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

The Art of Defense: Keys to solving our defensive problems

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • #1

    The Art of Defense: Keys to solving our defensive problems

    Our new additions clearly add some new offensive dynamics to our roster. Most of us can see the growth potential and the emerging chemistry that comes about when you have guys who play offense within the system given, and who make smart basketball plays. However, being better on one end of the floor does you no good if you give that advantage back on the other end. The Pacers clearly have to play much much better defense than theyve played the last 2 nights, we all see that. However the question remains, what do we need to do to achieve that goal? We dont have a naturally talented lockdown individual defender in our rotation at this time, even the JO is above average and Granger and Foster when the matchups favor them are plus defenders. But this thread isnt going to be about personnel so much as it is an overall emphasis on what we need to do to become better defensively, so we can win games instead of losing them. The margin of error in professional sports is THIS close, and its doing the little things well, and consistently, that creates winning situations. Let me tell you what I think we can do right now, with our current personnel, to get better, and hopefully get your comments and a good discussion going.

    To improve our defense and win games, we have to do the following:

    1. CONTEST SHOTS IN THE AIR, AND WITH "HANDS HIGH.". There are various levels of contesting shots: Giving up a wide open jumper or dunk, giving up a jumper with a man running at you but late, giving up a guarded jumper but not leaping into the air to contest the shot, and finally making the opponent shot over your outstretched hand to make the shot. Pat Riley made the most famous study of breaking down the shooting percentage difference of the various levels of shooting accuracy vs how you are guarded. Now, almsot every team in the league, and in lower levels as well, charts this out every game. Too many times the Pacers, both pre trade and now, are in front of their man in good position to contest their jump shot, but dont rise up with hands high and truly challenge the shot. It is this very fundamental flaw in individual defense that is killing the Pacers way more than any other thing. For those of you who tape or Tivo games, go back and chart out the 4 levels of contesting shots for the Pacers games you have available, and you'll see a big issue continue to develop. This simply must get better, or teams will continually shoot a high percentage against us.

    2. We've got to communicate better with one another. This will come in time, but the Pacers have to solve it quickly if they want to get on a winning streak. Our talking has to become better defensively so we can better orchestrate our 5 man team defense. We cant get caught in mismatches so often, we can't let the opponent run the same stuff over and avoer to beat us, and we cant get faked out so easily.

    3. Somehow, someway, no matter what we need to do or who we need to play, we've GOT TO GET BETTER DEFENSIVE PLAY FROM OUR POINT GUARD. There is no question that we play better defensively with Armstrong in the game, but playing him in my view is worthless in the big picture, because by the time we become championship worthy he won't be here. Our lack of pressure on the opponents lead guard lets the offense run any set play they want, with no shot clock pressure, and they can run any play they run all the way through. We simply dont take away anything from the opponent, we make the game easy to play for their backcourt. This a gigantic huge blaring hole of a weakness in our team, and one that causes me the most pain as I watch us play. Im not talking about steals or creating turnovers, Im talking about intense hounding ball pressure, making it difficult for the opponent's point guard to communicate with his bench and the rest of his teammates.

    Think about how playing Haywoode Workman helped turn around Larry Brown's first season here in Indiana, and think about Travis Best playing the 4th quarter in tight games in the Bird era because of his defense on the ball. Think about what a huge advantage it is to have a point guard who can cause the opposite ballhandler to have to turn his back to the defense just to protect the ball, and how much easier that makes it to play for the other 4 guys.

    4. Defending the ballscreen. We have a different roster now, and Isiah's Knicks did a great job last night putting us in positions where our slower players couldnt recover to shooters after rotating. We clearly have to rethink and strategize how we want to defend this situation. Right now we are hedging the screen very hard but not switching or trapping. We are rotating a third player to the original screener, who is generally against us "fading" to the perimeter. That original screener is then swinging the ball to open people, and our defense is too slow and spread out to recover to "contest" the shot.

    Now, Ive written an entire thread about this entire topic a few months ago, but instead of rehashing the same ground as that thread let me just discuss the Pacers current strategy of defending the play.

    If we had a harder trap on the ball by the ballhandlers man and our big (think of Tinsley and Foster for instance), or if the ballhandlers man had to struggle to even get to position to accept the screen, or if the ballhandlers man was bigger and able to make it harder for the ballhandler to make the very first pass, then this method of play would be better than it looks. The first pass would be harder to make, by the time it was made the defender would have already rotated to the ball and the second line of defense would be on its way to the potential open shooter. It isnt so much what we are doing, its how we are doing it.

    However, without a training camp or extended practice time, its going to be hard to integrate new people to recognize situations as easily, and even if the did Murphy, Dunleavy, and Diogu arent exactly fleet of foot, so it is definitely time to simplify how we play that situation I think. We either have to not play Tinsley, or play the situation differently. Since Tinsley isnt going to be benched, here is how I think Id adjust our screen/roll defense to help us:

    A. Have our big not step out as hard or as far, but instead have him step more laterally between the ballhandler and the goal. In other words, dont necessarily try and turn the ballhandler back into the defense, but instead just emphasize staying "flat" to the ball and on balance, with hands high to help contest a pull up jumper by the ballhandler. In conjunction with that have your screened defender go "under" the screen, and try and pick up his man quicker so you dont have to switch.

    B. If the ballhandler turns the corner on you (and he will sometimes when you guard it this way) and he gets to the rim, we need our bigs to punish him for doing so. JO obviously is a shotblocker, so a ballhandler driving to the rim obviously has to consider that. If JO isnt in, then we have to emphasize the "no layup" rule to our other bigs, and if they have to take a hard foul, then so be it. We have a deep bench of bigs, this is one way we can use it.

    C. If a perimeter player doesnt get "split" and is able to sink in and cause the ballhandler to pitch it out, then this player has to bust his butt and recover to the shooter to "contest" the shot with high hands, and not just give up on the play. This has to be a clear coaching emphasis to our guys to not let that happen. Youll give up some jumpers, but at least theyll be long shots with hopefully a fundamentally well coached defender coming at him to leap in the air and make him shoot over him or rush the shot.

    D. If all that works like it should, and the ballhandler makes a pass to a shooter who takes a long shot and misses, youve got to both REBOUND AND OUTLET THE BALL. This is where Murphy comes in, and how you can run teams out of running screen/roll guarding it this way. if you at least make them take a guarded shot, you have to rebound and push it back at them. You have most teams out of position, as their ballhandler drove he isnt in retreat position. With a long rebound you have a ready made break. Your rebounders must obtain the ball and outlet it, leading to 2 easy points on the other end. if this happens alot, the opponents coach will quit running the screen/roll, and you wont have to guard it so much the rest of the night and season.

    5. Next season, we need a defensive coach added to our staff who is proven and can get it done better than the guys we have now. I even have a couple of names for you, one of which you have heard of, and another from the college game that you havent: Dick Harter (our ex assistant, and many other teams ex too), and Mike Heineman, who is widely known as a defensive guru from University of Wisconsin (and who is an Indiana guy by birth) Both these guys are proven defensive minds with familarity with our franchise, and who specialize in suffocating team defensive schemes. Heineman particularly is great at teaching positioning, hand position to keep balance and contest shots optimally, and where and how to force guys to help.

    6. Speaking of forcing guys to help, we need to all rethink how we want our wing players to defend the dribble so everyone is on the same page. Did any of you notice Dunleavy intentionally steering the Knicks toward the middle of the floor on the drive the other night? Thats a sound technique many teams use, but it isnt necessarily how many of you were taught to watch and see the game. You do that so you can recieve help sooner, and keep the ball out of the paint.....its a zone type technique teams can use to protect less athletic players. (The Bird era Celtics played it that way) However, it only works when the help is prepared and waiting for that to happen, so they can "jump to the ball" and get in position. Generally, it causes a cross court pass to an open player, which then the defense has to recover well to, again, "contest" the shot with high hands.

    Now, when I wrote about this arcane topic earlier in the summer, I seem to recall the few that replied all liking the idea of forcing wing driver to the baseline instead of the middle. After all its the way most of us were taught to play, and the way most lower levels of basketball play it. Where Ive coached most recently it was a cardinal sin to allow your man to "go middle". However, we werent guarding Dwayne Wade either.....so which way is correct? With this team, I dont know yet, but clearly Dunleavy was playing it that way the other night, which is fine as long as our entire team can sing from the same songbook and get in harmony with one another. Right now, we look like 5 individual guys trying to stop 5 guys playing as one, and that wont ever be effective.

    So in summary, we can get better defensively right away if we can emphasize and make the following things happen: Contest shots with hands high, and get in the air to harrass the shot every time. Weve got to talk better. Tinsley's got to step up his defense or go the hell away. Rethink and simplify the screen/roll defense. Figure out where we want our wings to force the ball to. Take a few hard fouls and emphasize the no layup rule, taking advantage of our depth. And next year we need to hire a defensive veteran coach to help RC so he can focus on the offense.

    Thanks for reading this long post, which as always is just my opinion.

    Tbird
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: The Art of Defense: Keys to solving our defensive problems

    I will try and chart our shots contested in the next full game I get to watch, just to see if we improve any at all in this area. For those of you who are good at exploring things on the net, see if 82games.com or one of the other sites has any data on which teams actually contest shots the best, both as individuals and by team.

    We've talked this to death already as well, but I suspect that Dunleavy and Murphy could be pretty decent zone defenders, Dunleavy in particular with his wingspan and height could be very effective at the top of a zone. We may have to play some more zone so we can play different combinations of players.

    However, man to man defense is still going to be the main defense we play, and the stuff Ive listed above is what I see as the keys to improvement in that area.

    Tbird

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: The Art of Defense: Keys to solving our defensive problems

      Thanks for the read Tbird.

      Q - who do you consider as the best defensive 5 we can put on the floor right now? Would you consider playing it?

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: The Art of Defense: Keys to solving our defensive problems

        Another good post. I wish I had more insight to provide, but I don't.

        One thing I am looking forward to, is Murph and Foster staying fresh by spelling each other. I anticipate, late in close games, for them to be substituted liberally. (Foster in on defensive possessions, Murphy in on second free throw)

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: The Art of Defense: Keys to solving our defensive problems

          Originally posted by Seed View Post
          Thanks for the read Tbird.

          Q - who do you consider as the best defensive 5 we can put on the floor right now? Would you consider playing it?

          It's hard to say, I guess it might depend on who the opponent has in against us, but in general I think it might be this group:

          PG Armstrong or Greene
          SG Daniels
          SF Granger
          PF JO
          C Foster, or maybe Baston.

          I think its clear that Daniels, Granger, JO are the top 3. Then you might have to vary depending on who the opponent has in the game. You might have those 3 with Baston and Foster in certain circumstances. You might even include Harrison if we were playing another Eddy Curry type center. If you wanted to go supersmall you might go with Greene and Armstrong, with Daniels, Granger and Oneal.


          JMO

          Comment

          Previous template Next
          Working...
          X