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

Jim O'Brien and "Paul Ball"

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

    Jim O'Brien and "Paul Ball"

    Anyone remember Paul Westhead?

    He's the man behind the phrase "Paul Ball" ...basically..the whole reason there is a system of Run and Gun. Thanks Paul.

    Interstingly though, Paul Westhead was successful with this system. He's won in the NBA and won in the WNBA. (And his former assistant coach, and former point guard beat the Indiana Fever this season to win.) Because, there's more to the system than a "free for all" offense.

    Quite frankly, Obrien..and maybe it's because he "hasn't had the horses" has only been doing the system half way. Regardles..he's doing it wrong. Because this offense IS fun to watch, when done right. I'm not sure if JOB is trying to run Paul Ball, but from the looks of it, and from what JOB often says..and how he refers to it as "the system" (which proponents of Paul Ball often do)..I'd guess he is.

    The point of the offense, is to run in transition, and take the first open shot. Not the first "shot" not the first "kinda open shot" the first OPEN shot.
    First lets talk about lineups. The recent WNBA won with a lineup, mostly consisting of.
    Cappie Pondextor, Diana Taurasi, DeWanna Bonner, Penny Taylor, and Tangela Smith.
    Now, as with that offense, they tried to do several things.

    Push the ball
    1. First open shot.
    2. If no open shot immediatly, Look for Tangela Smith (Center) on the trailing 3
    3. After about ten seconds of no open shot, try to run a play for Taylor (PF) or Taurasi (SG/SF)
    4. If all else fails, Pondexter (Point Guard) tries to break down the defense..going one on one.

    That's the offense in a nut shell.

    What are the qualities of that lineup. Every single one of them can shoot the three. Yes, that is important. In fact, Tangela Smith, the Center, led the WNBA in three point field goal percentage..and she was soft and a terrible defender. (hmmm) More importantly they are all explosive offensive players. The Phoenix Mercury played the players that fit the system.

    So What lineup fits that system.
    AJ Price
    Brandon Rush
    Mike Dunleavy
    Danny Granger
    Troy Murphy

    Why Troy Murphy at center? Well, as said, he can hit the three. And as part of the offense I described, the "trailing Center" is a big part of it. It also does spread the floor well, and it's an unorthodox way to play. I"m not advocating not playing Roy (I'll get to that later) I'm just saying that for this system, Murphy is the best fit at Center.

    Danny Granger at PF. Once again, I know many people hate this. But let's be honest. A. He's the best PF we have. B. Troy and Roy can't play together in the front court no matter what system, never mind a transition one. Hans and Tyler don't do what this system requires. C. This is his best fit for the system.

    AJ at the point. I'm not saying this because obviously I'm an advocate of him, but because..in order for this system to work..it's necessary he's there. AJ can do things that Watson can't. He speeds up the game, is more assertive offensive, more versital offensively, and as I said..#4, he can break down a defense better than Watson. The more explosive offensive guy is the one needed. In this system. It's asking a lot. But quite frankly, if Obrien truly wants to play this offense, and not some half *** version, Price is the best option at point.

    Dunleavy. Dunleavy is playing more of the "Taurasi" role. With screens and such to help him get open. He should obviously be one of the guys we focus on getting points. Using screens and looking for him in transition.

    and Rush..like Bonner, just fits in. I put Rush here instead of Jones because Rush can hit the three. What can I say, it is important, particularly if you are using Murphy at the Center. Because the whole point is to not allow the defense to sag.

    Substitutions. and Rotations

    Price/Watson
    Rush/ Jones or Head Possibly Price if we're shooting for midget ball...which is a component of Paul Ball.
    Dunleavy/ Rush or Jones
    Granger/Hans...if and only if Troy is at Center
    Troy/Hibbert or Murphy..both only if Granger is at PF

    There are "offensive" (which means something a bit different) players: Granger, Roy, Murphy, Price, Head, Dunleavy

    The "defensive" players: SJones, DJones, Watson, Hans, Foster, Roy (Yes Roy), McRoberts. (and Play McBob at Center.)

    Then there are middle ground players: Rush. I seperated him because he's not in the mold of the "offensive guys" but he can play with any of them, like the "offensive guys" ..in fact..I'd play him more. I think he's an important part..because he does just "Fit in" and he's the best defender we've got.


    If you'll notice, this is truthfully broken up into 3 point shooter who are aggresive scorers vs. non three point shooters and/or who aren't as aggressive, and Rush..who is a three point shooter that isn't aggressive.

    The important part of this, is WHO you use together.

    And it basically comes down to this, if you want to use a defensive player, the system works much better if the other players on the court are "offensive" players.

    Do NOT play Watson and Jones together. Don't do it. Teams will sag, that's two positions on the floor that can not hit the three, (although Watson can, he's gunshy) You want to sub out Price, you leave Rush in or you put Watson and Head in.

    In fact (wait for the screams) Don't play ANY of the "defensive" players together, or as little as possible. You can play the "middle" guys with "defensive" guys though, but it's better to play them with the offensive group.

    As I said earlier. No Troy and Roy together. None. You'll suddenly be slow and the defense is terrible. In fact, Roy should be Troy's backup. Given plenty of time. There are some other defensive liabilities together. I wouldn't stick Head and Price together too much. Although neither is terrible defensively, they're both kind of short, and neither are defensive stoppers so that's a pretty big mismatch on the opposing team's shooting guard.

    It's a pretty easy formula to follow. And in fact, many of the people who try to use "Paul Ball" are incredibly systematic. You'll notice JOB is incredibly into his statistics. He has certain players come into the game at certain times, no matter what. Corey Gaines is like that too, listen to him talk about basketball..and you'll think he's talking about Math.

    But he changed a bit, and that's how his team won.

    And Paul Westhead is different than the above, because he was an excellent adjustment coach. Knowing who to play when, is important. I laid out a bit of a formula, and the system needs for it to be followed. But adjustments are needed too. IF AJ's "acting like a rookie"...watson needs to play, and the #4 option gets handed to Danny or Rush. ect...it's those intuitive coaching moves..adjustments..that need to be made.


    As for Defense. Westhead used a sort of "zone" with his team, which was the best form of defense for them. Because his center was a terrible defensive player. Basically, protect the middle. How was this done, well...Danny and Rush would be doing most of the work. Basically you sag into the middle. In general, Westhead's defense is pretty bad. And it'll rain threes. But it'd be good for this team to make SOMETHING difficult for an opposing team. *anything* and proctecting the middle is the best way to go.

    This is an unconventional way to play basketball. I know that. And I'm not necessarily advocating it for this team..because I think we'd be better off playing with Roy as the focus..and getting rid of Murphy. It can be fun to watch, when done right. But it does rely on shooting, an off night and you will get blown out. But it's been successful before, and this system and these players are capable of bringing a better record than this.

    However, as long as JOB is here, he's going to want to run his system. And if he's gonna run "paul ball" he needs to do it 100%, instead of this ...run down the court and shoot up a god awful shot..nonesence. That isn't this system. This is a mess. Either do it right, or don't do it at all. Because if you don't do it right, it..well..it looks like this.
    Last edited by Sookie; 01-21-2010, 01:19 AM.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Jim O'Brien and "Paul Ball"

    Originally posted by Sookie View Post
    Anyone remember Paul Westhead?

    He's the man behind the phrase "Paul Ball" ...basically..the whole reason there is a system of Run and Gun. Thanks Paul.

    Interstingly though, Paul Westhead was successful with this system. He's won in the NBA and won in the WNBA. (And his former assistant coach, and former point guard beat the Indiana Fever this season to win.) Because, there's more to the system than a "free for all" offense.

    Quite frankly, Obrien..and maybe it's because he "hasn't had the horses" has only been doing the system half way. Regardles..he's doing it wrong. Because this offense IS fun to watch, when done right. I'm not sure if JOB is trying to run Paul Ball, but from the looks of it, and from what JOB often says..and how he refers to it as "the system" (which proponents of Paul Ball often do)..I'd guess he is.

    The point of the offense, is to run in transition, and take the first open shot. Not the first "shot" not the first "kinda open shot" the first OPEN shot.
    First lets talk about lineups. The recent WNBA won with a lineup, mostly consisting of.
    Cappie Pondextor, Diana Taurasi, DeWanna Bonner, Penny Taylor, and Tangela Smith.
    Now, as with that offense, they tried to do several things.

    Push the ball
    1. First open shot.
    2. If no open shot immediatly, Look for Tangela Smith (Center) on the trailing 3
    3. After about ten seconds of no open shot, try to run a play for Taylor (PF) or Taurasi (SG/SF)
    4. If all else fails, Pondexter (Point Guard) tries to break down the defense..going one on one.

    That's the offense in a nut shell.

    What are the qualities of that lineup. Every single one of them can shoot the three. Yes, that is important. In fact, Tangela Smith, the Center, led the WNBA in three point field goal percentage..and she was soft and a terrible defender. (hmmm) More importantly they are all explosive offensive players. The Phoenix Mercury played the players that fit the system.

    So What lineup fits that system.
    AJ Price
    Brandon Rush
    Mike Dunleavy
    Danny Granger
    Troy Murphy

    Why Troy Murphy at center? Well, as said, he can hit the three. And as part of the offense I described, the "trailing Center" is a big part of it. It also does spread the floor well, and it's an unorthodox way to play. I"m not advocating not playing Roy (I'll get to that later) I'm just saying that for this system, Murphy is the best fit at Center.

    Danny Granger at PF. Once again, I know many people hate this. But let's be honest. A. He's the best PF we have. B. Troy and Roy can't play together in the front court no matter what system, never mind a transition one. Hans and Tyler don't do what this system requires. C. This is his best fit for the system.

    AJ at the point. I'm not saying this because obviously I'm an advocate of him, but because..in order for this system to work..it's necessary he's there. AJ can do things that Watson can't. He speeds up the game, is more assertive offensive, more versital offensively, and as I said..#4, he can break down a defense better than Watson. The more explosive offensive guy is the one needed. In this system. It's asking a lot. But quite frankly, if Obrien truly wants to play this offense, and not some half *** version, Price is the best option at point.

    Dunleavy. Dunleavy is playing more of the "Taurasi" role. With screens and such to help him get open. He should obviously be one of the guys we focus on getting points. Using screens and looking for him in transition.

    and Rush..like Bonner, just fits in. I put Rush here instead of Jones because Rush can hit the three. What can I say, it is important, particularly if you are using Murphy at the Center. Because the whole point is to not allow the defense to sag.

    Substitutions. and Rotations

    Price/Watson
    Rush/ Jones or Head Possibly Price if we're shooting for midget ball...which is a component of Paul Ball.
    Dunleavy/ Rush or Jones
    Granger/Hans...if and only if Troy is at Center
    Troy/Hibbert or Murphy..both only if Granger is at PF

    There are "offensive" (which means something a bit different) players: Granger, Roy, Murphy, Price, Head, Dunleavy

    The "defensive" players: SJones, DJones, Watson, Hans, Foster, Roy (Yes Roy), McRoberts. (and Play McBob at Center.)

    Then there are middle ground players: Rush. I seperated him because he's not in the mold of the "offensive guys" but he can play with any of them, like the "offensive guys" ..in fact..I'd play him more. I think he's an important part..because he does just "Fit in" and he's the best defender we've got.


    If you'll notice, this is truthfully broken up into 3 point shooter who are aggresive scorers vs. non three point shooters and/or who aren't as aggressive, and Rush..who is a three point shooter that isn't aggressive.

    The important part of this, is WHO you use together.

    And it basically comes down to this, if you want to use a defensive player, the system works much better if the other players on the court are "offensive" players.

    Do NOT play Watson and Jones together. Don't do it. Teams will sag, that's two positions on the floor that can not hit the three, (although Watson can, he's gunshy) You want to sub out Price, you leave Rush in or you put Watson and Head in.

    In fact (wait for the screams) Don't play ANY of the "defensive" players together, or as little as possible. You can play the "middle" guys with "defensive" guys though, but it's better to play them with the offensive group.

    As I said earlier. No Troy and Roy together. None. You'll suddenly be slow and the defense is terrible. In fact, Roy should be Troy's backup. Given plenty of time. There are some other defensive liabilities together. I wouldn't stick Head and Price together too much. Although neither is terrible defensively, they're both kind of short, and neither are defensive stoppers so that's a pretty big mismatch on the opposing team's shooting guard.

    It's a pretty easy formula to follow. And in fact, many of the people who try to use "Paul Ball" are incredibly systematic. You'll notice JOB is incredibly into his statistics. He has certain players come into the game at certain times, no matter what. Corey Gaines is like that too, listen to him talk about basketball..and you'll think he's talking about Math.

    But he changed a bit, and that's how his team won.

    And Paul Westhead is different than the above, because he was an excellent adjustment coach. Knowing who to play when, is important. I laid out a bit of a formula, and the system needs for it to be followed. But adjustments are needed too. IF AJ's "acting like a rookie"...watson needs to play, and the #4 option gets handed to Danny or Rush. ect...it's those intuitive coaching moves..adjustments..that need to be made.


    As for Defense. Westhead used a sort of "zone" with his team, which was the best form of defense for them. Because his center was a terrible defensive player. Basically, protect the middle. How was this done, well...Danny and Rush would be doing most of the work. Basically you sag into the middle. In general, Westhead's defense is pretty bad. And it'll rain threes. But it'd be good for this team to make SOMETHING difficult for an opposing team. *anything* and proctecting the middle is the best way to go.

    This is an unconventional way to play basketball. I know that. And I'm not necessarily advocating it for this team..because I think we'd be better off playing with Roy as the focus..and getting rid of Murphy. It can be fun to watch, when done right. But it does rely on shooting, an off night and you will get blown out. But it's been successful before, and this system and these players are capable of bringing a better record than this.

    However, as long as JOB is here, he's going to want to run his system. And if he's gonna run "paul ball" he needs to do it 100%, instead of this ...run down the court and shoot up a god awful shot..nonesence. That isn't this system. This is a mess. Either do it right, or don't do it at all. Because if you don't do it right, it..well..it looks like this.
    What you have posted here is as terrifying as it is spot on. Excellent analysis!

    Failing in the shooting department does kill us virtually nightly, and there are many resemblances to what you describe. The only way to make a system like this work consistently is to have more of the elusive quicker and more athletic players who can shoot threes to run faster than the opposition and wear them out over the course of games. Teams easily adjust and stop this system early in games (like they do the Pacers at this point), but as fatigue sets in, open shots become easier to find as the game goes on. If our legs hold up, we become more effective defensively as the opposition loses its legs for shots and our either continue to fall, or at least don't drop off much, which leads to comebacks.

    So, with that assumption, it is still very difficult to figure out who plays and who doesn't. The banished TJ is our fastest player, but otherwise fits this system best (I still think Jim wants to play him because of his "ability to push the ball" and drive to the rim for "high percentage" finishing moves [wretch]). The question is, will Jim give up threes from his starting point guard? Second is Price, and spot minutes go to Watson, unless Diener gets healthy enough to shoot threes.

    At the wings, Granger MUST hit shots and be considered a threat from 3, which will not happen for a while until he learns how to adjust to his foot issues, but he has to be a starter in this system. But, who else do you play? The best facilitator of offensive flow who is currently still recovering from his knee issues and will likely continue to struggle with his shot due to a heavy schedule in Dun? No. Luther Head? Too streaky to be reliable enough for O'B to trust, which is good. Rush or Dahntay? Pick your poison between a player who can make threes if the planets align and no one has messed with his qi (energy flow) recently in Rush, or Dahntay Jones who is not a threat from 3 and is mostly a threat offensively when he wildly drives into traffic in the manner of the point guards in this system and can't avoid being too "hands on" defensively to avoid fouling at a high rate for his position.

    Inside at the 4 and 5, plainly the only viable choice is Murphy (hurl) due to his threes, with a grab bag for the rest of the minutes. In reality, the player who should play in a system like this is probably McRoberts due to his athleticism compared to anyone else on the roster, but not if O'B is going to try to have him shoot threes. Doing that totally destroys the rest of what he can do, which is to play the role of an athletic traditional 4. So, that should leave Roy currently because Solo is just as slow but is not a factor offensively, and Hansbrough is just not healthy enough to get minutes. When he does get healthy, his only reason to be out there under this system is to get to the line (very similar to how he has been utilized thus far). That said, Foster's speed if he gets healthy could lead to extending posessions offensively and increase our success rate, and for that he should be the 5 next to Murphy at the 4.

    Obviously, there is not a single thing to like about this system played by our roster, but I really think you might have exposed a large part of what is going on. The terrifying part is that O'B still is refusing to change his ways even with player confusion, fatigue, and possibly rebellion dictating that adjustments need to be made to the SYSTEM by the coach. How can Bird be expected to trade away approximately 8 guys to enable (and I am using that term both in its positive and negative senses here) O'B to continue to run his "system"?

    I am now more firmly convinced (if that is possible) that the entire issue with the franchise is our reliance on the vision of Jim O'Brien to shape our franchise going forward, and that Larry Bird needs to make a coaching staff change no later than the end of this season, if not immediately, and begin the LONG process of building a roster piece by piece with quality players with basketball IQ who can adapt to various traditional basketball viewpoints depending on whatever coach is hired to take on the onerous and likely thankless task of cleaning up the abomination that O'B has influenced the assembly of here.

    It will take more than just the expiring of contracts to make things even close to right here. It will take a concerted effort between actual basketball minds that have the best interests of the Pacers both as a franchise financially and from a basketball standpoint, at heart to figure out what moves need to be made, and to resist the temptation of taking the easy way out by trying to fix everything with just the signing of a superstar or two and letting the rest go due to budget constraints that signing superstars inevitably leads to. I don't have any idea whether such people are currently employed with the franchise or not, which is frightening in and of itself.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Jim O'Brien and "Paul Ball"

      Yeah as you mentioend this isn't Paul Ball - thankfully because what Westhead ran as coach of the Nuggets was disgusting.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Jim O'Brien and "Paul Ball"

        Excellent contribution, Sookie.
        “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

        • #5
          Re: Jim O'Brien and "Paul Ball"

          Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
          Yeah as you mentioend this isn't Paul Ball - thankfully because what Westhead ran as coach of the Nuggets was disgusting.
          No, it's not Paul Ball, it's a cheap imitation, which was my point.

          Obviously, you have to have the personal to do it..which my guess is, in Denver, Westhead did not. But on the other side, Westhead is the only "run and gun" coach, that I know of, that's been successful professionally. As he has an NBA ring, and a WNBA ring.

          So, if we're going to do "Paul Ball" Let's actually run it. Do it right or don't do it at all. I don't know how JOB actually expects the team to run and score well with some of the player combinations he puts on the court. I think there are player combinations that could run this system successfully on THIS team. And at the very least, it would be fun to watch. Although, I like many people, would rather the team slowed it down, and use Hibbert as the main anchor offensively. That won't happen so long as JOB is here. If his system won't change, it needs to be amended *as the four things I pointed out..quick open shots, look for the trailing center for three, if that fails try to get a quick open shot for Danny or Dun, if all else fails, let the point break down the defense.*

          As for Ford. No, he's not the type of point guard that's good in the system. He can do the last bit, the..breaking down the defense. However, he's not a shooter..which is important. He's not a passer, which is also important. He dribbles too much, which means the game is actually slower, and he's turnover prone..which is another danger. A huge part of Paul Ball is trying to get more shots than your opponents. If a team can't defend, turnovers have to be limited.
          Last edited by Sookie; 01-21-2010, 03:45 PM.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Jim O'Brien and "Paul Ball"

            One of the major components of Westhead was pressing full court - that is a major difference from anything that JOB does.
            Westhead did not run anything close to the same suystem he ran in Denver when he won in LA. - Not even close

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Jim O'Brien and "Paul Ball"

              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
              One of the major components of Westhead was pressing full court - that is a major difference from anything that JOB does.
              Westhead did not run anything close to the same suystem he ran in Denver when he won in LA. - Not even close
              But that was another thing, that I pointed out that Westhead does, that Jim does not.

              Early on in his career as a coach of the Mercury, he quickly realized his team could not press, as the other team would just get layups..*as what would happen to our team* and changed it. He adjusted it. And maybe that's why he's more successful than other run and gun coaches.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Jim O'Brien and "Paul Ball"

                Whatever you choose to do as a coach, I think usually (always?) you need to pick a style where the clear majority of your energy is used on either offense or defense, but not both.

                If I wanted to primarily put my players' energy into the offense with a run and gun, 7 seconds or less, whatever kind of offense, I would probably play a lot of zone defense to rest them on the other side.

                If I wanted to primarily put my players' energy into the defense (aggression, trapping, forcing where the ball goes, etc.), I would walk the ball up often and run a set offense.

                Comment

                Previous template Next
                Working...
                X