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

O'Brien: Pacers completely revamped their defensive system

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

  • O'Brien: Pacers completely revamped their defensive system

    Yes another O'Brien thread. And yes I know almost all of you have more or less tuned Jim O'Brien out and have given up on him. However he said several things on his radio show that I think warrants some discussion. I tried to find the link on the ESPN 1070 website, but I don't think it is up yet.

    Someone called in and was asking him being a "system coach". The caller was making the point that during the 5 game winning the coach seemingly went off the system and was talking mainly about the offense and such. O'Brien said that they won 5 straight not because of the offense which was not good during that streak, but because the defense was excellent. Jim said that during he 5 game winning streak was when they played the system the best defensively.

    Jim further went on to dispute the caller's claim that he is a system coach. Saying that he's never had a system offensively, the offense in Boston was vastly different than what he runs here and that the offense is geared toward the players strengths.

    Jim did say he is a system coach on defense, but they have totally re-vamped their system coming into this year and it is completely different from two seasons ago to match the strengths and cover up the weaknesses of his players. I do see huge difference in the defense this season, the system is vastly different

    There was also an interesting didscussion about the plus/minus stat. He mentioned that Foster's plus/minus is by far the best on the team last season and he hinted that he wishes jeff could play more, but if there ws a game last night, Jeff would not have been able to play because his back is bad.
    And he knows that the plus/minus when Murphy and Roy are on the court is really in the minus.

    Rush has played himself out of the rotation for now

    Overall some really interesting comments



    \
    Last edited by Unclebuck; 12-04-2009, 09:50 AM.

  • #2
    Re: O'Briern: Pacers completely revamped their defensive system

    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
    Jim did say he is a system coach on defense, but they have totally re-vamped their system coming into this year and it is completely different from two seasons ago to match the strengths and cover up the weaknesses of his players.

    Couldja tawk jest a bit more abowt this part right here? On accounta I'm wonderin' what this here revampin' amounts to, doncha know. The main thing abowt the defense that I've seen that I don't pertiklerly like all dat much is havin' the center play so high and owta position . But I don't think that there is anythin' new fer this year.

    So, whut Ay'm tryin' ta say is, what is this defensive revamp that Cowch O'Brien is tawkin' abowt?

    .
    And I won't be here to see the day
    It all dries up and blows away
    I'd hang around just to see
    But they never had much use for me
    In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: O'Briern: Pacers completely revamped their defensive system

      What I would like to know, is how dumb he thinks Pacers fans are. For him to say that the 5 game win streak lineup played his defensive system the best without acknowledging that he hasn't played that lineup since is ridiculous. Newsflash JOB. If you want better defensive play, PLAY YOUR BEST DEFENSIVE PLAYERS!!!!!

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: O'Briern: Pacers completely revamped their defensive system

        Originally posted by travmil View Post
        What I would like to know, is how dumb he thinks Pacers fans are. For him to say that the 5 game win streak lineup played his defensive system the best without acknowledging that he hasn't played that lineup since is ridiculous. Newsflash JOB. If you want better defensive play, PLAY YOUR BEST DEFENSIVE PLAYERS!!!!!
        He acknowledged that or at least he implied it. But he says that in order to improve the offense, the returning players must be worked back in and that takes time. He also made a point that he never wants to be accused of not giving a player an opportunity - specifically referring to giving Rush 15 games to start.

        Jim also mentioned that the Pacers good defenders are all on the perimeter. I inferred that to man he feels handcuffed trying to find big defenders
        Last edited by Unclebuck; 12-04-2009, 10:05 AM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: O'Brien: Pacers completely revamped their defensive system

          UB, I really than you for posting this. It does help to know what O'Brien is thinking when watching games.

          Well, I guess this info explains a lot.

          So, the players that couldn't play his defense for the last two years have had to transition and learn to play his new defensive system this year, requiring that they unlearn and then re-learn whatever it is that he is trying to get them to do, which has yet to be apparent other than to be more aggressive on the perimeter and give up more pick and rolls in exchange for that. On top of that, those players must then also learn to adjust to new players while still attempting to adjust to the changing system while still playing the 2nd fastest pace in the NBA behind Golden State. All with significant players who now are back to being starters either battling injuries, or coming back from injuries for a good portion of it.

          No wonder that most of the returning players appear lost most of the time. Also, it is no wonder we have only played good defense for about 20 quarters so far this season, and that the overall result has not really changed in any significant way.

          Offensively, while O'Brien may not have a system, he does call a lot of plays, and they do have a theme. He can be counted on to have his point guard to push the ball up the court in an effort to get a shot off within the first 7 to 10 seconds of the possession if possible before the defense gets set. Then, failing that, a pass to a wing or a drive into the lane follows, both looking to shoot as the primary intent, and failing that, the guard or wing kicks the ball to another wing or Murphy standing at the arc for a three.

          Obviously there is more to our offense than that, but that is our foundation regardless of whether it is a system or not. Attack the paint from the top. However, the problem with it is that other players know that the only way that they will get touches that please O'Brien is if they are in the area of their highest percentage three point shots to receive kick outs after dribble penetration. This creates the mind numbing stagnation that we are seeing with our offense, especially after our legs leave us due to fatigue every single game.

          The plus/minus for Foster being good is a testament to his basketball IQ and the fact that when he gets boards he is excellent at knowing where the ball needs to go to either initiate offense, or find players in scoring position wherever those players are, whether it be at the arc, at the elbow, or in the paint. It is a real shame about his back. Games he doesn't play significant minutes in will be rough.

          The plus/minus for Murphy is due to not making shots like he did last year. He does not have his conditioning yet and his shot is suffering mightily because of that, plus other teams have probably noticed that as long as they leave one player within two steps of Murphy that he does not have time to get his shot off due to his long, low shooting stroke.

          The plus/minus for Roy is no mystery, either. We stopped feeding Roy in the post after he started committing turnovers. Therefore, his scoring threat was taken out of the equation, leaving defenses free to solidify their defensive focus both against drives and kickouts, and then rotating to cover whover the kickout goes to at the arc.

          No shock about Rush, but now we at least understand why Rush has been back to like he was at the beginning of last season. For all practical purposes, he IS a rookie again who is being required to re-learn everything, and it has caused him to revert to being exactly how he was last year at the same timeframe. Also no shock about the other players he hasn't played who don't fit O'Brien's offensive play calling, whether it is a system or not.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: O'Brien: Pacers completely revamped their defensive system

            Another point to factor in is that as much flack as Roy seems to catch for being a defensive liability, he started and played big minutes during that winning streak where the team played great defense. Goes to show what having a mobile player at the 4 did for him.

            While it is obvious to everyone Roy and Troy together is suicide, It is really disheartening that Roy is the one that always gets yanked in favor of leaving Troy out there. Roy has a lot more to offer on both sides than murphy, even if he does make mistakes sometimes.
            "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

            - ilive4sports

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: O'Brien: Pacers completely revamped their defensive system

              Originally posted by Brad8888 View Post
              Offensively, while O'Brien may not have a system, he does call a lot of plays, and they do have a theme. He can be counted on to have his point guard to push the ball up the court in an effort to get a shot off within the first 7 to 10 seconds of the possession if possible before the defense gets set. Then, failing that, a pass to a wing or a drive into the lane follows, both looking to shoot as the primary intent, and failing that, the guard or wing kicks the ball to another wing or Murphy standing at the arc for a three.

              Obviously there is more to our offense than that, but that is our foundation regardless of whether it is a system or not. Attack the paint from the top. However, the problem with it is that other players know that the only way that they will get touches that please O'Brien is if they are in the area of their highest percentage three point shots to receive kick outs after dribble penetration. This creates the mind numbing stagnation that we are seeing with our offense, especially after our legs leave us due to fatigue every single game.

              The plus/minus for Foster being good is a testament to his basketball IQ and the fact that when he gets boards he is excellent at knowing where the ball needs to go to either initiate offense, or find players in scoring position wherever those players are, whether it be at the arc, at the elbow, or in the paint. It is a real shame about his back. Games he doesn't play significant minutes in will be rough.

              The plus/minus for Murphy is due to not making shots like he did last year. He does not have his conditioning yet and his shot is suffering mightily because of that, plus other teams have probably noticed that as long as they leave one player within two steps of Murphy that he does not have time to get his shot off due to his long, low shooting stroke.

              The plus/minus for Roy is no mystery, either. We stopped feeding Roy in the post after he started committing turnovers. Therefore, his scoring threat was taken out of the equation, leaving defenses free to solidify their defensive focus both against drives and kickouts, and then rotating to cover whover the kickout goes to at the arc.

              No shock about Rush, but now we at least understand why Rush has been back to like he was at the beginning of last season. For all practical purposes, he IS a rookie again who is being required to re-learn everything, and it has caused him to revert to being exactly how he was last year at the same timeframe. Also no shock about the other players he hasn't played who don't fit O'Brien's offensive play calling, whether it is a system or not.


              Jim says they are trying to get the ball into Roy, but teams are packing in their defense because the Pacers are shooting 30% from thre point range (if you take Granger out of the %'s). So he hinted that if the Pacers start hiting some outside shots they will be able to get inside.

              I think Jim was referring to not have an offensive system as meaning that he hasn't taken what he did in Boston or Philly and brought it here without regard to the players who are on the Pacers roster. of course he has a system in that he has plays he calls here.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: O'Briern: Pacers completely revamped their defensive system

                He says what he thinks people/fans want to hear not the reality of the situation. The reality is this team is playing terrible, and he's the man in charge of the players.

                There is no person on this board that wants Jimmy to get it figured out and get the Pacers playing well again than me, but don't try constantly avoiding the real problems with BS rhetoric. It gets old after awhile.

                Another thing, somewhere in a thread recently there was a statement made by Bird that he didn't tell Jimmy how to coach. News flash Mr. Bird, part of your job description is guidance of those that you are in charge of. You might want to reconsider that statement. No one is saying you have to micro manage O'Brien, but putting forth your wishes with some suggestions might be something you might want to consider. Just remember a fish smells from the head down.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: O'Briern: Pacers completely revamped their defensive system

                  Originally posted by travmil View Post
                  What I would like to know, is how dumb he thinks Pacers fans are. For him to say that the 5 game win streak lineup played his defensive system the best without acknowledging that he hasn't played that lineup since is ridiculous. Newsflash JOB. If you want better defensive play, PLAY YOUR BEST DEFENSIVE PLAYERS!!!!!
                  x2

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: O'Briern: Pacers completely revamped their defensive system

                    Originally posted by Putnam View Post
                    Couldja tawk jest a bit more abowt this part right here? On accounta I'm wonderin' what this here revampin' amounts to, doncha know. The main thing abowt the defense that I've seen that I don't pertiklerly like all dat much is havin' the center play so high and owta position . But I don't think that there is anythin' new fer this year.

                    So, whut Ay'm tryin' ta say is, what is this defensive revamp that Cowch O'Brien is tawkin' abowt?

                    .
                    What's with the Sylvester and Tweety dialect?

                    To the thread, I want everyone to read the following posts and try to think in terms of what UB posted concerning coach O'Brien's commentary:

                    (Note: Keep in mind I posted my comments before JOB changed the line that now starts Dahntay and benched BRush.)

                    Originally posted by NuffSaid View Post
                    McKeyFan,

                    I hear you and would agree 100% except not everything is as clear-cut as it may seem.

                    Typically, I'm all for putting your very best players at their relative positions as your starters, but there are other factors to consider, i.e., having a mixture of good offense and defense with a particular group of players, chemistry, unselfishness/personal pride, a keen understanding of the game on both sides of the ball, a full comprehension of the schemes, etc., etc. Or to put is mildly, it's what I like to call "balance".

                    The Pacers have or had:
                    • 5 rookies/sophomores - Hibbert, Hansborough, BRush, McRoberts, and AJ Price
                    • 4 new acquisitions (All vets) - Watson, Dahntey, Head and Solo
                    • Up to 4 veteran players on the IRL (4 or more games) - Murphy, Dunleavy, Foster and Diener
                    The learning curve has to be slightly bent for those players in the first two groups even for the returning sophomores (in bold). So, imagine trying to put together a consistent, winning team with 5 rookies/sophomores, 4 new vets and being down 4 returning veteran players. Kinda puts things in perspective doesn't it?


                    This team will continue to go through growing pains as long as JOB continues to give mixed signals as McKeyFan eludes to. He is correct to a large degree. If your emphasis is on improved defense, then you must play your best defenders. BUT...

                    You must do so with a balanced offense AND...

                    You must do so taking team depth into considereation.

                    For example: While it would be great to start Dahntey, you take away from bench production without the more experienced Dunleavy. And while it would be outstanding to see Hibbert get 25-30 mpg and see him develop, truth is he still has a long way to go.

                    Thus, it would have been foolish for JOB to stay with Hibbert last night while he got beat terribly on PnR plays be a slower but more experienced Rasho who is taller and is a very good mid-range jump shooter. (Where the hell was all that instant offense when he was with us?)

                    Ideally, I would love to see more of a lineup consisting of:

                    Granger - SG
                    Dahntey - SF
                    Foster - C
                    Hansborough - PF
                    Watson - PG

                    (Sidenote: This was the lineup that was implemented during the 2nd and 3rd qtrs of the Kings/Pacers game which helped get the Pacers back into the game by using their defense.)

                    Although this group make up most of who I call our "Energy Crew" (you can also add BRush and Solo to the mix) and clearly are our better defenders, you don't get alot of offensive fire power from them except through Granger and maybe Dahntey. And neither Dahntey nor Watson are going to take pressure off Granger unless both are creating space for themselves. The only other threat with this group might be Hansborough, but I'm still 50/50 on his ability to draw the defense. That may take time as opposing teams begin to see him as more of a post-threat. Until then, I think players will shag off him and take their chances with doubling Granger and take both Watson and Dahntey 1-on-1 or clog the driving lanes to the basket. This above all else is why it is so important to get Dunleavy back and soon! Moreover, it's also one reason you don't want to ruin BRush's confidence and bring him off the bench. The longer he's out there and has the freedom to create for himself the better he will get. But if you reign him in and force him to be a spot-up jump shooter, you kill his confidence! He, like Luther Head, play more like Point-Forwards (or scoring guards) than shooting guards. Let them play to their strengths, not their weaknesses. However, in order to do any of this you as a coach must find "balance" among your roster for your starters and your bench players.

                    "Luke, bring balance to the Force."
                    Originally posted by NuffSaid View Post
                    I've always been in favor of putting your best players at their respective positions forward whether they're rookies or vets. While I do understand the significance of playing vets over rookies (i.e., experience and salary), there's something to be said about skill and overall team chemistry. Some players just work better with others. So, if as a rookie you're able to make the offense and/or defense run better I say let the rook play. The vet will just have to work harder to perform better.
                    Originally posted by NuffSaid View Post
                    Alright, folks. Let's not panic.

                    I know most of you want to see Hibbert, Hansborough and Solo play more and I agree - they've all done well enough to warrant playing time - but we also have to look at how teams have been kicking our butts lately and that has been by using veteran lineups against us AND using their depth to wear us down.

                    I thought like many of you when I first read the pre-game report: Murphy and Foster as starters so soon? Why?

                    Well, the answer is more obvious than you think if you look at how we've been beat these last three games - lack of veteran experience.

                    Coach O'Brian is going with the lineup he wanted to use last year but couldn't because either Dunleavy, Foster or TJ would be on the IL right as he wanted to implement it. Now that he has at least two of these players healthy, it's a good time to see if it can work. The only different here is JOB is going w/BRush at SG and not Dunleavy. I can understand why he's not going w/Dahntey to start vice BRush: he wants to keep some defense in reserve. And honestly, it makes sense. Plus, Dahntey's offense has been quite the surprise. It does make sense to stick to the original game plan of bringing Dahntey off the bench as Granger's backup. Afterall, he is a natural SF not a SG. We've been fortunate that he has shown an ability to score the ball. Our reserves could use his offensive contribution, as well as his no-back-down defensive toughness.

                    So, when you really step back and think about it this lineup change makes sense. But this creates problems for guys like Solo and Luther Head particularly when Dunleavy returns. Minutes won't be at a primium for those guys. Same goes for McRoberts. But if all goes well once Dunleavy returns to action, I can see this team going 9-10 deep: Granger, Foster, Murphy, Hibbert, BRush, Ford, Watson, Dahntey, Hansborough and Dunleavy.
                    Originally posted by NuffSaid View Post
                    I think most of you are forgetting about all those 30 pt 1st-qrts an offshoot of this lineup provided last year. The only difference is BRush at SG and not Dunleavy.

                    I think brining Dahntey off the bench (as I believe was as originally planned when we acquired him) is just being smart. After all, this team did struggle with getting those last minute stops. Bringing Dahntey off the bench will bring both offense and defense to the reserves.

                    I don't mind Murphy and Foster starting - two proven vets. They should have their starting jobs back. I wouldn't necessarily give Foster starter's minutes knowing how his back tends to give out on him, but I'd've certainly returned to starting my vets with the backcourt JOB proposes - Granger, Ford and BRush. Atleast with this group each player knows the role.

                    Foster will box out and clear the boards.

                    Murphy will continue to be the trailor and, if possible, bring some help defense. He is improving alittle in that regard.

                    Granger does need to refocus his efforts to producing on both sides of the ball. I think his heel is bothering him more than he lets on, though.

                    TJ Ford just needs to focus on doing those things he does best, but do so within the offensive scheme. Pass the ball more. Setup the offense, and work the Pick-N-Roll more.

                    BRush just needs to be ready to play more like he did against the Cavs. He wasn't spectacular, but he did bring more elements to his game.

                    The majority might not like it (probably because most of us tend to wear our hearts on our sleeves when it comes to the Pacers; we all want to see this team win but we also want to see the play with some consistency), but I think it's the right move to make.
                    Originally posted by NuffSaid View Post
                    But you guys are all forgetting about this thing called "balance".

                    It's about finding the right players at their respective positions who perform well together and fits into the coach's system. While I'm not that much of a huge fan of the run-N-gun offense becasue it lends itself to low percentage shots (3pters) and defensive rebounds, I do love when it all comes together. The only element missing from such an offense is the defense. To that, I think JOB is doing the right thing by turning to his veteran because you bring that higher level of experience back to the game. However, I do understand where the concerns are with relegating Hibbert to the bench or not finding playing time for young players like Solo who has performed well in the brief playing time he has seen.

                    We've talked about the nauances of the game on numerous occasions here - doing the little things that help win ball games, i.e., "feeling" the defensive pressure, boxing out, recognizing when and where the double-team is coming from, knowing when to take the midrange jumper or ball-faking and driving the lanes or stepping in for a closure shot. This all comes from experience at the NBA level. And I'm sorry, but relying on so many 1st and 2nd year players and/or so many new players to the roster let alone the rotation all at once to get you beyond such "rookie mistakes"...sorry, but that won't cut it for very long.

                    I think JOB is doing the right thing here. He may not be putting our best players out there to start, but he's putting the more experienced players out there who have all been starters before on this team and have had some success. I think he stands a much better chance of correcting the problems this team has faced in recent games in going with the veterans at this stage than sticking with what did gain us a 5-game winning streak. Considering who we won against, IMO, it was just a matter of time before things started to go south again. Still, will the lineup change work? We'll know after tonight.
                    Originally posted by NuffSaid View Post
                    I think what JOB wants in playing Murphy at Center or PF is to pull the defense out along the perimeter, but here's the problem: you don't have a rebounder out there unless you pair Murphy with either Foster or Hansborough. Now, the problem with pairing Murphy with Hansborough currently is Hans is still trying to get his feet wet and become more than just a body out there. It's going to take him time to figure things out where he looks smooth out on the court. Right now, he's still looking green to me but not nearly as green as McRoberts (or Solo who I think has done a fine job when given the chance, but still needs to work on fine-tuning his game just a little).

                    Nonetheless, the Murphy/Hansborough pairing is yet another example of why I've been saying that JOB is still looking for balance with his roster. He really is trying to give his younger, less experienced players every opportunity to grow and develop. It's just that when the younger, less experienced players are put up against some of the more elite teams they fall short not because they lack skill, but because they lack experience. So, whether most of you want to accept it or not, this team is still a team that will continue to go through some growing pains, but they're on a much better footing than some other teams out there.

                    Look at it this way, despite being 1-5 over their last six games, the Pacers are still the 8th seed. I think they have a very good chance over their next seven games to move up in the standings. Of course, I'd say where they are right now isn't as important as where they end up at the end of the regular season. So, with that said where most see failure, I see progress. All JOB has to do is find that balance between offense and defense, quickness and patience, skill and athleticism mixed with sound decision making. I think we're about to find out if this team has these traits and if JOB can truly put it all together.

                    I wish him and the team good luck. With Dunleavy back and Luther getting some playing time as well, I think they'll find it. IMO, these two players are the key. Why? Because IMO they are the best players on this team who use their basketball smarts (IQ) more than their skill to do things that help move this team forward. (You can even add Hansborough to that mix; he's shown a keen understanding of where to be in some situations defensively. Now, if he can only flip that over onto his offensive game...) One can only imagine what this team could do if these two w/Granger, Hans and Foster could do together OR with a more mature, more experienced Hibbert anchoring the defense.
                    Sorry for the lengthy reply, but I pulled these posts because I believe each provides insight into what's happening with our team, as well as, the evaluation process JOB is going through in trying to find the right "balance" with the players. I think he took one giant leap forward in changing the lineup against the Kings. And I have to agree with his assessment of not having Dunleavy available at the end. I honestly do believe having him on the floor would have made a difference during those final 5 minutes. I also believe he has done the right thing in benching BRush. I know for some it's not a popular decision, but BRush isn't producing on the offensive end right now and he (along with the training/coaching staff) need to find out what's wrong.

                    Right now, players are saying the right things, but as a fan I'd rather they not pay lip service and just work harder and make smarter decisions out there. Still, for what it's worth, I think changing the starting lineup was the right call. It's still going to take time before things begin to run more fluidly, but I think JOB's decisions will help move the team in the right direction.
                    Last edited by NuffSaid; 12-04-2009, 01:25 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: O'Brien: Pacers completely revamped their defensive system

                      I'm not going to do bunches of quotes but I will respond to pieces.

                      O'Brien has no offensive system: I think the proper response here is "duh". However, I will leave this to another thread, as this one seems to be more about defense.

                      O'Brien has changed the defense since last year: This is clearly true, as we have been trying to play more man-to-man. The lack of a planned help defense is why we seem to do so badly once things break down. We rail and scream about it but, in fact, if there is anything that takes "contact with the enemy" it is developing this kind of defense. I'm not always happy with it, but it is most definitely different.

                      O'Brien should continue to play the lineup that was playing during the 5-game streak: Sorry, there's got to be offense and the lineup from that streak was cold far too often for comfort. I'm not saying everyone who was supposed to come back and bring offense is doing so, but let's not forget the streak lineup is also the lineup that fell apart in the Knicks game.

                      O'Brien changing his defense is bad because players have to forget last year and re-learn the new system: What, players like Dahntay and Earl and Solo? Never mind that, let's keep in mind that these guys are supposed to be professionals and learning new systems is what they often get paid to do. What are our options:

                      a) Last year's defensive system was better, why change it? Sh'yeah, right.
                      b) The defensive system this year is better but the players aren't used to it? Then give it time.
                      c) The players aren't able to execute this defensive system - don't play them? Back to the "where does the offense come from" question.
                      d) The players aren't able to execute this defensive system - change it? To what? And then we're back to "the players aren't used to the system".


                      I think I'm far too much into "the problem is offense" camp. High scoring from the opponents is coming from turnovers and defensive rebounds. The times they are in offensive sets we are in fact preventing quick shots and doing a pretty good job of slowing down the opponent, at least until everything builds to a break point and the execution (not the system) falls apart.

                      Remember the discussions in the past how Carlisle's supposedly good defensive teams really were only "good" because they limited possessions? We're the opposite of that. I don't have time to dig into the stats, but I'd say our margins of defeat are:

                      - points off turnovers
                      - FT disparity (because we don't get to the line, not because we give up too many trips, at least not like last year)
                      - shooting %age.

                      Fix these, then let's judge the defense.
                      Last edited by BillS; 12-04-2009, 11:18 AM.
                      BillS

                      A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                      Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: O'Brien: Pacers completely revamped their defensive system

                        Last night's show is up.....

                        http://www.1070thefan.com/pacers/obrien.aspx
                        PSN: MRat731 XBL: MRat0731

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: O'Brien: Pacers completely revamped their defensive system

                          Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                          Jim says they are trying to get the ball into Roy, but teams are packing in their defense because the Pacers are shooting 30% from thre point range (if you take Granger out of the %'s). So he hinted that if the Pacers start hiting some outside shots they will be able to get inside.

                          I think Jim was referring to not have an offensive system as meaning that he hasn't taken what he did in Boston or Philly and brought it here without regard to the players who are on the Pacers roster. of course he has a system in that he has plays he calls here.
                          That's crazy. You go inside-out, not outside-in.

                          Alright, I'll concede he doesn't have a "system". He's just hopelessly in love with the long jumpshot.
                          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


                          • #14
                            Re: O'Brien: Pacers completely revamped their defensive system

                            Originally posted by BillS View Post

                            O'Brien should continue to play the lineup that was playing during the 5-game streak: Sorry, there's got to be offense and the lineup from that streak was cold far too often for comfort. I'm not saying everyone who was supposed to come back and bring offense is doing so, but let's not forget the streak lineup is also the lineup that fell apart in the Knicks game.
                            Logically, If we were going back to a version of that lineup, I think it would include dunleavy instead of rush. Mike is not defensive ace, but I don't think he hurts us nearly as much as Murphy, and has a lot more to offer offensively.

                            Watson (More likely Ford, though)
                            Jones
                            Dunleavy
                            Granger
                            Hibbert

                            I think this would be our best lineup and gets our best players on the floor at the same time.
                            Last edited by Infinite MAN_force; 12-04-2009, 10:49 AM.
                            "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

                            - ilive4sports

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: O'Briern: Pacers completely revamped their defensive system

                              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                              He acknowledged that or at least he implied it. But he says that in order to improve the offense, the returning players must be worked back in and that takes time. He also made a point that he never wants to be accused of not giving a player an opportunity - specifically referring to giving Rush 15 games to start.

                              Jim also mentioned that the Pacers good defenders are all on the perimeter. I inferred that to man he feels handcuffed trying to find big defenders
                              Solomon Jones?!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X