball at the end of a game and creating his own shot is his ball-handling skills.

Agreed, Artest is strongest when taking it to the hole - but his dribbling skills are not all that great for "creating his own shot".

If the situation arose that UB pointed out, I would agree that we go to Artest or Jermaine...but if we chose to go to Artest, I think it would be best that we post him up rather than allow him to create his own shot. I think he's best when he receives the ball at the high post...backs his way down and does a nifty move around the basket. I usually get a little nervous when Ron dribbles his way into the key facing forwards. Just my opinion.

Edit: I guess that is just another way of "creating your own shot" - when we use that phrase I usually think of someone like Kobe...but Artest has a unique way of doing it and I would hope he would stick to it in a pressure situation like the one UB described.

Unclebuck
10-14-2004, 05:15 PM
:laugh::laugh:

I was thinking of you when I made that post.

Jay would you agree that probably 90% of the time in the last 2 minutes of close games last season that the play was for J.O or Artest. I think it was split equally between the two.

OK, I also make the contention without any facts to back it up (just my memory) that in those situations, the Pacers scored at a higher rate when the ball went to Artest than when it went to J.O. that does not mean that Artest scored, but simply that he created a shot for himself, drew a foul or created a scoring opportunity for a teammate, more often than J.O did in those situations. .

The coaches keep these stats

Eindar
10-14-2004, 05:18 PM
However, when thngs get tough late in close playoff games, I still believe a team needs a player who can create a shot, draw a foul or create an easy shot for a teammate. Artest is the best at doing that.

Better than JO? I think you've got the Ron-colored-glasses on again. :flirt:



I would say that Artest is as good and maybe a little better at creating his own shot and drawing a foul than JO is. Part of that is because Ron is generally going towards the basket when he is creating his own shot and thus forces the officials to make a call. JO is often backing down his opponent or shooting over them.

Yes, but they don't call fouls at the end of games, and that's why you need an open look, not a bull-in-a-china-shop drive to the basket. When we're losing, that's exactly the time when everyone needs to be on the same page, not when 1 guys needs to dictate the flow of the offense for everyone else. When we're losing towards the end of a game, that's probably the LAST time I want to see Artest with the ball.

ChicagoJ
10-14-2004, 05:20 PM
I don't think you guys are using the notion of "create his own shot" correctly.

Reggie needed somebody to pass him the ball in order to catch-and-shoot, usually coming off a triple screen. IOW, he was very clutch, but he needed the entire play - the other four players - revolving around his strengths and weaknesses.

Neither Ron nor JO need that. For either player, give them the ball, clear out, and let them go to work. Both guys are very, very good at creating thier own shots.

JO, in the post, with either hand and his devastating spin move, is a much higher % play and should be option #1. I'd like him to be better at passing out of the paint/ double-team, but usually once he gets the ball I want him to take the shot, period.

Ron, on the wing, should be option #2.

I'm not sure what to think of rcarey's suggestions, but presumably he's implying that JO would have fouled out or gotten hurt, otherwise why would Ron be in the post? For all the things I've ever complained about with Ron, I don't remember turnovers ever being an issue.

Unclebuck
10-14-2004, 05:20 PM
Kegboy: "That's where UB and I differ. I assume his apprehension expressed above is not because of spectors of seasons' past, but because he's afraid there won't be anymore 70-60 barnburners like his favorite game from last season, the Denver game where I just about shot myself due to extreme offensive ineptitude on our part"

When does the statute of limitations run on my comments about the Nuggets - Pacers game from last November.

I love winning ugly, but most of all I love winning. if anyone could convince me that winning 125-123 will work in the ECF or NBA Finas, I would be all for it. But it won't work.

Eindar
10-14-2004, 05:26 PM
I don't think you guys are using the notion of "create his own shot" correctly.

Reggie needed somebody to pass him the ball in order to catch-and-shoot, usually coming off a triple screen. IOW, he was very clutch, but he needed the entire play - the other four players - revolving around his strengths and weaknesses.

Neither Ron nor JO need that. For either player, give them the ball, clear out, and let them go to work. Both guys are very, very good at creating thier own shots.

JO, in the post, with either hand and his devastating spin move, is a much higher % play and should be option #1. I'd like him to be better at passing out of the paint/ double-team, but usually once he gets the ball I want him to take the shot, period.

Ron, on the wing, should be option #2.

I'm not sure what to think of rcarey's suggestions, but presumably he's implying that JO would have fouled out or gotten hurt, otherwise why would Ron be in the post? For all the things I've ever complained about with Ron, I don't remember turnovers ever being an issue.

Let's redirect this a little. Who's going to be better this year at creating their own shot? Artest or Jackson?

Unclebuck
10-14-2004, 05:30 PM
Jay, for the most part last season Carlisle wet to either whoever was having a better game or whoever had the better matchup.

Agaisnt the Pistons J.O had the better matchup.

But Jay you must admit there were times last season when Artest was able to run right over his defender late in games. Or draw a quick double team that opened up an easy shot for someone.

So Jay I am more than willing to compromise, and agree that the ball should go to whoever has the bet matchup between J.O and Artest ;)

Unclebuck
10-14-2004, 05:32 PM
Jay, for the most part last season Carlisle wet to either whoever was having a better game or whoever had the better matchup.

Agaisnt the Pistons J.O had the better matchup.

But Jay you must admit there were times last season when Artest was able to run right over his defender late in games. Or draw a quick double team that opened up an easy shot for someone.

So Jay I am more than willing to compromise, and agree that the ball should go to whoever has the bet matchup between J.O and Artest ;)

MagicRat
10-14-2004, 05:32 PM
When does the statute of limitations run on my comments about the Nuggets - Pacers game from last November.

Never. Those comments are seared - SEARED - into my memory.

But to be fair to you, it was 71-60.......

sweabs
10-14-2004, 05:34 PM
I'm not sure what to think of rcarey's suggestions, but presumably he's implying that JO would have fouled out or gotten hurt, otherwise why would Ron be in the post? For all the things I've ever complained about with Ron, I don't remember turnovers ever being an issue.

Basically, I was attributing to the fact that I'd rather see Artest post his man up, and pull one of his brute force lay-ups down low (forcing the ref to make a call, like UB suggested), instead of trying to beat his defender face to face with the dribble - mainly because of his poor ball handling.

And yes, I would rather see Artest have the ball in the post in this situation instead of Jermaine. Artest goes to the basket, as opposed to Jermaine fading away from the basket.

In terms of turnovers, Artest managed to average 2.77 turnovers per game last season - not too bad, but like I said, I get a little nervous when I see Artest dribbling too much.

Hicks
10-14-2004, 05:42 PM
2.77 turnovers is bad. Ron was right there with Stephen Jackson at like 7th or 8th most TO per game.

ChicagoJ
10-14-2004, 05:47 PM
:laugh::laugh:

I was thinking of you when I made that post.

Jay would you agree that probably 90% of the time in the last 2 minutes of close games last season that the play was for J.O or Artest. I think it was split equally between the two.

OK, I also make the contention without any facts to back it up (just my memory) that in those situations, the Pacers scored at a higher rate when the ball went to Artest than when it went to J.O. that does not mean that Artest scored, but simply that he created a shot for himself, drew a foul or created a scoring opportunity for a teammate, more often than J.O did in those situations. .

The coaches keep these stats




Jay, for the most part last season Carlisle wet to either whoever was having a better game or whoever had the better matchup.

Agaisnt the Pistons J.O had the better matchup.

But Jay you must admit there were times last season when Artest was able to run right over his defender late in games. Or draw a quick double team that opened up an easy shot for someone.

So Jay I am more than willing to compromise, and agree that the ball should go to whoever has the bet matchup between J.O and Artest ;)




Obviously our posts cris-crossed in cyberspace. I don't think we disagree too much, but JO has been one of the top two or three clutch players in the league for the past couple of seasons. Here's another place where Ron is top-ten in the league, but still not the best one on his team. I'm not opposed to Ron getting the ball in the clutch and I think you know that.

This is how I'd word the compromise: If Ron clearly has the better matchup, he gets the ball. Otherwise, I'd go to JO, including if both matchups were equal.

MagicRat
10-14-2004, 05:50 PM
2.77 turnovers is bad. Ron was right there with Stephen Jackson at like 7th or 8th most TO per game.


16th and 17th......

ChicagoJ
10-14-2004, 05:50 PM
2.77 turnovers is bad. Ron was right there with Stephen Jackson at like 7th or 8th most TO per game.

Huh. I guess there's so many other things about Ron that give me ulcers (where's that Nexium bottle?) that I haven't noticed. :cool:

ChicagoJ
10-14-2004, 05:52 PM
I'm not sure what to think of rcarey's suggestions, but presumably he's implying that JO would have fouled out or gotten hurt, otherwise why would Ron be in the post? For all the things I've ever complained about with Ron, I don't remember turnovers ever being an issue.

Basically, I was attributing to the fact that I'd rather see Artest post his man up, and pull one of his brute force lay-ups down low (forcing the ref to make a call, like UB suggested), instead of trying to beat his defender face to face with the dribble - mainly because of his poor ball handling.

And yes, I would rather see Artest have the ball in the post in this situation instead of Jermaine. Artest goes to the basket, as opposed to Jermaine fading away from the basket.

In terms of turnovers, Artest managed to average 2.77 turnovers per game last season - not too bad, but like I said, I get a little nervous when I see Artest dribbling too much.

I agree that JO used the fadeaway move a bit too much last season. In years' past, he went stronger to the basket, and was more effective. I'm hoping he uses the newly-added twenty pounds as a reminder to attack instead of fadeaway.

ChicagoJ
10-14-2004, 05:55 PM
When does the statute of limitations run on my comments about the Nuggets - Pacers game from last November.

Never. Those comments are seared - SEARED - into my memory.

But to be fair to you, it was 71-60.......




Sorry, UB, but I'm going to have to side with the prosecution here.

Judge Jay

Hicks
10-14-2004, 05:55 PM
2.77 turnovers is bad. Ron was right there with Stephen Jackson at like 7th or 8th most TO per game.


16th and 17th......



Right. Still high up there.

Kegboy
10-14-2004, 08:07 PM
When does the statute of limitations run on my comments about the Nuggets - Pacers game from last November.

(Rat stole my thunder, but...)

Never. NEVER!!!!!! :darkness:

Either that, or I come up with something else to make fun of you about. :flirt:

Kegboy
10-14-2004, 08:10 PM
2.77 turnovers is bad. Ron was right there with Stephen Jackson at like 7th or 8th most TO per game.

Huh. I guess there's so many other things about Ron that give me ulcers (where's that Nexium bottle?) that I haven't noticed. :cool:

So, does every time he runs into the lane and throws the ball up in a vain attempt to get his own offensive rebound count as a turnover? Cause it should. :banghead:

Unclebuck
10-14-2004, 11:16 PM
I shouldn't bring this up. But I will anyway. Maybe Ron commits too many turnovers, but J.O gets his shot blocked more than anyone in the whole NBA by a substantial margin.

(face it they both stink we should go to AJ and Cro at the end of games) :devil:

ChicagoJ
10-15-2004, 09:39 AM
I thought I was the cynical/ sarcastic twin. :p

JO gets hammered constantly yet shoots far fewer FTs than his fellow MVP candidates. Adding two fouls - two less FGAs and four more FTAs - and JO's FG% and FTA would be in line with his peers - the other MVP candidates.

I'm hoping JO and the refs learn to respect each other this season - I'll acknowledge this is the one area of immaturity JO still struggles with.

McKeyFan
10-15-2004, 10:37 AM
I don't think you guys are using the notion of "create his own shot" correctly.

Reggie needed somebody to pass him the ball in order to catch-and-shoot, usually coming off a triple screen. IOW, he was very clutch, but he needed the entire play - the other four players - revolving around his strengths and weaknesses.

Neither Ron nor JO need that. For either player, give them the ball, clear out, and let them go to work. Both guys are very, very good at creating thier own shots.

JO, in the post, with either hand and his devastating spin move, is a much higher % play and should be option #1.


Well put.

JO is definitely option #1. He also is doubled often, and there is also many times when the defense denies the pass well enough to keep him from getting it.

The play can't start with JO out on the perimeter. In that sense, he can't "create his own shot" from scratch. So, I think most of us agree the best person to start the play is Artest.

Artest passes well if a teammate is open in those situations.

TheSauceMaster
10-15-2004, 11:00 AM
I shouldn't bring this up. But I will anyway. Maybe Ron commits too many turnovers, but J.O gets his shot blocked more than anyone in the whole NBA by a substantial margin.

(face it they both stink we should go to AJ and Cro at the end of games) :devil:

:tsk::tsk::tsk::tsk:

Unclebuck
05-18-2005, 02:23 PM
I have to bump this.

Question: did the new offense simply not materialize because of injury and suspension, or was the offense really different at all

Anthem
05-18-2005, 06:55 PM
It was going before the suspension. We looked great on O and great on D. We out-Pistoned the Pistons... we ground it out defensively but got easy buckets on offense.

Here's a heretical thought... Reggie really doesn't play well in that kind of offense. Reggie needs an offense designed for him, with double- and triple screens happening all over the court. We never played that offense after Reggie came back. We did have more of a open offense before Carlisle decided to dump it to Jermaine every time, but I think if he had it to do over again he'd have changed that.

Kegboy
05-18-2005, 08:22 PM
It fell through the cracks just like the Original Quick did. Though, this time there's a bit more of an excuse (not that The Great Collapse didn't suck, mind you.)

I'm salivating over seeing what we run next year with Jack and Ron at the wings.