Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Addressing multiple threads: Current State of the Pacers

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    The Middle of Nowhere..near Fishers

    Default Addressing multiple threads: Current State of the Pacers

    Two different threads have left me with the same exact thought regarding the Pacers, so I'm polluting the board with a thread of my own.

    Peck said this regarding Austin Croshere:

    Croshere brings something totally differant to the floor when he is out there & other teams have to adjust to us, not us adjust to them.
    And PacerTom said this regarding the difference between the Spurs and Pacers:

    Very high basketball IQ.

    In the 4th quarter when the Pacers needed a defensive stop they could never get it. Nobody on the Spurs is breaking a play to launch a three or dribbling aimlessly into a double team. The ball goes to Duncan and good things follow and you can't stop it even if you are expecting it.
    There are two things I know about basketball that have been true from the day the sport began and will continue to hold form until the last basket is made.

    1. Stick to what you do best. This is something I've been preaching for several years on this forums and I'll probably never stop. The players and teams that put their lineup out on the floor and say, "Ok, try to stop us," almost always win. The key is to make your opponents adjust their gameplan to counteract what you're doing. It may even seem contradictory to a point because your opponent may have a bad matchup for your team and they may look to isolate on that match-up. But guess what? They've now changed their whole offensive philosophy and its absolutely going to fail, despite the sense it makes on the surface.

    Conversly, what I'd do if I were the team with the mismatch advantage, you can exploit it, but within your normal offensive scheme. Say you have a big guard being defended by small guard and you want to post him up. Go for the post up, but mainly to draw the double-team and get the other team scrambling. If they don't double, just run your normal offense. If you're a good offensive team, you're hurting yourself by switching things up.

    This is as simple as a player/coach/system as being proactive or reactive. The teams that struggle are the ones with players who are unsure of themselves and/or don't stick to what they do best. They let their opponents knock them back and they spend their time trying to adjust so it doesn't happen again. The teams that win big in any level of basketball are those that force the action. They make you adjust to them. They make you change your gameplan to stop them.

    2. Herefore it shall be known as the "Luke Walton" rule. I've always referred to this as "this guy really knows how to play basketball." Its not something you can quantify, you just have to see it for yourself to know that its true.

    Its as simple as reading someone's eyes, recognizing foot position before a guy attempts a spin move, knowing when your teammate is really open when he doesn't look open (and vice versa), etc, etc. The guys that play basketball like its chess and plan 4-5 moves ahead always succeed.

    These guys rarely make stupid mistakes, especiallly in crucial situations.


    Now lets take a look at the Pacers and the Spurs in context of Chauncey's two rules of basketball. Here are the things that stand out to me:

    1. The Pacers offensive philosophy, at least in part, is to shorten the game and minimize the total # of possessions in an attempt to help on the defensive end. This is the single biggest thing that drives me crazy about watching the Pacers, especially knowing that there is quite a bit of offensive talent on this roster. Thats a self-defeating philosophy if I've ever seen one. The Spurs play offense with an intent to score.

    2. The Spurs are LOADED with guys who fall into the "Luke Walton" rule. Hell the only guys they have that I wouldn't put in that category off the top of my head are Rasho and Nazr. Look at Duncan, Ginobili, Parker, Finley, Horry et al. These are basketball players. You'll never mistake them for a great athlete that happens to play basketball. They're basketball players that happen to be great athletes. Now ask yourself how many of the Pacers would you put in the same category. I'd put Croshere in there, probably JO....maybe Tinsley, Saras would go in there...and thats about it I think.

    3. How many times have you seen Ron Artest break the offense to post up a smaller man? It may sound like a good idea, but its taking way from what the team does best. Tinsley does this too.

    4. What is Jeff Foster's value on the offensive end? He can creep around the basket and clean up some garbage, but does anyone honestly think that will help the Pacers beat good teams? Austin Croshere forces a man to guard him with his perimeter shooting. As Peck has said, playing Foster ahead of Croshere is absolutely ridiculous. Relating to #1, playing Foster doesn't fall into an offensive philosophy of trying to score the falls into a reactive philosophy of "after we miss, he can get us some offensive rebounds." Newsflash, if you start scoring buckets, you dont need offensive rebounds. Austin can help this team score.

    Basketball is an offensive game. Probably about 60% of the time, the offense is going to score from the field or the FT line on each possession. According to my scientific (lol) estimates, 40% of the time the offense scores because they're that damn good, 20% of the time, the offense scores because the defense is that damn bad, 20 % of the time the offense doesn't score because the offense is that damn bad, and 20% of the time the offense doesn't score because the defense is that damn good.

  2. #2

    Default Re: Addressing multiple threads: Current State of the Pacers

    I agree with you on both rules, but I'm not sure I'd put quite the emphasis on offense that you do. You have to score to win, but in most sports defense is more critical than offense. I'm thinking that part of this may be because you are a Laker fan and they are generally known for their offensive prowess. However, Larry Brown teams and post-LA Riley teams are very much focused on more of a defensive scheme. Offense comes and goes, but defense is a constant that you can control. If you are a good defensive team you can bring that every night. Even the best of offensive teams can put up some scary nights of shooting.

    You have really hit the nail on the head with the Luke Walton rule. That in a nutshell is the problem with this Pacer team. We don't have a team that is full of solid B-ball players. We have many athletes, but some folks who just don't know how to play the game at a high level. I have often referred to this team as one that "scores in a Jalen Rose Way" or "doesn't take what the other team gives them" on a daily basis. We do some good things, but it almost seems as if it is by accident at times. If Foster misses one more pass in the lane I think I'll scream. If Jack misses one more 2 foot shot after making a nifty drive to the basket, I'll scream louder.

    I also agree that you should make the other team adjust to you, one quirk I don't like about Carlisle. However, I still think this Pacer team is struggling to figure that out. What does this team do best? Right now, I'm not able to come up with an answer and it would appear they are having the same problem.

  3. #3
    Member Hicks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004

    Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Addressing multiple threads: Current State of the Pacers

    I agree with everything you wrote, Chauncey.

  4. #4
    Member Slick Pinkham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004

    Default Re: Addressing multiple threads: Current State of the Pacers

    One of the main frustrations with this team for many years now has been the individual and collective lack of basketball IQ. If Luke Walton is the standard, and we give him a 10, I'd out our dearly departed Bender at 0. We have a lot of guys much closer to zero than to 10.

    I'm an old and chubby guy without much game anymore. When I was younger I had some game. I was never athletic and wasn't good at anything but basketball, but I could shoot and I could find my teammates. I loved walking into the YMCA and being the last man picked and being guarded by the other team's scrub until I lit him up. I loved it when I had on my team other guys of similar mindset and we just whalloped the bigger, stronger, faster opponents that couldn't figure out haw to defend screens, refused to hustle, and didn't understand what was a good shot.

    Austin gets it. I think Jermaine is starting to get it. Saras was born with it. I think that MOST of the time Tinsley at least has an idea of how to make his team as a whole hard to defend. Everybody else, I'm just not so sure. Granger hopefully.
    The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

  5. #5
    Administrator Shade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Addressing multiple threads: Current State of the Pacers

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicks
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I agree with everything you wrote, Chauncey.
    Ditto. Not too much to argue with there.

    Which once again begs the question -- is Rick Carlisle the right man for the job now? And if not, who is?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts