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

Can a running team like the Pacers still be a great defensive team

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

  • Can a running team like the Pacers still be a great defensive team

    I have been thinking about this a lot recently. My question isn't can this current team be a good defensive team - the question is a lot broader than that. Can a running team that pushes the ball everytime, that plays a fast tempo offensively, can they then go to the other end of the floor and get down and dirty as you must do to be a good defensive team.

    I think it is nearly impossible - I can't think of any really good defensive teams that ran. Lakers of the 80's is the only team that maybe did. But the Lakers also if they didn't have a fastbreak played a very patterned and patient offense. The Bulls in the 90's actually ran very little.

    It is difficult for players to play at 90 MPH on offense, take quick shots, run around, pass the ball - call it whatever you want. But then to ask those same 5 guys to run back to the other end and dig in, be patient, play together, be patient, play as one, follow the gameplan. it is impossible. So I think the way you play at one end impact the other end - if you play a helter - skelter style offensively - then that is how you are going to play defensively. That is why the really good defensive teams are not fastbreak teams - you are asking too much of NBA players in a season that is 82 games long.

    So if O'Brien who I still like a lot - if he doesn't change the offense, if he doesn't bring some discipline, some calmness, some normalcy to the offensive end the defensive end won't ever improve. yes we have some glaring defensive weaknesses - but I am 100% convinced that if we ran a more patient offense, our defense would be much better - even with the same exact players and even with the same exact defensive system. This is the same exact defensive system OB ran in Boston and Philly, what has changed is the offensive system - that is the problem right now.

    Edit: I hate to bring football into this discussion, but compare offensive football players to defensive players. The mentality is completely different, the approach is completely different. But in football you have two sets of different players, in the NBA you have the same players trying to play both sides at the same time - it is a difficult transition that is made much more difficult when the offense is so helter - skelter
    Last edited by Unclebuck; 03-13-2008, 09:56 AM.

  • #2
    Re: Can a running team like the Pacers still be a great defensive team

    I don't think you can. I'm not as convinced regarding your theory about structure, but I think if we set up our offense slowly instead of trying to get the ball across half court in 3 seconds or less, we might save some energy for the other end.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Can a running team like the Pacers still be a great defensive team

      The Lakers-of-old and Bulls-of-yore were faster paced and great defensive teams.

      I guess I don't understand what you mean by "patient offense." If you mean wait until the opponents are set before you "initiate" like Rick always did, frankly I'd rather lose. I think we've suffered enough of that.

      If you mean understanding the shot percentages and passing up the first available shot opportunity to take advantage of a higher percentage opportunity, well that's just good basketball.

      I believe that the only chance we have against many opponents is to try and run past them and take advantage of coverage mistakes before they are corrected. One-on-one, none of our guys hold up. But getting there fast and swinging the ball around fast before a rookie defender can adjust is about all we've got. Slowing that down doesn't make sense to me.

      At the beginning of the season, we heard about the players needing to get into "Jim Obrien Shape." At that time, I was given the impression that the team was expected to run both directions.
      “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

      “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Can a running team like the Pacers still be a great defensive team

        I remember Bird and O'Brien both saying earlier in the season that this team is going to be uptempo, but it's also built so that we can play with any style. Obviously with Jermaine out, we're pretty much just an uptempo team. Because of that, when we don't have any quick options we're forced into a lot of jump shots, bad shots, and throwing passes that lead to turnovers. We all know we need that true big time go to guy [in the future], but [for THIS team] I think with the threat of Jermaine and the ability of Jamaal to get to the basket any time he wants (both when healthy of course), we could be .500 to at least 5 games over that. I guess the point I'm trying to make is that we could actually play a little defense by being a little more patient on offense -- taking up time and thus cutting down on opportunities for the other team to score. Jermaine's defensive presence is much needed as well.
        Last edited by Evan_The_Dude; 03-13-2008, 09:55 AM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Can a running team like the Pacers still be a great defensive team

          No... The Pacers shouldn't even be a running team because our personnel is not even close to being able to play at this pace AND defend.

          Is it possible... yes... with the right personnel and a very smart team who are also athletically gifted all the way around AND off the bench. That is not this Pacers team.

          The problem I had with Rick Carlisle is that he focused too much on a player that didn't deliver, made the team easy to defend, and ended up wasting too many possessions anyway.

          I have NO problem with pushing the ball up the court and trying to catch the defense napping. BUT not at the expense of wasting the trip... you have to be able to pull the ball back out and be patient and break the defense down. Make the opposition work!

          We cannot compensate for bad offense on the defensive side of the ball. And DEFENSE is what wins championships... it's also what wins games consistently. You're not always going to score at a 50% clip. Not from game to game... not even from quarter to quarter. That's true of the 2008 Pacers or 1980's Lakers. ...So you better have defense to fall back on. Making the other team work on offense... or just work to keep you off the offensive glass to begin with... is going to make a team harder to beat.

          Right now, the Pacers are an easy team to beat. Some of that is talent... more of it's coaching (and not using the personnel properly and maximizing what we do have).

          -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: Can a running team like the Pacers still be a great defensive team

            We can't ignore that there are few good defenders on this team. As much as I like Dunleavy, he's only average at best defensively. Other than Danny and JO, this team is not very good defensively.

            Even Foster, IMO, is limited defensively. He's a hustler and and a good on the ball defender but he's below average at rotating defensively. This team is really exposed defensively without JO cleaning up the breakdowns of the perimeter defenders.

            Their defense wasn't quite as bad when JO was playing because of all the charges and blocks he got. Still they could really use another good low shot-blocking post defender. So I guess my answer to the question is no, this running team can't be a great defensive team. The Warriors are a better defensive team though and they run more than the Pacers do. They still aren't a "great defensive team".

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Can a running team like the Pacers still be a great defensive team

              Originally posted by naptownmenace View Post
              We can't ignore that there are few good defenders on this team. As much as I like Dunleavy, he's only average at best defensively. Other than Danny and JO, this team is not very good defensively.

              Even Foster, IMO, is limited defensively. He's a hustler and and a good on the ball defender but he's below average at rotating defensively. This team is really exposed defensively without JO cleaning up the breakdowns of the perimeter defenders.

              Their defense wasn't quite as bad when JO was playing because of all the charges and blocks he got. Still they could really use another good low shot-blocking post defender. So I guess my answer to the question is no, this running team can't be a great defensive team. The Warriors are a better defensive team though and they run more than the Pacers do. They still aren't a "great defensive team".
              OK, but my question is - isn't it harder for the Warriors to be agood defensive team because of their offensive style than it is for the Cavs to be a good defensive team because of their offensive style. or do you disagree with my theory and think it doesn't matter
              Last edited by Unclebuck; 03-13-2008, 10:16 AM.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Can a running team like the Pacers still be a great defensive team

                I think that because the Pacers are a up-tempo team, they subject themselves to allowing a lot of points. A good defense on a up-tempo team allows close to hundred points a game. However, we don't have the players to accomplish this feat.

                Although its getting redundant, we have no perimeter defense and lack of interior presence. Unless, David Harrison screws his head on straight or Jermaine actually finishes a season were stuck. We are only a few pieces away from being solid, not good. If our defense stepped it up somehow we would also score more too, around 107-110 a game.

                A up-tempo team can play good defense, just expect higher scoring. When I played in High School we played many up-tempo teams. It's just as taxing on your team to keep up, especially on offense, so yes we can do both well. Just not with Diener, Tins or Murray at the the point. I will admit that in High School we didn't play back-to-back games either. I would imagine that is hard to do, so your right Bball we need to become more patient offensively and push the ball less in unnecessary situations to conserve energy for late game scenarios. It could help defensively as well.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Can a running team like the Pacers still be a great defensive team

                  No, they can't. But what they can do is assemble a roster that has a good mix of both high octane players and solid defensive rotation players, players who are good 1-on-1 defenders or have a good understanding of defensive schemes and are unselfish in rotating to the open man defensively. That's what most championship teams were able to do over the years. I don't see any reason to believe that trend will change.

                  Take the Suns and Warriors as two leading examples of why it's fun to watch these "run-N-gun" teams, but in recent years most have hinged their bets on the "grind-it-out/half-court" teams, i.e., Pistons, Spurs. It's so very true: good offense will keep you in the game, but strong defense will win ball games every time. Our own Pacers are a prime example of why that statement is so very true...7th in the league in FG shoting avg 103 ppg, yet near the bottom of the ledger in team defense. Thus, they have lose 39 games even when they've scored 100+ pts.

                  No! A running team can't be a good defensive team at least NOT using it's starting 5 and possibly not even with their 6th Man. But if you surround them with a few rotation players who are good defenders, you stand a good chance of moving up the win column and surprising a few people.

                  Sidenote: NaptownMenace is correct; there are some good defensive players on this team: Owens, Ike, Harrison, Foster, Granger, Dunleavy and Murray are the players I'd label as good defenders. But here's the rub: Some of these guys aren't rotated into the ball game when you really need a defensive stop! There have been countless times prior to acquiring Murray, for example, that I've wondered why JOB wouldn't call on Owens at least for his defense. And then there's the question of not using Harrison and Ike more if there was so much concern for leaving the low-post so vunerable to dribble penetration.

                  There are good rotation players on this team who I believe can get the job done defensively. Up until recently, they weren't being used. I'd keep close watch on the 3rd qrt and midway through the 4th from now on. I wouldn't be surprised to see JOB use a lineup of Murray, Granger, Quis, Foster and Harrison more often. They had pretty good success keeping the Sonics at bay the last game and a similar lineup that featured Ike was good at slowing the Cavs.
                  Last edited by NuffSaid; 03-13-2008, 12:19 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Can a running team like the Pacers still be a great defensive team

                    The Lakers and Utah are good examples of up-tempo teams that play great defenses. Those guys should be a model for us on how to be a all-around up-tempo team. Seven years ago the NBA started allowing zone defense. My point is that slashing, up-tempo offenses counter the zone effectively. Teams that play this style will start to winning more rings. Maybe LA will get it started.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Can a running team like the Pacers still be a great defensive team

                      I hate, absolutely hate all these different defensive schemes.

                      Defense should be stopping pentration with your on ball defender and having everyone else in helpside. These complicated defensive rotations just suck. In high school we played a trapping defense made popular by then Bowling Green's coach Jim Leranegra (sp?) who is now at George Mason.

                      It was just a waste of time. If all five guys don't understand it, it cannot work, it's impossible. If all five guys don't move perfectly together, it cannot work. You have to be perfect time and time again, or you give up layups. Even when being perfect there's still a system to beat it.

                      Every junk scheme is like that. It's okay to be used in spot situations, but to have this grand design about things is just fool's gold.

                      Give space if you lack lateral quickness to stop pentration. When they shoot, put and hand in their face. If they hit it, then pat them on the butt and say good shot.

                      Good offense will always beat good defense, especially the way the rules are in the NBA.

                      EDIT: Good defensive teams in the NBA have the athletes to do so. They also play no nonsense man to man. Detroit doesn't do anything special but put pressure on shooters and stop pentration. Defense in basketball should be about simplifying it down to the basics IMHO.
                      Last edited by Since86; 03-13-2008, 11:29 AM.
                      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Can a running team like the Pacers still be a great defensive team

                        While I might not agree from point to point, I still think that was an excellent post, 86. That's what the Pacers forum is all about IMHO.
                        “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

                        “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Can a running team like the Pacers still be a great defensive team

                          Would expanding to a 10-player rotation make a difference?

                          One of the problems that I think that we encounter ( which may explain why we always seem to hit a 2nd half slump ) is because I think that we run of out of energy with all the "back and forth" running that we have to do on the offensive/defensive end. We try so much to accomplish both so early in the game that we end up wearing ourselves out by the 2nd half. By the 2nd half.....our key players are simply too tired to effectively do anyting....which ( again ) may explain the defensive lapses and our tendency to take the "easy" 3pt shot.

                          If we were to have more Players play some regular/consistent minutes where JO'B actually manages the minutes, our key Starters/Finishers won't be as tired throughout the entire game. Although we would have to acquire some depth.....it may allow us to play this tempo on both ends of the floor offense/defense up for the majority of the game without wearing out our key players.

                          On top of that....I think that getting some solid defensive-minded players would help out immensely. It's been mentioned by TBird that if key players like Granger and JONeal didn't have to focus so much on the defensive end ( only cuz they are the best defenders on the team ) that they can actually have a greater impact on the offensive end.

                          one more thing.....if we were to at least get some decent defensive help in the offseason....would we have to necessarily stick with this "team defense" that we run? It just seems like it REQUIRES that we actually have 5 smart basketball players out that understand and grasp the concept on the court AT ALL TIMES. If we were to change the defensive scheme to either a more simplified version ( if that is even possible ) or a different defensive scheme that most players can implement....I think that it would improve our defense.
                          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Can a running team like the Pacers still be a great defensive team

                            Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                            OK, but my question is - isn't it harder for the Warriors to be agood defensive team because of their offensive style than it is for the Cavs to be a good defensive team because of their offensive style. or do you disagree with my theory and think it doesn't matter
                            Actually I agree whole-heartedly. Mike Fratello invented the slow-down offense back in the late 90's with the Cavs and it was a bore but that team was really good on the defensive end. So yeah, it's easier for a team with a slower more half-court based offense to be a great defensive team.

                            That may be dumbing it down a little but basically if you can control the tempo, your defense has a better chance at getting back and digging in defensively. It also helps to have good individual defenders too.

                            Somebody mentioned the Bulls earlier but if you think about it, that team had some very good defenders on the squad. Pippen, Jordan, Armstrong, Grant/Rodman, and Ron Harper were very good individual defenders so they could up the tempo and still lock you down defensively. Still, they didn't run as much and shoot as many 3's as the Warriors, Suns, or Pacers today. They shot the ball really well and that led to a good ppg average but they did most of their damage in the half-court. They weren't an up-tempo team.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Can a running team like the Pacers still be a great defensive team

                              I think it can be done.

                              It depends on how you measure a good defensive team. Is it points allowed? Shots allowed? Oppenats FG%? If you are a "running team" like the Warriors or Suns you are going to allow more points right away than a slow it down type of team.

                              I think that here is the problem.

                              Players are all about shooting the 3 or getting a dunk. There is no mid range game now.

                              Coaches who employ a fast break type of system are not about getting layups but more about getting a quick shot and shooting more shots than your oppeant.

                              Play good defense, rebound, advance the ball up the court QUICKLY with a pass and not dribbling and see if you can get a layup. Otherwise move into your half court offense.

                              Just like players who seem to shoot the 3 or try for the dunk most coaches seem to either play a VERY slow it down walk the ball up the court style or they play the lets just try and shoot more than the other team style of play.

                              You have to be able to play in the half court on offense and defense. You also need to run and try and get some easy baskets. It's a combination.

                              One more thing I think it's easier to be good defensive while speeding up the pace in high school and college as opposed to the NBA. Less minutes per game and less games played the reasons being.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X