Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Pacers problem: Defense

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Pacers problem: Defense

    Why did the Pacers lose these last two games? I'll tell you in a minute, but let me first tell you what was not the problem.

    Coaching was not the problem. RIGID substitution pattern was not the problem.

    Bench play was not the problem. AJ was not the problem. Reggie was not the problem. Backcourt scoring was not the problem. Lack of a center was not the problem.


    The problem was defense. Pacers could not get any important stops, in fact aftewr the first quarter Friday night, the pacers got very few stops for 7 straight quarters.

    Pacers shot 15 of 18 in the first quarter Saturday night, and yet only had an 11 point lead. That was a sure sign of trouble.

    Did the Pacers get one important defensive stop in either game? I can't think of one.

    As I sit here and watch the Pistons destroy the Cavs in Cleveland, if the Pacers don't get back to their defensive mindset and start playing betrter defense again the Pacers will not win the east, no chance.

    You might ask, what is the problem defensively? Good question

  • #2
    Re: Pacers problem: Defense

    I agree that the defense has let down and in the long run we have to get back to where we were to make a serious run.

    But how can the starting backcourt total 20 points in two games? We might not be where we should be defensively but we would have won both games with a decent showing from our guards.
    "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

    "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Pacers problem: Defense

      I will really not be overly concerned about the Pacers for another 3-4 games.

      If the defense does not show up by the start of the back-to-back with Milwaukee, then I will get worried.

      These are boys/men, not machines. They have played 69 of 82 games. They have a large lead in the East and are still tied for the best record in the NBA.

      I think they are having a small mental rest before their push to the playoffs.

      Detroit has 11 games left and I question if they might be peaking a little early. They have been great for the last 10-12 games. Can they maintain this momentum for the rest of the season and still have it for the playoffs? We shall see.

      If the Pacers can pull it together for the last 8-10 games and into the playoffs, then all is well. Only time will tell but it looks like they start out a game fine but just don't retain their intensity. Let's hope it is just the time of the season and nothing serious.

      I would rather be the hammer than the nail

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Pacers problem: Defense, defense, defense, defense and defense

        Several things Ive noticed. One, the guards are not hitting or they would have won the last two games.

        Two, after the first quarters the defensive intensity slowly dissipates.

        Three, the bench hasn't been consistent. One time they will play better than the starters and then the next time (in the same game against the same opponent) they will stink.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Pacers problem: Defense

          RAMBLING THOUGHTS....


          CAVEAT: I had to miss the Memphis game.

          While I would like to blame the defense entirely, I think that would be unfair.

          That said: Part of the reason to have a stifling defense is to help weather the storm when your shooting goes cold, the calls go against you, or you need a stop.

          What I noticed during the Kings game was the offense was moving and cutting and passing.... and then they just lost sharpness on offense. What happened to the precision that was there?

          Maybe that is a reflection on our guards not able to hit the broadside of a barn and the other team clogging it up inside more? Maybe that is a reflection on our production from the bench when the starters wear down?

          Then again, at the end when it was crunch time the team seemed to get it back on offense... but by then we were trading baskets.

          And that points back to the defense. So maybe it IS the defense? Hmmmmmmmmmm

          If I am an opposing coach I am not going to bite on Reggie posing as a 'decoy'. I'll take my chances fully knowing that SOMETIMES he will burn people for that.

          I still think Harrington is a problem for this team. It is a sticky situation because I don't think Artest has the Pacer management's confidence yet... and I think they have to be worrying about Bender's proclivity for injuries. Meaning: those two things buys Harrington a bit of an insurance policy. That and Artest's surgery are probably why Harrington didn't get traded at the deadline even tho IMHO he probably should have been.
          I wish Harrington had Croshere's mindset.... as it is I see Al as a selfish player who COULD be more but doesn't get it.

          -Bball
          Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

          ------

          "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

          -John Wooden

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Pacers problem: Defense

            i'm not too worried about the guards' scoring. they've been that way pretty much all year, even when we were winning games. in fact, having the guards (especially reggie) score big almost guarantees a win, since it's something of a bonus.

            bench is a lot more worrisome. we like to say we have a deep bench, but all the second unit is doing now is giving up leads. actually, they've been doing that for quite a bit recently, it's just that the starters have been able to pull it out in several close games.

            i don't see why carlisle's substitution patterns should be blamed - the bench has been playing awful, should he just stick with the starters? well maybe he will, for the playoffs.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Pacers problem: Defense

              I still think Harrington is a problem for this team. It is a sticky situation because I don't think Artest has the Pacer management's confidence yet... and I think they have to be worrying about Bender's proclivity for injuries. Meaning: those two things buys Harrington a bit of an insurance policy. That and Artest's surgery are probably why Harrington didn't get traded at the deadline even tho IMHO he probably should have been.

              I wish Harrington had Croshere's mindset.... as it is I see Al as a selfish player who COULD be more but doesn't get it.

              -Bball
              Mr. Optimist: But what about when he does get it?

              bulletproof: Trade Al.

              Mr. Optimist: Where's Mr. Pessimist?

              bulletproof: Trade Al.

              Mr. Optimist: I refuse to have this conversation with you. What did you do to my friend, Mr. Pessimist?

              bulletproof: Trade Al.

              Mr. Optimist: La-la-la-la-la, I can't hear you.

              bulletproof: Oh, you hear me just fine, Mr. Blue Sky. Al and Ron for TMac.

              Mr. Optimist: La-la-l—for TMac?

              bulletproof: TMac.

              Mr. Optimist: Do we have to include Ron?

              bulletproof: Well, Pollie ain't gonna get us :censor:.

              Mr. Optimist: But what about our famed defense? What'll happen to that without Ron?

              bulletproof: Cleveland, 107 points. Sacramento, 94 points. Memphis 99 points.

              Mr. Optimist: Not fair. Ron didn't play in all those games.

              bulletproof: Yeah, the one where we allowed the least points.

              Mr. Optimist: There's no way we could get TMac.

              bulletproof: Maybe, but maybe Larry will press Donnie to be a little more...bold this off-season.

              Mr. Optimist: I don't know if I like bold. Bold is for...the Pistons...

              bulletproof: Bold is scary. High risk. High reward.

              Mr. Optimist: Or high risk, low reward.

              bulletproof: Oh, now I see...

              Mr. Optimist: What?

              bulletproof: Mr. Optimist and Mr. Pessimist are one and the same person.

              Mr. Optimist: Oops. What gave it away?

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Pacers problem: Defense

                In the playoffs the rotation will get shorter for sure.

                Part of the defensive problem might be related to the style of ball we are playing. And in these last games, we have been scoring easily early. When you are constantly pushing the ball in transition, the opponent in return is going to get good shots off our misses before our defense can not get completely set-up.

                I look for the Pacers to play more conservatively in the playoffs. Which, of course, is no major revelation.

                I do, however, think guard play is part of the problem. Tinsley, Reggie \, AJ and Freddie simply must hit some shots if we are to beat the good teams. To think otherwise is goofy. Without our guards contributing, the defenses will collapse into the interior, as Sacramento did Friday night.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Pacers problem: Defense

                  ya the defensive probs go back beyond the last few games, I commented about this a few weeks ago during the winning streak and how they should be blowing teams out, when they barely beat them down the stretch.

                  Honestly, I think it comes down to playing up tempo as opposed to always halfcourt sets. More freelance style guard slashing stuff.

                  I suppose thats just 1 of many things, but the Pacers are definately NOT at the peak of their game right now. Hope they didnt peak too early...

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Pacers problem: Defense

                    Bball and Bullet

                    Even when Al isn't on the floor the Pacers still have problems.

                    Al didn't guard Bibby or Webber, and those guys hurt us.

                    And in the Memphis game Al got a defensive stop, a steal and a assist to Tins for a three late in the game to give the Pacers a chance to get into overtime.

                    Al isn't a guard, and our problem is with our guards. You guys point the finger at Al, how about taking a look at Reggie once in a while?

                    As Slick said during the Griz game while we still had the lead, we got to have more from our guards. Its late in the season now and Reggie should have started to turn it up by now. If the number of shots are a problem then Reggie needs to say gimme the ball more.

                    If he is doing his best now, then he needs to step back and let Freddie start (notice I said Freddie and not Al).
                    Freddie plays better defense than Reggie or Tinsley, he can hit the three, and most importantly, he can slash to the bucket.

                    Pacers need to make a choice, respect Reggie and have him retire a starter, or enhance the backcourt defense and possibly the chances of winning a game.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Pacers problem: Defense

                      I said this after the Kings game and I really beleive it to be true:

                      Our pick-and-roll defense has changed. We've gone back to last year's version of every man for himself, without the team and help concepts.

                      Don't know if its lack of discipline from the players or lack of direction from the coaches.

                      But no matter how much Tinsely improves on D, if he's left to his own devices to defend a hot shooting PG on a pick and roll, we're doomed. We've got to get our centers and forwards trapping on the screen again - did you notice how far away JO was from Brad's screen against Jamaal on Bibby's game-winning shot? And that isn't the only time it happened. Foster and O'Neal in particular have been more concerned with staying in the paint/ rebounding position and we can't do that against a hot PG. So you say, "But Jay, GP and Kidd will always be better defenders than Mel Mel." Fine, but if you put GP and Kidd out there against Bibby with no assistance on the pick and roll, a hot-shooting Bibby will still hit the game winner.

                      [hr]

                      I think a more significant problem than our defense is this: over the past four games, we've played three teams that have as good or better records than we've had since say Christmas. The six hottest teams in the league are Sacremento, Detroit, Memphis, Indiana, Cleveland and the Lakers. All six of these teams should advance in the playoffs, although if ESPN hasn't been paying attention (and they rarely do), they'll tell you that if Cleveland and Memphis advance its an upset. I disagree. And the other four teams I think are going to be playing in the conference finals.

                      We've built a big cushion in the standings because we've been consistently good-to-great all season. But there are teams out there that are better than us or are just playing better than us right now. This, fellow posters, is why I'm opposed to "resting" any of our key guys if they are healthy enough to play - we can't afford to "surrender" any of the momentum we have remaining.
                      Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                      Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                      Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                      Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                      And life itself, rushing over me
                      Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                      Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Pacers problem: Defense

                        So maintaining defensive intensity, more consistant guard play, and more consistant bench play seem to be the bigger issues... I would question the timing of some substitutions....not who comes in.

                        I'd like to see jamal stay in with JO, FJ, Al, and JB... to get those guys going, and you have JOs stability in there to fall back on.... then bring in AJ and Cro in once the other guys are going.

                        You can't really place blame on one player here.... yeah Al makes mistakes sometimes....but he usually makes up for them by taking a charge or getting a big offensive board.... Artest does the same thing,,,,he turns the ball over more than anyone on the team....but no one complains because he makes up for it in other ways... JO is second to Artest on the team in turnovers btw.

                        The bench is inconsistant...who's isn't??? I'm not going to blame them for giving up all the big leads lately... On more than one occasion the starters had already let the opposition get momentum or givin up the lead entirely only to have the bench come in against a red hot opponent....

                        In the Portland game the starters looked lethargic starting the 3rd quarter and the bench got us back in the game in the 4th quarter, so again I'm not gonna blame everything on the bench....

                        its apparently a combo of things that the Pacers hopefully learn from and overcome.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Pacers problem: Defense

                          I said this after the Kings game and I really beleive it to be true:

                          Our pick-and-roll defense has changed. We've gone back to last year's version of every man for himself, without the team and help concepts.

                          Don't know if its lack of discipline from the players or lack of direction from the coaches.
                          I certainly agree with you Jay on the Pacers lack of pick-and-roll defense. Bibby and Webber worked the Pacers to death Friday and Saturday, Gasol and Mike Miller scored on almost every pick-and-roll that they ran.

                          However, the Pacers were trapping the dribbler sometimes but they were a step late and the pick setter was able to slide over for wide open 17 footers or the dribbler just raised up and canned the jumper.

                          The Pacers defenders have done a poor job of rotating as well.

                          I don't think we can just pin it on the defense though, as Tinsley and Reggie really killed us the last two games. Reggie's defense was horrendous two nights in a row.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Pacers problem: Defense

                            Carlisle sees it too....
                            http://www.indystar.com/articles/1/131385-9531-039.html

                            Carlisle has defensive worries
                            Opponents' point production during Pacers' 2-game slide cause for concern.

                            Related content

                            • Carlisle has defensive worries


                            Today's game

                            • Who: Chicago (20-49) at Pacers (50-19)
                            • Tipoff: 7 p.m.
                            • TV: Fox Sports Net
                            • Radio: WIBC-1070 AM

                            Probable starters (key statistic)
                            Bulls Pacers
                            G Kirk Hinrich (6.7 asts) Jamaal Tinsley (5.7 asts)
                            G Jamal Crawford (17.0 pts) Reggie Miller (10.3 pts)
                            C Eddy Curry (14.5 pts) Jeff Foster (7.1 rebs)
                            F Linton Johnson (3.2 pts) Ron Artest (18.0 pts)
                            F Antonio Davis (8.4 rebs) Jermaine O'Neal (20.6 pts)



                            By Mark Montieth
                            mark.montieth@indystar.com
                            March 22, 2004


                            This being the point in the NBA season when teams want to look their best, the Indiana Pacers have a new and sudden challenge.

                            Namely, avoiding the disheveled appearance of a team pointed in the wrong direction.

                            The Pacers enter tonight's game against Chicago at Conseco Fieldhouse having lost three of their past four and are in danger of losing three in a row for the first time this season.

                            That's a good news/bad news scenario, as it points out their unsurpassed consistency over the course of the season but also the recent exception to it.

                            Only two other NBA teams have avoided a losing streak longer than two games this season -- Sacramento and Minnesota. The Pacers have never gone through an entire season, ABA or NBA, without enduring at least one losing streak of at least three games.

                            So, while everything looks grand from a big-picture perspective, the here-and-now picture isn't so bright.

                            Coach Rick Carlisle knows why.

                            "I have some serious concerns, because the last couple of games we've been a little frantic in our offensive play, which led to some sloppiness at the defensive end," Carlisle said Sunday. "We're going to have to redefine our identity as a team."

                            Carlisle is seeking a return to the basics that propelled his team to the top of the NBA. The Pacers owned the league's best record by 1 1/2 games over Sacramento heading into Friday's game against the Kings, and were looking dominant with a 17-point second-quarter lead. A second-half collapse brought a two-point loss.

                            The Pacers jumped to an early lead over Memphis on Saturday with another strong start but faded again in the second half.

                            That made for three losses in the week -- at Cleveland, to Sacramento and at Memphis. All came against teams playing at a high level and were closely contested, but they combined to forge a trend that's disturbing to Carlisle and his players.

                            "We've always come up with stops, and the last two games we haven't come up with stops," guard Reggie Miller said after Saturday's loss.

                            The Pacers lately have become the hare in the fabled race with the tortoise.

                            They took an eight-point first-quarter lead against the Cavs, a 13-point first-quarter lead against the Kings and a 13-point first-quarter lead against the Grizzlies.

                            Early success brought complacency, however, something they hope doesn't become a microcosm of their season. Carlisle appreciates his team's ability to open a game aggressively, but lately the momentum has lured them into out-of-character up-tempo games.

                            "My fear right now is early scoring binges are weakening our defensive posture as the game wears on," Carlisle said. "We walk a fine line. I realize the importance of getting early baskets, but I realize what the success of this team is built on, and that's consistency at the defensive end. The challenge for us is to strike the right balance."

                            The Pacers have been one of the NBA's better defensive teams through the combination of their patient offense and effective concept of team defense. But they slipped in their three losses last week. They allowed Cleveland 107 points on 54.5 percent shooting, Sacramento 94 points on 45.5 percent shooting (53 percent in the second half) and Memphis 99 points on 53 percent shooting.

                            "That's just not going to get it," Carlisle said.

                            Carlisle's objective is to have it all -- play strong defense, run when the opportunity is there, but execute in the half-court offense when necessary, which is most of the time.

                            "Our ability to tie in those three elements are going to determine the success of our season," he said.

                            It will take a major collapse for the Pacers to lose the No. 1 seed in the Eastern Conference, but they face a clear, if not present, danger in Detroit. The Pistons have won eight consecutive games and 12 of 13. The addition of Rasheed Wallace has made them the NBA's best team over the past month.

                            The Pacers' focus, however, can't be diverted to the big picture.

                            "Now's the time of year when we find out what kind of team we have," Carlisle said.
                            -----------------------
                            Bender headed for injured list?

                            Pacers forward Jonathan Bender, who injured his right shoulder in Friday's loss to Sacramento, will be examined again today. Coach Rick Carlisle said Sunday that Bender might be placed on the injured list for the third time this season. If so, he could return in plenty of time for the playoffs. Bender has averaged 7.1 points while shooting 49 percent from the field, 50 percent from 3-point range and 82 percent from the foul line in 18 games.

                            Bulls' future tied to Curry

                            Chicago center Eddy Curry scored 28 points against Toronto on Friday and 25 against New York on Saturday. He had four blocks in each game. Not coincidentally, the Bulls won both. "If he does things the right way, he has a better chance than anybody on the floor," said Bulls forward Antonio Davis, a former Pacer.

                            Etc.

                            The Pacers' backcourt of Reggie Miller and Jamaal Tinsley has combined for just 20 points on 7-of-28 shooting in the past two games, including a 2-of-14 showing from 3-point range.
                            -- Mark Montieth
                            ------------------------------


                            -Bball
                            Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                            ------

                            "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                            -John Wooden

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Pacers problem: Defense

                              I said this after the Kings game and I really beleive it to be true:

                              Our pick-and-roll defense has changed. We've gone back to last year's version of every man for himself, without the team and help concepts.

                              Don't know if its lack of discipline from the players or lack of direction from the coaches.
                              I certainly agree with you Jay on the Pacers lack of pick-and-roll defense. Bibby and Webber worked the Pacers to death Friday and Saturday, Gasol and Mike Miller scored on almost every pick-and-roll that they ran.

                              However, the Pacers were trapping the dribbler sometimes but they were a step late and the pick setter was able to slide over for wide open 17 footers or the dribbler just raised up and canned the jumper.

                              The Pacers defenders have done a poor job of rotating as well.

                              I don't think we can just pin it on the defense though, as Tinsley and Reggie really killed us the last two games. Reggie's defense was horrendous two nights in a row.
                              Once the dribbler gets hot with the jumper, the trap becomes pretty ineffective anyway. Either the trap-man doesn't close out, leaving the dribbler with just enough daylight to rise up and drill the jumper, or the trap-man does close out and the dribbler, who usually has superior quickness, pulls the trap-man away from the screener forcing a full "switch", complete with an "I got a little guy on me! GIVE ME THE BALL!" mis-match.
                              Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                              Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                              Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                              Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                              And life itself, rushing over me
                              Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                              Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X