PDA

View Full Version : Odd Thoughts: Destroyed by Birds of Prey



Peck
03-07-2012, 02:53 AM
There is great news to report right off of the bat. Apparently tomorrow the Colts are going to have some kind of news conference to announce some form of player transaction so at the very least nobody in Indiana will really care about this game. Thankfully the news from that event (like none of us know what that will be) will permeate the news for at least a week or more so by the time we come home from Florida on a 4 game losing streak the only people who will know this will be people who read the Digest.

Other than that there is no good news to report.

Once again we had two leads in this game, two!!!!! They are missing Joe Johnson and Al Horford and we had two lousy leads in this game and had to fight, scratch and crawl our way to even get back in this game.

I know a lot of you are not happy with the dark turn that my posts are taking but let me assure you that I really don’t like the dark turn our team has taken even worse.

We are not good right now. There is no other way to say it. I have zero confidence in our ability to beat any of the teams that we are matched up with over the next few games and honest to God as bad as I hate to admit this I don’t think a 9 game losing streak it out of the question. I’m not saying it’s going to happen but right now if you asked me which of those teams we can beat until we finally get the Wizards and I will tell you that I have zero confidence in our ability to defeat any of them.

This goes beyond talent right now, we are in a bad place mentally. Frank has to take some heat for that, but in reality Danny Granger has to take the heat just as much. If he is the Captain, if he is the leader then he needs to be the man rallying the troops, talking in huddles, encouraging players on the floor, leading the charge with hustle plays. Instead more often than not it looks like Danny needs a hug and someone to tell him that he is still the man and that big mean old Paul George isn’t usurping his throne. Well bad news Danny, Paul isn’t your problem. You are. Your standing straight up watching a loose ball from a long rebound go to the opposition, your losing your man on defense, your absolute God awful shot selection and frankly your putrid shooting % is what made you not be an all-star and not be the national darling.

I am a Danny Granger fan; I have supported him all season long and have gone after people when I think they are being unfair. But right now he is part of the problem and I’m no longer sure that long term he is the solution. That might be to harsh at the moment but right now I see a whole lot of the Jim O’Brien Danny Granger & I can’t say I like it.

But hey Danny isn’t alone here; our real all-star (the one who actually made the game) appears to once again need to spend time on the couch with the sports psychologist. He is being pushed off of the blocks by about every player he is playing against and he has completely lost the ability to hit that little hook shot in the post that we had going early in the year. I know that some of that is not his fault as teams are focusing in him and our entry passes are usually either late or too early. But some of it is on him, he is not getting in good position and he is committing stupid fouls that he wasn’t committing early in the season.

But like I said Frank is going to have to take his lumps here as well. What happened to our offense that was designed to keep two big men down low to get offensive rebounds? We are so committed to transition defense that it is pretty much one and done. I understand transition defense, but we don’t stop them generally and our big men are not nimble enough or quick enough to make a difference anyway so why we have gone away from that I will never know.

Our bench is in total collapse, what was supposed to be a strength for our club has turned into an absolute nightmare. George Hill was once again outstanding but other than him our bench is just bad. Obviously Frank agrees with this as only Tyler played for more than 5 min.

Again I know that some of you want to throw out our overall record but I just can not get past the fact that we are now 9-8 over the past month with 6 of those 9 wins coming against the dregs of the NBA. This is the second time we have played the Hawks in that time span and they have beaten us soundly each time. I don’t think in both games combined we held the lead for more than 5 min. What made it worse was that the Hawks played Stackhouse, Dampier & McGrady together on the floor for extended min. and we still could not take the lead from them.

Let’s just do narrative tonight for our thoughts.

Danny Granger I’ve pretty much blasted above so I will give him one small credit here. He did at least rebound. On another night when we were beaten on the boards he at least did get his fair share. Other than that? Well Joe Johnson wasn’t here so by all rights Danny should have been the best scorer on the floor, but it is impossible to be that scorer when you are once again shooting 35% from the floor & a massive 29% from behind the arc. 7 three point shots, really? Like I said I’m seeing a return to Danny the Chucker and I don’t like it.

David West was the best scorer we had on the floor and frankly has been the most consistent scorer all season long so it should be no surprise he led us in scoring. What should also surprise no one was that once again he provided absolutely zero help defense to cut off penetrating guards & wings. I can’t remember if it was Teague or someone else who blew past Collison and had a wide open lane to the rim for a dunk. Now don’t get me wrong Collison shouldn’t have gotten beaten (again) but it happens that is why your interior players are supposed to step up. David moved with all of the conviction and speed of a Tree Ent while said guard did a hurricanrana on his way to the basket.

Roy Hibbert was talking to himself as he went to the bench during the first time out. I point this out because Roy often did this in the past when things weren’t going his way. He hadn’t been doing it this year that I had seen, he was tonight. Over the next couple of days off the team needs to just work on getting Roy back involved in the offense. 6 shots is not enough, even though he got up a few more but got fouled. However I realize that our next couple of games are not games that I should expect any improvement from him (or anyone for that matter).

Paul George shot worse from the floor than Danny did, which is saying something. Now he didn’t have the shot selection Danny had but what he did take he did not hit. Still was trying to have a good overall game even if his shot wasn’t dropping and he did get mad tonight for the first time I’ve ever seen. Sadly he was mad at his own team mate (Tyler) and let him have it at the free throw line which I was actually happy to see. Tyler blew a defensive assignment and Paul ripped into him about not having his hands up on defense.

Darren Collison may have lost his starting job tonight. Thankfully for him Danny Granger air balled a three point shot in the clutch so nobody will remember Darren actually over shooting the rim and air balling it early in the game. God help him he just has no court vision at all. We counted about 7 times where he just flat out didn’t see an open player on the court. I know it will cause turmoil if he is demoted but to be honest with you I wonder if maybe we aren’t misusing him. To his credit he is really trying to be a pass first point guard, he’s not very good at it but he really trying. I wonder if going to the bench and just being told to be an offensive force wouldn’t actually be more beneficial to his game. It might help the bench scoring as well, who knows.

A swift kick in the groin is about as much fun as watching Tyler Hansbrough when his offense is not going. The league has him figured out; there is just no other way around it. Sure he might have a concussion, sure he might need more shots, sure he needs a better point guard. But at the end of the day he is a power forward in the NBA and if he is not scoring or his shot is not dropping then there about 100 other ways he could contribute. But he just does not do that. If he isn’t scoring frankly he is pretty useless. He is not a bad man to man defender against post players but his help defense is, well it’s like every other power forward on our team so I can’t just blame him. I hate it, I want him to succeed and I want his rugged style of play to be the tone we set but it just isn’t and I fear it never will be.

George Hill gets a complete and total pass tonight for any criticism. He was our best player by a mile and unless Frank is really afraid to upset the apple cart of team chemistry (which I think has already occurred to an extent) then George should be the starter the rest of the way or at least a trial run. He even was getting rebounds tonight. Great overall game from him, it’s just very sad that only David West stepped up to help much.

I have no idea why Lou Amundson played so few min. tonight. I guess David West had it going so they rode him to big min. but I still think that they might have wanted to give some of Tyler’s min. to Lou.

3 fouls & 1 turnover was pretty impressive of a statistic for Dahntay Jones. He got kicked in the nads as a parting gift on that last play. Our bench is in such turmoil right now that he has been relegated to less than 5 min. over the past two games.

A.J. played about as well as Collison (that’s not a compliment btw) in his short time on the floor. If Hill does get elevated I have a feeling that A.J. will be going back to the deep bench and if that is the case we should look to use him in a trade. I know he won’t have much value but he might part of a deal to get a player another teams needs to dump to get below salary cap hell.

I’m not going to lie, I have no idea what happened. I don’t know where it went wrong. I have no idea how we beat Dallas in Dallas and since that game we have just struggled against any team that is not a pushover.

I don’t want to believe that our early season record was a fluke; I don’t want to believe we just snuck up on teams and they weren’t ready for us, I don’t want to think that our real level of play is just at the .500% level or slightly above.

But right now I don’t see a whole lot to make me think otherwise.

I normally end these with an mention of going and getting the next game, well considering who and where the next game is I will just say let’s hope we can compete and not be out of the game 4 min. into the 1st quarter.

http://www.sculptures-by-bjh.com/images/Buckeye%20Hawk-right%20side1-840.jpg

Jrod Jones
03-07-2012, 03:31 AM
I agree that we have had 2 pretty disappointing games, BUT that isn't reason to completely lose all faith in this team.

We lost on the road to Chicago, to a team that is quite obviously better then us. Then we lost at home to the Hawks, and I agree this was a game we really should have won. BUT these are both very good teams. We are also coming off of a 6 game win streak. Losing 2 in a row (considering the extent of the losses) to elite talent should not be this off-putting. $#!* happens.

Chicago is on a level of its own with Miami and losing on the road to them shouldn't be so decimating. Yes we lost by 20, but there is only so much you can do when the other team hits 5 consecutive 3's and your shot just isn't falling. We matched them point for point all through the 1st half and I think that is definitely something to take notice of. Not a 'good' loss, but these things happen.

The Hawks are much better then everyone seems to be giving them credit for. With this win over us, their record is now only half a game worse then ours... Yes this would have been a huge win, but is it such a bad loss that we are going to go ahead and say that a 9 game losing streak is in order? Lets keep everything in check here. We lost to a good team at home tonight, and even if it was a winnable game we need to appreciate that the Pacers are not going to have a perfect home record... losses at home, especially to good teams, do happen.

This is a tough 9 game stretch that we have just started but we can't go crazy after 2 poor showings. This team was expected to have serious growing pains coming into the season and its definitely showed. But that doesn't mean that there haven't been bright spots. The reemergence of George Hill, David West posting a season high in scoring, and Paul George breaking 20 points against a great Chicago defense, have all been positive stories from the past 2 games.

We need to put these 2 games into perspective. Coming off of a 6 game win streak it is understandable to lose 2 to very good teams. We all know this team isn't perfect so its not fair to expect every single game (especially when we play top teams) to be a win or near win.

This year has been a hell of a ride so far, lets just see where it takes us.

immortality
03-07-2012, 03:36 AM
I just hope we have a competitive game against Miami, I really don't want to see another 25 point blowout.

Peck
03-07-2012, 03:41 AM
I agree that we have had 2 pretty disappointing games, BUT that isn't reason to completely lose all faith in this team.

We lost on the road to Chicago, to a team that is quite obviously better then us. Then we lost at home to the Hawks, and I agree this was a game we really should have won. BUT these are both very good teams. We are also coming off of a 6 game win streak. Losing 2 in a row (considering the extent of the losses) to elite talent should not be this off-putting. $#!* happens.

Chicago is on a level of its own with Miami and losing on the road to them shouldn't be so decimating. Yes we lost by 20, but there is only so much you can do when the other team hits 5 consecutive 3's and your shot just isn't falling. We matched them point for point all through the 1st half and I think that is definitely something to take notice of. Not a 'good' loss, but these things happen.

The Hawks are much better then everyone seems to be giving them credit for. With this win over us, their record is now only half a game worse then ours... Yes this would have been a huge win, but is it such a bad loss that we are going to go ahead and say that a 9 game losing streak is in order? Lets keep everything in check here. We lost to a good team at home tonight, and even if it was a winnable game we need to appreciate that the Pacers are not going to have a perfect home record... losses at home, especially to good teams, do happen.

This is a tough 9 game stretch that we have just started but we can't go crazy after 2 poor showings. This team was expected to have serious growing pains coming into the season and its definitely showed. But that doesn't mean that there haven't been bright spots. The reemergence of George Hill, David West posting a season high in scoring, and Paul George breaking 20 points against a great Chicago defense, have all been positive stories from the past 2 games.

We need to put these 2 games into perspective. Coming off of a 6 game win streak it is understandable to lose 2 to very good teams. We all know this team isn't perfect so its not fair to expect every single game (especially when we play top teams) to be a win or near win.

This year has been a hell of a ride so far, lets just see where it takes us.

You do realize that we have now lost 6 straight games against teams with winning records? You do understand that the 6 game win streak was by playing a team that may be the worst team ever assembled in the modern NBA twice (Bobcats), another bottom feeder twice (the Nets) and then by beating two teams that have poor records but are actually spunky?

I believe I have this in perspective. We are 9-8 over the past month and if we are content with .500% or slightly above ball then there has been no growth from last season when Frank took over. Yes it is significantly better than O'Brien's teams but I am not willing to just set back and say "well at least we aren't as bad as when Jim was here". Those days are in the past.

I am not saying we are going to lose 9 in a row, I am saying that it is not out of my mind that it could occur. Hey who knows we might go to Miami and win on Saturday.

Jrod Jones
03-07-2012, 03:48 AM
I think fighting for the 3 seed is a huge step forward from last year. I don't think anyone honestly projected us as the third best team in the conference this year. Growing pains are a part of being a young team.

I'm not saying that the 6 game win streak was overly impressive, but 6 wins is 6 wins. This team has learned to consistently beat the teams it need to, and is still in the process of figuring out how to deal with difficult competition.

MrHale
03-07-2012, 04:14 AM
i think ur right we should start george hill and see what happens. i like collison but we need a change. do it frank!

spazzxb
03-07-2012, 05:31 AM
You do realize that we have now lost 6 straight games against teams with winning records? You do understand that the 6 game win streak was by playing a team that may be the worst team ever assembled in the modern NBA twice (Bobcats), another bottom feeder twice (the Nets) and then by beating two teams that have poor records but are actually spunky?

I believe I have this in perspective. We are 9-8 over the past month and if we are content with .500% or slightly above ball then there has been no growth from last season when Frank took over. Yes it is significantly better than O'Brien's teams but I am not willing to just set back and say "well at least we aren't as bad as when Jim was here". Those days are in the past.

I am not saying we are going to lose 9 in a row, I am saying that it is not out of my mind that it could occur. Hey who knows we might go to Miami and win on Saturday.

I think some people got to high during the winning streak. Even Frank seemed to be sucked in by the haze that are garbage teams. Nothing that happened against the b-Bobcats should have been used to make decisions about the future.

Being at the game tonight I made an interesting observation. When a combination of two of DC,AJ,or GH are on the floor teams play us differentlty (at least Alanta did). With those players on the floor Alanta was comfortable playing 2 pg's themselves. While Hinnrich did guard PG at the begining, Stackhouse was brought in to guard PG quite a bit. So not only are we making ourselves succeptable to being over powered in our backcourt, We created circumstances that allow the opponents weaknesses(JJ out no real 2g) to be mitigated.

I have to say G. Hills scoring ability impressed me tonight. I was glad to see GH get to play PG, however with Paul george playing the entire third I was afraid of what was going to happen in the fourth. IT happened, we get extended minutes of GH and DC together. The team scraped and had a shot at the end(an airball unfortunatly). Personally I liked the linup before GH was injured(the one that never lost a back to back game) to what we are utilizing now.

able
03-07-2012, 07:49 AM
I have never looked at DC as a bad PG until last nights game, where I actually was wishing for his removal from the game in the 1st quarter.
While i liked his speed, his ability to score I never liked the fact he was not a POINT guard.

Some the other day likekened him to Jamaal Tinsley from 2008, well let me set you straight, Tinsley would make more assist with his hands tied behind his back than DC.

At least 3 times in the 1st quarter alone he had a window to get the ball to Roy who had position deep, by the time DC realized that, the window closed again.
He also missed a wide open PG and a wide open DG twice.

Not to mention the 3 times he let the ball get away from him, really Tinsley?? You never seen Tinsley play if you ever compare the two, JT did NOT lose the ball (still doesn't even in the 2 minutes he plays)
I am not sure if we had JT coming of the bench who would be starting at the moment, but I don't think it would be DC.

Unfortunately it all collapses from there, your pointguard is important for a monster amount of reasons, I simply believe that Roy's lapsing is a result of that poor DC play as well, he is simply not getting the ball, has to come out to far to get a chance on getting a ball, has to take fouls that are silly because ppl get past DC (and DW is not stepping in) in short his self confidence is taking hits his cheque book can't cover.

It is now simply no longer something we can cover up anymore, it needs addressed, preferably before the deadline.

IndyHoya
03-07-2012, 08:51 AM
I wonder a tad bit about all the criticism of DC. He has pluses and minuses. He is a very decent shooter. He's fast. He generally handles the ball OK (although there were some conceded lapses last night).

His minuses are he's undersized a lot of the time. Sometimes he has a great deal of difficulty defensing the pick and roll (he seems to have a lot of trouble particularly getting around Roy when Roy comes out to hedge or temporarily switches off the pick & roll when DC gets picked). I also question his peripheral vision. Lance, for example, has more (maybe because Lance is taller, maybe because when DC drives he has his head down too much. I dunno). His timing sometimes with his passing is bad (DC's sometimes slow to recognize an open man -- a problem with a lot of guys on the Pacers and not just DC). It's frustrating sometimes to see DC hesitate to dump down to Roy or West or PG, for example when they're open for a couple of instants posting low, and then only belatedly try to make the pass when the defense has already recovered and the momentary window of opportunity has closed and his target is covered up again.

I've also noticed, however, that the Pacers, generally, can't (or don't) fast break. How many times do we pull down a rebound, outlet to DC, and then have DC speed upcourt only to be the only Pacers player on the opponent side of the midline and then facing a 1 on 2 or a 1 on 3? DC then invariably does the only sane thing - circle back and wait for the rest of the team to come up, and get into a half-court set. It happens over and over again - like Groundhog Day.

We're simply a pretty slow team and we don't fast break well and your point guard can't pick up an assist on occasions when there's simply no one up there to pass to. Then we're always faced with a half-court situation. Roy moves up, sets the pick and DC then is expected to dribble off the pick and make something happen. But usually, then, he's only got the choice of attacking the basket as an undersized guard taking on all the opposition's big men inside (which DC does or tries to do sometimes - usually with poor results) or stopping and taking the pull up J (which he usually opts for, often with pretty good results) or kicking out to someone outside (which he opts for a lot too - usually to Danny or PG (who are typically behind the 3-point stripe and not cutting to the hoop)). About the only time we fast break is when we generate a defensive turnover. There's nothing about our offensive scheme geared to a point guard running fast breaks.

I guess what I'm saying here is that DC doesn't dole out a lot of assists because of his own limitations sometimes. But also because we don't or can't seem to run much. We're really not very good in offensive transition. I kind of wonder sometimes if a Rashon Rondo would be doling out many assists if he (and not DC) was playing for our team.

Am I wrong on this?

duke dynamite
03-07-2012, 08:51 AM
Peck,

As much as I wish it could help, I don't think having Danny talking to the team in huddles, trying to fire them up, etc. will help this team. He's been designated "captain" due to tenure, and that is a role I have always said was not best fit for him. It still isn't.

My recommendation:

We need a serious talent upgrade on the bench. Hicks' parody of the Jay-Z song before the season started? That's moot.

bphil
03-07-2012, 08:52 AM
I was at the game and kept a close eye on Hibbert, and I have to say that I'm really worried about him. He seemed down. He seemed gassed. He didn't have that energy or that spark that he had earlier in the season. In the past he's fallen into a funk at around the halfway point... I was hoping he could avoid that this year. Maybe it was just because of the tough loss the night before and the fact that the team had a "spirited" practice in the morning...

Unclebuck
03-07-2012, 08:55 AM
Peck I have a real problem with this paragraph of yours.


But like I said Frank is going to have to take his lumps here as well. What happened to our offense that was designed to keep two big men down low to get offensive rebounds? We are so committed to transition defense that it is pretty much one and done. I understand transition defense, but we don’t stop them generally and our big men are not nimble enough or quick enough to make a difference anyway so why we have gone away from that I will never know.



Transition defense is not optional, it is not either or. Transition defense is hugely important because if you aren't good at that, then it really doesn't matter how good your halfcourt defense is because you'll never get to that point. Teams will distroy us.

I am a stictler on transition defense because I think it is so important. Right now teams know West and Hibbert are slow getting back and they are taking advantage of that. So if that means not getting many offensive rbounds, that is fine with me, transition defense IMO is much more important.

HickeyS2000
03-07-2012, 09:30 AM
Everyone is pointing out that DC cannot make the right pass, but how awful was his defense? I counted four times in a row that he didn't fight through a screen and when he did get close to his man, he only put a hand up. He didn't even jump. I was soooo upset at our defense from the PG spot last night. It was causing everyone to switch and they were running layup drills on us. Say what you want about Rondo and his shot making ability, the dude can flat out play pressure defense.

Since86
03-07-2012, 09:38 AM
Has anyone realized that the Sixers have lost 8 out of 10? IT HAPPENS.

The offense is the real concern. I was kinda half and half with Bill the past few weeks, where he was saying defense wasn't the problem but rather the offense. I'm fully on board now. It's just a complete lack of confidence on both sides of the ball, and I think it's because they can't do anything offensively, other than a few players making individual plays. (West, PG, and GH)

Everyone else just freaking blows right now.

And Frank does deserve some criticism thrown his way. Their smashmouth identity is gone, and it's hurting all areas of play from rebounding to defense. Roy isn't a good rebounder like Jeff. He can only rebound what he can jump to get. There's no chasing down boards, or reading the angles and getting in position. If the ball comes to him, he can get it, and that's about it.

Jump shots lead to long rebounds. Close shots lead to close rebounds. By pounding the ball into the middle, it put Roy into position to rebound. Now, he might as well turn and run down the floor whenever the shot goes up, because he isn't getting it.


The shift came when Frank started opening up the offense. They need to go back to the grind it out style, because they can't handle the freedom.

Since86
03-07-2012, 09:44 AM
Oh, and those two plays that were drawn up, one for PG's jumpshot on the baseline and the 3 taken by Danny were just downright horrible.

Very disappointed that the Pacers didn't even attempt to get the ball into the lane. Horrible.

Ace E.Anderson
03-07-2012, 09:48 AM
At this point your almost at a loss for words when it comes to this team. You wonder what happened to the group of guys that played with an immense chip on their shoulders throughout last years playoffs, and through the first few weeks of the season. And like Peck said, you wonder WHEN this change took place.

Sollozzo
03-07-2012, 09:48 AM
We are what we are - the 4th 5th or 6th best team in the conference. We're going to beat all of the crappy teams but will struggle with good teams. It is what it is.

Early on, we beat some really good teams. But some of those teams are older and didn't have their legs at the beginning of the season while we were young and fresh. Now though, you're seeing the veteran teams in mid-season mode.

Think how far we've come. We used to always lose to bad teams.

BillS
03-07-2012, 09:56 AM
Last night was the first game where I actually despaired against a team we should have beaten (I was in the same mode against Miami but, hey, that was Miami).

When we hit the fourth quarter I knew, deep in my heart, that there was no way we were going to pull this one out. We were once again missing shots that a 5th grader could make (including a third of our free throws), and our opponent was hitting everything that went into the air because we failed to disrupt their rhythm in any fashion whatsoever.

When all our possessions are one-and-done, we have to shoot a significantly higher percentage than our opponent (we have not done so). One wonders if we should sacrifice some transition defense in order to get more second shot attempts and therefore perhaps be able to defend after an in-bounds rather than having to recover after a quick rebound outlet pass.

I would not be surprised at all to see Hill starting at 1 on Saturday night.

IndyHoya
03-07-2012, 09:58 AM
Oh, and those two plays that were drawn up, one for PG's jumpshot on the baseline and the 3 taken by Danny were just downright horrible.

Very disappointed that the Pacers didn't even attempt to get the ball into the lane. Horrible.

In this morning's Star, Granger said his 3 was not the play that was called. Maybe they couldn't run whatever Frank had drawn up for one reason or another.

Since86
03-07-2012, 10:07 AM
There were two Danny threes in the final minute out of timeouts. Which one was Danny talking about? I was talking about the 3 he shot with 49secs left down by 4. It was nice to see him drive to the bucket and get the and-1 on the very next play. Would have been a lot nicer to see him make that decision when he shot the 3.

Mackey_Rose
03-07-2012, 10:15 AM
I wonder a tad bit about all the criticism of DC. He has pluses and minuses. He is a very decent shooter. He's fast. He generally handles the ball OK (although there were some conceded lapses last night).

His minuses are he's undersized a lot of the time. Sometimes he has a great deal of difficulty defensing the pick and roll (he seems to have a lot of trouble particularly getting around Roy when Roy comes out to hedge or temporarily switches off the pick & roll when DC gets picked). I also question his peripheral vision. Lance, for example, has more (maybe because Lance is taller, maybe because when DC drives he has his head down too much. I dunno). His timing sometimes with his passing is bad (DC's sometimes slow to recognize an open man -- a problem with a lot of guys on the Pacers and not just DC). It's frustrating sometimes to see DC hesitate to dump down to Roy or West or PG, for example when they're open for a couple of instants posting low, and then only belatedly try to make the pass when the defense has already recovered and the momentary window of opportunity has closed and his target is covered up again.

I've also noticed, however, that the Pacers, generally, can't (or don't) fast break. How many times do we pull down a rebound, outlet to DC, and then have DC speed upcourt only to be the only Pacers player on the opponent side of the midline and then facing a 1 on 2 or a 1 on 3? DC then invariably does the only sane thing - circle back and wait for the rest of the team to come up, and get into a half-court set. It happens over and over again - like Groundhog Day.

We're simply a pretty slow team and we don't fast break well and your point guard can't pick up an assist on occasions when there's simply no one up there to pass to. Then we're always faced with a half-court situation. Roy moves up, sets the pick and DC then is expected to dribble off the pick and make something happen. But usually, then, he's only got the choice of attacking the basket as an undersized guard taking on all the opposition's big men inside (which DC does or tries to do sometimes - usually with poor results) or stopping and taking the pull up J (which he usually opts for, often with pretty good results) or kicking out to someone outside (which he opts for a lot too - usually to Danny or PG (who are typically behind the 3-point stripe and not cutting to the hoop)). About the only time we fast break is when we generate a defensive turnover. There's nothing about our offensive scheme geared to a point guard running fast breaks.

I guess what I'm saying here is that DC doesn't dole out a lot of assists because of his own limitations sometimes. But also because we don't or can't seem to run much. We're really not very good in offensive transition. I kind of wonder sometimes if a Rashon Rondo would be doling out many assists if he (and not DC) was playing for our team.

Am I wrong on this?

I responded to this in the other post game thread, but yes, I think you are wrong to make this conclusion.

I think this is an error of cause and effect. The reason we're not very good in transition, is largely because DC is really bad in transition. He's bad for a variety of reasons, but they all essentially fall back on the same overarching theme: Darren Collison has a low basketball IQ.

He rarely makes the right play in the open court, and when he does it is almost never on time. He almost always passes it far too late, and when he doesn't, he frequently passes it too early. Obviously, more often than not, he doesn't even look to pass. He'd rather take the ball, on his own, into a wad of defenders and try to get his own layup. Because he's such a poor passer on the break, that's probably the best option really.

He never makes an effort to get the ball into the middle of the court. He always tries to take it up one of the alleys outside the lane. This is a major violation of basketball 101. By doing this, he allows defenders to multiple players and shut down our fast break.

There was a good example last night that epitomized the DC-led fast breaks all too well.

The first one was an example of him passing too early, we had a three-on-one with Collison leading the break down the right hand side. Again, why he didn't try to get to the middle is beyond me, because by doing this he forced Paul George to fill the lane in the middle of the court, and Danny Granger was on the left. I can't remember who the lone Hawks' defender was, but he was able to effectively guard all 3 Pacers due to the way Collison refuses to use the middle of the court.

He never made the defender commit to him, and he dumped it back to George trailing down the middle. He was able to draw a foul and get to the line, but it should have been an easy layup if he had drawn the defender to him before passing it. I don't remember if he made both free throws or not, but it was an absolutely awful fast break, even if we got the 2 points out of it anyway.

Collison's poor transition play, is mainly a result of him having a very low basketball IQ.

Major Cold
03-07-2012, 10:23 AM
I understand the context of our record. And I understand that when you step back and look at the forest you don't see trees, you see a forest.

There are trends to this team. But there is a trend to our opponents. They are shooting extremely well from the field. Good teams do that. And when we take **** poor shots and allow them to take uncontested fast break dunks, it hurts even more.

The problem is ball movement, and Danny and DC are hugely to blame for this.

In losses we are:
-4 on TRB -2ORb
average margin of defeat is 12+
Our opponents are averaging 2 more 3pt makes
We are averaging 6 less assists*****but only 1 more turnover

The problem is not offensive rebounds. The problem is the offense. And having our boards bail us out is not going to solve it. And I think that we have had this problem for more than a year. This is a symptom of JOB.

Smash mouth basketball was not going to fix the fact that our wings and guards hold the ball too long, stand around after they pass, and fail to rub their defender into the screener.

All of this is JOB basketball. And it has not went away. Our bigs haven't bailed us out with rebounds, and interior scoring. And the scoring is not their fault. Teams are collapsing on Hibbert far more than they did at the start of the season. And he is not responding great, but it is the duty of the shooter to find the gap and shift to it.

But careless shooting leads to fast break points. And that means we need our bigs back.

Solve the shot selection and the standing and we might return to January basketball.

But it is still the first week of March.

ColeTheMole
03-07-2012, 10:43 AM
It is ridiculous how Paul George can't do any wrong on PacersDigest.

Major Cold
03-07-2012, 10:53 AM
It is ridiculous how Paul George can't do any wrong on PacersDigest.

He has improved more than digressed and reverted back to old habits. Does Paul make mistakes? Yes.

Is he the captain and veteran in charge of leading this team? No

More responsibility more accountability.

Hicks
03-07-2012, 10:55 AM
It is ridiculous how Paul George can't do any wrong on PacersDigest.

He gets a ton of slack right now because besides being a seemingly great kid, he's only a sophomore player, not a vet, and he's trending towards becoming a hell of a two-way player for us. If he stops growing his game and consistently plays exactly like this in 1-2 years, the knives will come out.

joeyd
03-07-2012, 11:12 AM
We are what we are - the 4th 5th or 6th best team in the conference. We're going to beat all of the crappy teams but will struggle with good teams. It is what it is.

Early on, we beat some really good teams. But some of those teams are older and didn't have their legs at the beginning of the season while we were young and fresh. Now though, you're seeing the veteran teams in mid-season mode.

Think how far we've come. We used to always lose to bad teams.

This is a post that puts things in perspective. Most of us started out with the view that we would be very happy competing for a 5 or 6 seed. Then because of some success, we set sights higher to home court advantage and a 3 or 4 seed. But even a shortened season has it's ups and downs. So why not re-set our sights on the 5 or 6 seed, which seemed more reasonable in the first place? There's nothing that says that we might not yet right the ship down the road. And last year, there is no way that we get that 6 game win streak against even the dregs of the league (the dregs that on any given night can and do upset even the best teams in the league----hey, didn't the Nets thump an upper eschelon team by double digits recently???). So....try to steal a few games on the road in the next two weeks against the better teams, take care of business against the teams we should beat, and we will have a much better record, than last year, have team growth, and will not suffer the ignominy of backing into the playoffs this year.

MTM
03-07-2012, 11:12 AM
With Collinson, I think we have what would be a top 6th man point guard in this league - a guy we'd love to come off the bench and play 20-25 minutes.

Unfortunately he is the starter and the best we have, not just a super-sub waterbug who can disrupt the second unit.

This team with a legitimate distributor would be a clear 3rd best team in the East. Without a distributor, this team is bunched with a lot of other teams that have their holes to fill.

If no changes are made, then the design of the offense needs to be adjusted so that the best distributors are handling the ball. Our best passer in the starting 5 may be Roy, amazingly, although PG and West are both good passers as well.

I have wondered if we should re-think how the offense is organized and attempt to run more plays through the post with Paul George. He has shown to be a fairly good passer, and as such a threat to score, could bring double teams and cause rotation issues for defenses. Much like Mark Jackson was used as a post up distributor because of his lack of speed and ability to see the floor, I wonder whether we should run more post passing -- like a Triangle -- rather than pick and roll passing. Just a thought.

Brad8888
03-07-2012, 11:20 AM
Perhaps Frank should ennunciate better.

I am sure he is telling the Pacers that they need more ball movement. That is an "all" sound, not an "owel" sound.

Maybe he is reverting to his days at Kentucky? :shrug:

Ace E.Anderson
03-07-2012, 11:56 AM
It is ridiculous how Paul George can't do any wrong on PacersDigest.

I think part of the reason we don't rag on PG too much is because he seems to always TRY to play hard, and the "right way". It's one thing to make bone headed mistakes, or making mistakes b/c you're playing timid/afraid. But it's another to make a mistake, and still play hard through your mistakes.

Is PG just lighting the world on fire just yet? Maybe not, but he gives us flashes of greatness as he makes good, steady progress (unlike say DC who has seemingly regressed since he's gotten here). When you combine all of that with effort, then what else can you ask for out of a second year player, first year starter?

Sherlock
03-07-2012, 12:00 PM
I support the idea that
G. Hill should replace D. Collinson as starting point guard.

Peck
03-07-2012, 12:22 PM
Peck I have a real problem with this paragraph of yours.





Transition defense is not optional, it is not either or. Transition defense is hugely important because if you aren't good at that, then it really doesn't matter how good your halfcourt defense is because you'll never get to that point. Teams will distroy us.

I am a stictler on transition defense because I think it is so important. Right now teams know West and Hibbert are slow getting back and they are taking advantage of that. So if that means not getting many offensive rbounds, that is fine with me, transition defense IMO is much more important.

We've always disagreed about this, even when Carlisle was here.

Yes I understand that transition defense is very important, however if you have David West & Roy Hibbert on the floor they are not going to be part of that defense unless they are stationed at the half court line because they are to slow to get back. So since they are not going to be chasing the fast breaks with any success why not use them to what they can be used and get second shot opprotunities. A rebound stops a fast break just as fast as a made basket does.

How many second chance points have we been killed by the past couple of games? It seems like 100 to me and it seems like we have maybe 3 second chance points of our own.

I like West on offense and there are times on defense I don't dislike him but at the end of the day our front court is just not very mobile. The most mobile big we have is Lou and he is actually pretty good at transition defense.

In fact I would really like to see Lou getting more min.

PaceBalls
03-07-2012, 12:38 PM
I support the idea that
G. Hill should replace D. Collinson as starting point guard.

Me too,
DC would be great off the bench for all the reasons Peck listed. He can play his natural game more, which is getting his own shot with that sweet mid ranged J.

We need a playmaker with the starters that can see the court well enough to find the open man in those small windows. DC is too scared or just doesn't see the open man to try to make the pass.

GHill might not be the answer either, but I think he sees the court a little better. If anything I'm all for trying it out for a few games.

rexnom
03-07-2012, 12:39 PM
We are what we are - the 4th 5th or 6th best team in the conference. We're going to beat all of the crappy teams but will struggle with good teams. It is what it is.

Early on, we beat some really good teams. But some of those teams are older and didn't have their legs at the beginning of the season while we were young and fresh. Now though, you're seeing the veteran teams in mid-season mode.

Think how far we've come. We used to always lose to bad teams.
Exactly. We're good. We're just not 3rd best in the East good. This year, no one seems to want that 3rd spot and it's fairly wide open but, honestly, as long as we don't fall below 6th, we're in great shape going into the playoffs.

IndyHoya
03-07-2012, 12:48 PM
And last year, there is no way that we get that 6 game win streak against even the dregs of the league (the dregs that on any given night can and do upset even the best teams in the league----hey, didn't the Nets thump an upper eschelon team by double digits recently???). So....try to steal a few games on the road in the next two weeks against the better teams, take care of business against the teams we should beat, and we will have a much better record, than last year, have team growth, and will not suffer the ignominy of backing into the playoffs this year.

I note last night that lowly Detroit beat the Lakers in OT

PGisthefuture
03-07-2012, 12:58 PM
Me too,
DC would be great off the bench for all the reasons Peck listed. He can play his natural game more, which is getting his own shot with that sweet mid ranged J.

We need a playmaker with the starters that can see the court well enough to find the open man in those small windows. DC is too scared or just doesn't see the open man to try to make the pass.

GHill might not be the answer either, but I think he sees the court a little better. If anything I'm all for trying it out for a few games.

I think this is a move that needs to be made as well as bringing in Lou instead of Hansbrough as our big guy off the bench. If West has the hot hand Vogel should keep him in and the same goes for Roy. The only problem I have with Vogel is that he always takes out Paul George and David West at the same time no matter what. I think it honestly takes Paul out of any rhythm he has going. West is our most consistent player and it doesn't make sense to take him out when he is doing well unless West has requested to be taken out at a certain time.

Nuntius
03-07-2012, 01:05 PM
We are what we are - the 4th 5th or 6th best team in the conference. We're going to beat all of the crappy teams but will struggle with good teams. It is what it is.

Early on, we beat some really good teams. But some of those teams are older and didn't have their legs at the beginning of the season while we were young and fresh. Now though, you're seeing the veteran teams in mid-season mode.

Think how far we've come. We used to always lose to bad teams.

I agree with this although I'd also put the 3rd seed into the equation.

Nuntius
03-07-2012, 01:16 PM
Exactly. We're good. We're just not 3rd best in the East good. This year, no one seems to want that 3rd spot and it's fairly wide open but, honestly, as long as we don't fall below 6th, we're in great shape going into the playoffs.

Then who is the 3rd best in the East?

As you said, no one seems to want it. The Magic are legit but they were just ridiculed by the Bobcats and may have a serious change in their roster after the 15th of the month. The Sixers are able to stomp several teams but struggle horribly to close out games. The Hawks are good but they're too streaky and the various injuries have crippled them. The Celtics are old. They seem to be in mid-season mode at the moment but how long will this continue?

So, who will take the 3rd spot? Impossible to know. Probably, the luckiest one. We shouldn't rule ourselves out from that race yet.

Since86
03-07-2012, 01:24 PM
The Sixers have lost 8 out of their last 10. Since the beginning of Feb, they are 7-11.

The next few games aren't any easier. Boston, Utah, NYK, IND, Miami, and the Bulls.
Then they get the bobkitties again, but go right back into NYK, Boston, SA.

Hoop
03-07-2012, 01:25 PM
This is a post that puts things in perspective. Most of us started out with the view that we would be very happy competing for a 5 or 6 seed. Then because of some success, we set sights higher to home court advantage and a 3 or 4 seed. But even a shortened season has it's ups and downs. So why not re-set our sights on the 5 or 6 seed, which seemed more reasonable in the first place? There's nothing that says that we might not yet right the ship down the road. And last year, there is no way that we get that 6 game win streak against even the dregs of the league (the dregs that on any given night can and do upset even the best teams in the league----hey, didn't the Nets thump an upper eschelon team by double digits recently???). So....try to steal a few games on the road in the next two weeks against the better teams, take care of business against the teams we should beat, and we will have a much better record, than last year, have team growth, and will not suffer the ignominy of backing into the playoffs this year.
You are correct sir. It just seems the more you win the more you want to win, you get greedy and want them all.

You ever read on a Miami or Chicago board, they are ready to slit their wrists when they lose 1 out of 10. I guess it's just the nature of sports fans.

All teams have warts, some more than others, but we see them more clearly on the team we root for.

Ace E.Anderson
03-07-2012, 01:40 PM
Then who is the 3rd best in the East?

As you said, no one seems to want it. The Magic are legit but they were just ridiculed by the Bobcats and may have a serious change in their roster after the 15th of the month. The Sixers are able to stomp several teams but struggle horribly to close out games. The Hawks are good but they're too streaky and the various injuries have crippled them. The Celtics are old. They seem to be in mid-season mode at the moment but how long will this continue?

So, who will take the 3rd spot? Impossible to know. Probably, the luckiest one. We shouldn't rule ourselves out from that race yet.

If we continue to play the way we have for the past month or so, we may have to rule ourselves out from that race.

Nuntius
03-07-2012, 01:45 PM
If we continue to play the way we have for the past month or so, we may have to rule ourselves out from that race.

Sure. But so will do the Hawks and the Sixers. And given that the Magic (the only team of the 4 that has shown some stability) may have a radical roster change soon then maybe all teams rule themselves out as well. So, it will still be equal ;)

Unclebuck
03-07-2012, 01:48 PM
We've always disagreed about this, even when Carlisle was here.

Yes I understand that transition defense is very important, however if you have David West & Roy Hibbert on the floor they are not going to be part of that defense unless they are stationed at the half court line because they are to slow to get back. So since they are not going to be chasing the fast breaks with any success why not use them to what they can be used and get second shot opprotunities. A rebound stops a fast break just as fast as a made basket does.

How many second chance points have we been killed by the past couple of games? It seems like 100 to me and it seems like we have maybe 3 second chance points of our own.

I like West on offense and there are times on defense I don't dislike him but at the end of the day our front court is just not very mobile. The most mobile big we have is Lou and he is actually pretty good at transition defense.

In fact I would really like to see Lou getting more min.


A rebound stops a fast break just as fast as a made basket does.

Yes, by definition you are correct. But that is way too big of a gamble. Taking your theory to the extreme, why don't we send all 5 of our guys to the boards for offensive rebounds. Surely our % of offensive rebounds would increase and thus we will stop even more fastbreaks.

IMO the bigger problem with our rebounding is on the defensive end when Danny and Paul leak out all the time. That is what makes me mad.

Ace E.Anderson
03-07-2012, 01:51 PM
Sure. But so will do the Hawks and the Sixers. And given that the Magic (the only team of the 4 that has shown some stability) may have a radical roster change soon then maybe all teams rule themselves out as well. So, it will still be equal ;)

Lol we could only be so lucky!!

The Hawks have been dealing with injuries to 2 of their best players. (Johnson and Horford) and the Magic is very much so a system team. When their J's arent falling from behind the arc, they are able to be beaten somewhat easily.

Honestly though, I'd rather us be playing at a higher/more consistent level going into the playoffs, then be lucky and happen to fall into the #3 seed in the playoffs.

I'm keeping my fingers crossed for either a small roster tweak/addition, OR a change in the lineup (bumping Hill to the starting lineup?) ANYTHING that can help us get out of this funk that we've been in for a little too long (not counting the 6 game winning streak against bottom feeders of course)

Ace E.Anderson
03-07-2012, 01:53 PM
A rebound stops a fast break just as fast as a made basket does.

Yes, by definition you are correct. But that is way too big of a gamble. Taking your theory to the extreme, why don't we send all 5 of our guys to the boards for offensive rebounds. Surely our % of offensive rebounds would increase and thus we will stop even more fastbreaks.

IMO the bigger problem with our rebounding is on the defensive end when Danny and Paul leak out all the time. That is what makes me mad.

ESPECIALLY WHEN GRANGER DOES IT. PG is playing the two, so at times it's a little more natural for him to leak out. But Granger is a forward, he should be helping our bigs on the boards a little more. There's NO WAY IN HELL DG should average less than 5-6 Rebs a game.

McKeyFan
03-07-2012, 02:37 PM
We've always disagreed about this, even when Carlisle was here.

Yes I understand that transition defense is very important, however if you have David West & Roy Hibbert on the floor they are not going to be part of that defense unless they are stationed at the half court line because they are to slow to get back. So since they are not going to be chasing the fast breaks with any success why not use them to what they can be used and get second shot opprotunities. A rebound stops a fast break just as fast as a made basket does.

How many second chance points have we been killed by the past couple of games? It seems like 100 to me and it seems like we have maybe 3 second chance points of our own.

I like West on offense and there are times on defense I don't dislike him but at the end of the day our front court is just not very mobile. The most mobile big we have is Lou and he is actually pretty good at transition defense.

In fact I would really like to see Lou getting more min.

The point guard is the primary person responsible for defending the fast break. I wonder if we had a better defender in that position, could we better afford to send two bigs to the offensive boards?

Since86
03-07-2012, 02:45 PM
There isn't a point guard in the league that can consistently provide fast break defense on their own.

Trophy
03-07-2012, 02:57 PM
I support the idea that
G. Hill should replace D. Collinson as starting point guard.

I'm beginning to agree and not trying to say one is better than the other.

DC would probably fit in better with the bench and they'd definitely benefit with an offensive flow going.

EDIT: GHill might not rack up a ton of assists, but his ability to score would improve playing with the starters. I also think, he'd help keep a flow going.

I just feel like from an offensive standpoint, both guys would benefit as would the team.

doctor-h
03-07-2012, 03:18 PM
Some of us have been warning about this for weeks. We have been criticized and told we are too negative. These things Peck is talking about now are accurate. They were predictable and will not change with this group. They are mentally weak with a low basketball IQ. They still have no leader who takes charge when the team needs it most. They have no sense of direction. Point guard play on this team is not good and it really doesn't matter who is playing the point. The rebounding lately has been horrendous and the defense out front is awful. If you want to be a smashmouth team, you cannot be weak in these areas. I am also worried about the substitution patterns. It seems we are heading back to some of those theories of the O'Brien area.

AesopRockOn
03-07-2012, 03:32 PM
I'm disappointed that the picture for the op wasn't:

http://www.loftcinema.com/files/birdemic_web.jpg

ASkin_ANight
03-07-2012, 03:32 PM
What do you guys think is the chance Vogel actually starts Hill over Collison, though?

Hill did get those minutes at the end of the game last night over D.C.

beast23
03-07-2012, 03:34 PM
A rebound stops a fast break just as fast as a made basket does.

Yes, by definition you are correct. But that is way too big of a gamble. Taking your theory to the extreme, why don't we send all 5 of our guys to the boards for offensive rebounds. Surely our % of offensive rebounds would increase and thus we will stop even more fastbreaks.

IMO the bigger problem with our rebounding is on the defensive end when Danny and Paul leak out all the time. That is what makes me mad.
I agree with those that state that our transition defense is horrendous. I also agree that our transition offense on the break is also horrendous. That leaves us with one conclusion... our transition game absolutely sucks. We can't convert the break and we also have trouble stopping it.

The thing is that I believe that our PG is the problem in both directions.

Able, Mackey and Peck touched upon the inability of our PG to deliver the ball on a timely basis to where it is needed. I would probably expand on what each has said and say that this problem isn't just confined to the break and it isn't just confined to the half court. It is pretty much a true statement ALL OF THE TIME.

In the half-court, Collison is not very court conscious, and he repeatedly either misses the read and gets the ball to the destination late, whereupon our bigs are immediately double-teamed. Or conversely, he attempts to deliver the inlet pass early before our bigs can establish good position. Each causes more turnovers than what we should be making.

On the break, as Mackey says, Collison ignores conventional rules and avoids the middle, most often looking for his own opportunity. When he does dish, it is far too late and one defender near the basket is able to cover multiple players effectively.

Defensively, our bigs are slow getting down the court, so it is extremely important that we have players that can prevent the forward progress of the ball. This means that one of our bigs has to immediately cover the rebounder, since he is not getting upcourt quickly anyway. And once the rebound is lost, Collison, Granger and George have to assure that the logical players to receive the outlet pass are immediately covered, while at least one of the three is quickly recovering to the defensive end. It is quite apparent that our wings and PG are not good at all at stopping the dribble on the break. I believe this is one of Collison's worst faults defensively.

From my perspective, Hill appears to be much better at leading a break than Collison. Last night, he did call his own number on a few occasions, and I'll admit that a couple of times he seemed to make a lucky conversion, but he also drew fouls and got the job done. I'm all for giving Hill a chance until we can acquire a better option.

As for Granger and George, with a better distributing PG, I believe their shot selection will immediately improve. It's difficult to take "good shots" when the timeliness of the ball being delivered to you is not good. That really leaves your best shot opportunities as being catch and shoot perimeter shots, with not much opportunity of driving the ball because your are not getting it on a timely basis as your opportunity to drive the ball presents itself.

Suaveness
03-07-2012, 03:34 PM
My biggest issue is that for some reason we have no ability to actually physically grab a basketball. It is frustrating to see possesion after possession where the ball just hits their hands and they can't hold the ball. It's like the ball was covered in butter or something.

Since86
03-07-2012, 03:44 PM
Tyler has a bad case of stone hands. He rarely catches anything clean.

Peck
03-07-2012, 03:44 PM
What do you guys think is the chance Vogel actually starts Hill over Collison, though?

Hill did get those minutes at the end of the game last night over D.C.

Normally I would say that the likelyhood is low but when Hill came back from his injury Vogel made the very out of character statement that Hill was fighting for a starting spot.

So with his recent play and Darren's recent poor play I would say that it is not out of the question anymore.

PGisthefuture
03-07-2012, 03:44 PM
What do you guys think is the chance Vogel actually starts Hill over Collison, though?

Hill did get those minutes at the end of the game last night over D.C.

I'm guessing he'll stick with Collison even though I think it wouldn't hurt to experiment with Hill starting a few games.

Trophy
03-07-2012, 03:54 PM
What do you guys think is the chance Vogel actually starts Hill over Collison, though?

Hill did get those minutes at the end of the game last night over D.C.

He'll probably continue to go with DC as the starter, but I wouldn't be surprised if he shakes things up a bit. Maybe sub DC out for Hill early on if we get off to a slow start and put DC back in with the bench.

It's not a matter of who is the better PG, it comes down to the chemistry and it seems Hill would do better with the starters and DC with the bench.

PGisthefuture
03-07-2012, 03:57 PM
He'll probably continue to go with DC as the starter, but I wouldn't be surprised if he shakes things up a bit. Maybe sub DC out for Hill early on if we get off to a slow start and put DC back in with the bench.

It's not a matter of who is the better PG, it comes down to the chemistry and it seems Hill would do better with the starters and DC with the bench.

Hill for DC instead of Hill for PG is my vote.

Unclebuck
03-07-2012, 04:07 PM
Normally I would say that the likelyhood is low but when Hill came back from his injury Vogel made the very out of character statement that Hill was fighting for a starting spot.

So with his recent play and Darren's recent poor play I would say that it is not out of the question anymore.


I was in favor of the switch a few months back, although I do worry about whether Collison will lose his confidence and whether nhe might not be an effective backup point.

Ideally we need George Hill has our backup point and backup shooting guard, but with a new starting point guard. I love george Hill as a player and like him much more than Collison, but he is not the point guard we need.

Nuntius
03-07-2012, 04:21 PM
Lol we could only be so lucky!!

The Hawks have been dealing with injuries to 2 of their best players. (Johnson and Horford) and the Magic is very much so a system team. When their J's arent falling from behind the arc, they are able to be beaten somewhat easily.

Honestly though, I'd rather us be playing at a higher/more consistent level going into the playoffs, then be lucky and happen to fall into the #3 seed in the playoffs.

I'm keeping my fingers crossed for either a small roster tweak/addition, OR a change in the lineup (bumping Hill to the starting lineup?) ANYTHING that can help us get out of this funk that we've been in for a little too long (not counting the 6 game winning streak against bottom feeders of course)

Don't get me wrong, I'd prefer us to play at a higher and more consistent level as well.

But which team is consistent at a high level except the 4 great teams of the league (Thunder, Heat, Bulls, Spurs)? That's the upper echelon of the league. We don't belong there yet so we shouldn't expect them to play like that yet either.

All I'm saying is that despite our recent disappointing results (and believe me I'm concered after the last defeat) we're still right around where we should be.

Major Cold
03-07-2012, 04:42 PM
But the issue of the transition defense is bigger than offensive rebounding and backcourt defense.
e
If their bigs get down quicker, which this has not been the case, predominantly speaking. No I think our backcourt takes horrible angles. I will pay attention to the opposition's front court players. It is not like Tyler Zeller is running down and getting easy dunks.

The only time your front court players do not go for the ORebound is if their front court is running hard and/or our wings are not eliminating paths to the wing, baseline, or elbow extended.

The initial ball handler plays one-on-one if he has no one to pass to.

So if DC, PG, and Danny all make an effort to get back we can still pressure with Hibbert and West. And if they can't.........

West cannot closeout on defense, what makes you think he can run the floor?
Hibbert is positioned on the low-block, what makes you think he can get back to help with faster backcourt opponents?

beast23
03-07-2012, 05:14 PM
West cannot closeout on defense, what makes you think he can run the floor? Hibbert is positioned on the low-block, what makes you think he can get back to help with faster backcourt opponents?
In transition, I don't think anyone can reasonably ask Hibbert to help with defending backcourt opponents. However, what Hibbert or West can do is to immediately defend the rebounder to assure that the first pass taken is NOT 20 feet up court. At the very least, force the opponent to make a lateral pass to one of his wings or his PG. Doing this may gain 2-3 seconds for our wings and/or PG to get up court in order to better defend in transition.

If the opponent takes 4 seconds or more to get the ball across mid-court, there is really no reason at all that they should be getting quick transition scores throughout the game. Every now and then, even slowing down the opponent to 4-5 seconds across the timeline will still result in easy scores due to bad decisions on coverage at the other end, but it should not happen with near the frequency that it is now occurring.

So, right now, I don't believe that our bigs are preventing the quick handoff or outlet pass, nor do I believe that our wings and PG are stopping the dribble on the break.

I believe that Hill is better in transition on both sides of the ball than Collison. And, I believe that Granger, in particular, needs to do a much better job at getting back on defense.

Naptown_Seth
03-07-2012, 05:16 PM
The Sixers have lost 8 out of their last 10. Since the beginning of Feb, they are 7-11.

The next few games aren't any easier. Boston, Utah, NYK, IND, Miami, and the Bulls.
Then they get the bobkitties again, but go right back into NYK, Boston, SA.
Thus the Hammer Comes to Philly thread. They are toast. They will make the playoffs, but staying above .500 is a realistic concern for them.

They've lost 6 of their last 7 HOME games. Of course these are all good teams, but still, HOME. Then on the road if you took the time to read my long post about the Pacers upcoming schedule you saw the portion showing the W-L ROAD records of these teams against +500 teams - and it ain't good.

This makes losing at home to ATL more disappointing in fact, but losing at home to Philly will be downright unacceptable.


Orlando is the competition, period. Losing to CHA last night is worse than the Pacers losing to ATL, and they still could lose Dwight and fall totally out of the hunt.



I like West on offense and there are times on defense I don't dislike him but at the end of the day our front court is just not very mobile. The most mobile big we have is Lou and he is actually pretty good at transition defense.

In fact I would really like to see Lou getting more min.
I could not disagree more about swapping in more Lou time. Lou is not good enough on defense to make up for the offensive struggles.

However West showed some very intense defense late in the 4th last night and was a big reason why the Pacers got a lot of those late stops. I was pleasantly surprised.

You'll note that West also tends to get his hands on the ball in PnR and help type defense as a guy comes to the lane. It's not great defense, but it helps quite a bit in slowing down the drive and disrupting enough to let Roy, Paul and Danny help out.

He is the attack point for other teams without a doubt, but for a guy that can split double teams in the post and score he has shown that he can at least carry his weight on defense at times and can play a smart team game at that end.



2 stories from down close last night

1) At one point Paul picked up a foul rotating to the rim as Tyler was "guarding" the lane. Paul went off to the point of demanding Tyler AT LEAST put his arms up...and then he SHOWED Tyler this. This is 2nd year, much younger Paul getting frustrated with Tyler's defensive effort/awareness.

This came after the entire bench got on him a bit earlier after he got a holding foul while chasing a guy around a screen. Shaw, Burke, DJones and a couple of others all yelled out to him to cut through on the play rather than follow around the low block screen.

Last year I recounted how I thought Danny was on the verge of fighting Tyler out of frustration in the Orlando game (last JOB ORL game). And it happened TWICE in that game, intense screaming at Tyler and all one-way from Danny to him.

His hustle is covering up his stone hands (mentioned earlier in thread) and his poor defense. Based on player reactions I'd say he's not working the defensive system right much of the time, not rotating correctly, etc.


2) After Roy (and the team) got punked about 6 trips in a row in the mid-4th (6 min to 3 min roughly) by the Pachula high PnR, GEORGE HILL went to Shaw/Burke at a timeout and plead his case for why their strategy was wrong. He was showing that he couldn't cover the lane and keep leaving Pargo and that they needed to do something different.

It appeared that he suggested a plan and Shaw/Burke both nodded and agreed, maybe even added some ideas to it.

The team went on to the huddle and then coming out of it West and Hill were talking and West was nodding a lot in agreement with Hill.

The next thing you know you had West making a great shift off of Smith to deny Pachula the lane entry/pass, which in turn forced the ball to rotate elsewhere. Several times this resulted in Smith trying to go at West and LOSING that battle.

So IMO I just saw two SMART PLAYERS sizing up the situation, coming up with a plan (in conjunction with the coaches) and solving the problem.



You can like Lou all you want, but West shows savvy and can make solid defensive plays at times. And clearly it's not even close when you compare Hill's court awareness to Collison. Hill is vastly superior when it comes to recognizing what is needed at either rend.



PS - I love Roy, but he couldn't have stunk much more than last night. Ditto DC.




PSS - DC + 1st (24th pick maybe) for Nash, Tyler & 2nd for Kaman, make this happen and get this team to the ECF at least THIS year. It would solve the 2 biggest team issues right now.

Even if you lose Nash and Kaman after the year (after a great playoff run, really they leave?) you have tons of cap space and you only lost 3 bench players (DC, Tyler, 24th pick) at worst. If Dwight doesn't go to NJ then maybe you are handing DWill a fat contract to run with a ECF caliber team (as proven the year before). Or you can turn around and again absorb a contract someone else wants to give up for a rebuild.

xIndyFan
03-07-2012, 05:24 PM
. . . IMO the bigger problem with our rebounding is on the defensive end when Danny and Paul leak out all the time. That is what makes me mad.


ESPECIALLY WHEN GRANGER DOES IT. PG is playing the two, so at times it's a little more natural for him to leak out. But Granger is a forward, he should be helping our bigs on the boards a little more. There's NO WAY IN HELL DG should average less than 5-6 Rebs a game.

might want to check with vogel before getting too upset. much, if not all, of that leaking out is by design.

for example, if paul or danny run out to contest a shot, they are supposed to keep going istead of trying to get back for the rebound. the chance of a positive play is much higher if they cherry pick instead of trying to get back and rebound.

Naptown_Seth
03-07-2012, 05:25 PM
and honest to God as bad as I hate to admit this I don’t think a 9 game losing streak it out of the question.It is. I can't think of anything more out of the question. Manning it more likely to do a surprise resign with the Colts than the Pacers losing 9 straight. It was a frustrating game for sure, but mostly because they were lax in addressing their issues in time.

With the way they started the game they had no business being in it down the stretch, but they were. That shows that the talent is there, they just need to maintain focus and stay on top of strategy breakdowns.


And when Miami wins by 23, don't panic then either. Save the panic till they actually prove they can lose at home to the Knicks or Sixers.

rexnom
03-07-2012, 05:32 PM
We have to wait until the trade deadline until we decide to mix it up with lineups.

BillS
03-07-2012, 05:41 PM
Quick addition - I think the defense needs to focus more on guarding the player rather than trying to steal the ball. I once again saw a number of times when a defender tried to make a spectacular steal play only to end up giving his man a clear shot or open lane.

Sookie
03-07-2012, 05:46 PM
Quick addition - I think the defense needs to focus more on guarding the player rather than trying to steal the ball. I once again saw a number of times when a defender tried to make a spectacular steal play only to end up giving his man a clear shot or open lane.

Also, our guards have a tendency to sag.

And I'm not sure whether this is a good thing or bad thing. I think, since all of them do it, it's probably instructed.

On the one hand, it reduces the amount of inside shots, because most post players actually know how to kick the ball back outside to an open player.

On the other hand, we end up with a lot of wide open three pointers, because the player is sagging, and the Pacers aren't good at rotating to help out.

vnzla81
03-07-2012, 05:57 PM
It is. I can't think of anything more out of the question. Manning it more likely to do a surprise resign with the Colts than the Pacers losing 9 straight. It was a frustrating game for sure, but mostly because they were lax in addressing their issues in time.

With the way they started the game they had no business being in it down the stretch, but they were. That shows that the talent is there, they just need to maintain focus and stay on top of strategy breakdowns.


And when Miami wins by 23, don't panic then either. Save the panic till they actually prove they can lose at home to the Knicks or Sixers or to Atlanta at home without Horford and Joe Johnson.

Fixed.

xIndyFan
03-07-2012, 06:57 PM
Also, our guards have a tendency to sag.

And I'm not sure whether this is a good thing or bad thing. I think, since all of them do it, it's probably instructed.

On the one hand, it reduces the amount of inside shots, because most post players actually know how to kick the ball back outside to an open player.

On the other hand, we end up with a lot of wide open three pointers, because the player is sagging, and the Pacers aren't good at rotating to help out.

pacers do help out a lot with the wings. since both danny and paul can block shots and david/tyler cannot, the pacer use danny and paul to help defend the front of the rim

Major Cold
03-07-2012, 09:37 PM
2) After Roy (and the team) got punked about 6 trips in a row in the mid-4th (6 min to 3 min roughly) by the Pachula high PnR, GEORGE HILL went to Shaw/Burke at a timeout and plead his case for why their strategy was wrong. He was showing that he couldn't cover the lane and keep leaving Pargo and that they needed to do something different.

It appeared that he suggested a plan and Shaw/Burke both nodded and agreed, maybe even added some ideas to it.

The team went on to the huddle and then coming out of it West and Hill were talking and West was nodding a lot in agreement with Hill.

The next thing you know you had West making a great shift off of Smith to deny Pachula the lane entry/pass, which in turn forced the ball to rotate elsewhere. Several times this resulted in Smith trying to go at West and LOSING that battle.

So IMO I just saw two SMART PLAYERS sizing up the situation, coming up with a plan (in conjunction with the coaches) and solving the problem.


I like this. But we all know that the wings helping on pick and rolls come from JOB. And this never would have happened last year. Having your other big man in the lane is crucial and allows for the open threes to be limited. Seeing Josh Smith launch a contested three under 2 minutes was good, too bad it took that long to figure out. And too bad Vogel didn't figure that out. These are growing pains, and having Shaw here is important to the maturation of Vogel.

Bball
03-07-2012, 10:25 PM
We've always disagreed about this, even when Carlisle was here.

Yes I understand that transition defense is very important, however if you have David West & Roy Hibbert on the floor they are not going to be part of that defense unless they are stationed at the half court line because they are to slow to get back. So since they are not going to be chasing the fast breaks with any success why not use them to what they can be used and get second shot opprotunities. A rebound stops a fast break just as fast as a made basket does.



Also, if you attack the glass you disrupt the other team even if they do get the rebound and so many times you mess up their rhythm, block their vision, slow them down by making them coverup/protect the ball and ultimately ruin their fastbreak off the miss anyway.

If you just let an opposing player have the defensive rebound then you allow them the entire playbook of possibilities on what to do with the ball.

There's more than one way to think about handling transition situations...

Hicks
03-08-2012, 10:19 AM
Quick addition - I think the defense needs to focus more on guarding the player rather than trying to steal the ball. I once again saw a number of times when a defender tried to make a spectacular steal play only to end up giving his man a clear shot or open lane.

Well, somewhat, but they do that because we really need more easy buckets for our offense.

Naptown_Seth
03-08-2012, 12:32 PM
Fixed.
Are you going to fix it for Miami too?

Whoops, turns out Atlanta without Joe and Al AND on the 2nd day of road back to backs can actually take a 10 point lead in the 3rd in Miami and then almost hold them off for the win.

You know, kinda like if the Pacers hit a 3 when down by 3 late in the game instead of missing it.


The difference between the result ATL got in Indy vs Miami is a hair's width. Maybe it's the difference between Paul George's steal and out of bounds play being called Pacers' ball (correct call) or Atlanta's ball (actual call made).

Naptown_Seth
03-08-2012, 12:38 PM
I like this. But we all know that the wings helping on pick and rolls come from JOB. And this never would have happened last year. Having your other big man in the lane is crucial and allows for the open threes to be limited. Seeing Josh Smith launch a contested three under 2 minutes was good, too bad it took that long to figure out. And too bad Vogel didn't figure that out. These are growing pains, and having Shaw here is important to the maturation of Vogel.
And to clarify my view, I was not taking a shot at Vogel on this. It's possible that it looked like the idea came from Hill or Shaw or both, but it's also possible that Vogel had a plan that he needed to re-emphasize or who knows what.

Primarily it seemed to me that Hill and West both had a very clear understanding of what needed to get done, and I thought this before it actually did get done. That impressed me.


Like Peck I'm one of those geeks who really likes to watch body language and lip read (or hear at times) the interactions away from the play or during timeouts. I enjoy the player interaction and how it translates to the court quite a bit. We also sit about 10 feet from each other so we tend to see the same incidents.