Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 52

Thread: Possible lineup changes?

  1. #1
    Member joew8302's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Bennettsville, SC
    Age
    31
    Posts
    2,991
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Possible lineup changes?

    No, I am not ready to jump off a cliff, but the Pacers play over the past 3 weeks does make you consider some things. Here are several questions/thoughts.

    1. What do we do with the second unit? If Scola is not hitting his shots he is pretty useless to us, especially on defense. Should tighten his leash and give some of his minutes to Solomon Hill or Chris Copeland?

    2. I am not saying bench Granger completely. Yes, I know he has been out forever. Personally I would keep riding him for another few weeks. That said, if he does not improve when do we see Vogel make the move to give his minutes to Rasul Butler or Solomon Hill?

    3. CJ Watson is always solid on defense, but again, when his shot isn't falling he does not contribute a ton on that side of the court. Sloan at least penetrates more. I am not sure what happened to OJ earlier this year, but does Watson's shaky play open the door up for him?

    Do any of these changes happen? How much longer do we stick with the minute distribution with our bench given this little production?

  2. #2

    Default Re: Possible lineup changes?

    I'd like to see Vogel just play more players in general. He's trying to play a short rotation for the entire season. He runs the risk of wearing the guys out.

    He definitely needs to get Copeland into the rotation at PF. That's where I'd start, give him 5 minutes in the first half. If he's effective, bring him back for more in the second half. If he's a liability then let him finish the game on the bench.

    Once he's found a role for Copeland then he should look to integrate another guard into the regular season rotation.

  3. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Strummer For This Useful Post:


  4. #3
    Wasting Light Hicks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583
    Mood

    Default Re: Possible lineup changes?

    I'd stay the course.

  5. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to Hicks For This Useful Post:


  6. #4
    Welcome CJ Miles! BlueCollarColts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    3,339

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Possible lineup changes?

    Find more minutes for Copeland, but nothing else

  7. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Dillon, Co
    Posts
    3,869

    Default Re: Possible lineup changes?

    The only thing I'd like to see if Vogel consider adjusting the playing time of our starters in back to backs and tough road schedules like we just had. Those would be times to give more playing time to the bench and insert Copleland to some degree. Granger and Scola could handle more then 18 minutes on the second night of a back to back. Overall I'd say stay the course with who's playing in the rotation though.

  8. #6
    Member BenR1990's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Fredonia, NY
    Posts
    1,263

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Possible lineup changes?

    I'm not really a big fan of changing up the players on the floor, but I'm open to Frank experimenting with different substitution patterns (more specifically in the 1st half).

    Scola is going through a slump lately, but he was absolute money shooting the ball the first couple months of the year. I expect him to return to form very soon.

    Granger is our best option for the playing the backup 3. Solomon Hill was brutal (as to be expected in a rookie) that first month of the season and while Butler has shot the ball well in limited minutes, I like what Granger can (potentially) bring with his post up game. If Granger be more assertive in the post and have consistency shooting from outside, we'll be fine.

    CJ Watson is having his best month of the season shooting the ball by far. I don't see an issue at all at the backup PG spot.

    I don't think things are as bad as people think. Tonight our bench gave us squat, but if you look at our previous game they scored 32 points against the Lakers. We're going to be just fine going forward.

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to BenR1990 For This Useful Post:


  10. #7
    Member joew8302's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Bennettsville, SC
    Age
    31
    Posts
    2,991
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Possible lineup changes?

    Good inputs from everyone. I do not think things are "bad", but with the play of late I was just wondering if tinkering here and there was worth it to make us even better.

  11. #8
    Member ilive4sports's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    6,816

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Possible lineup changes?

    I might experiment with when the substitutions are occurring. maybe let lance run a bit longer with the starters, maybe bring in scola sooner with the starters, get him an easier bucket and then have West in sooner in the second. I dont like how long PG sits for in the second either. Same with Hibbert. Do we really need them playing the entire first while sitting to the 4 minute mark of the 2nd? Why not sub them out with 2 left in the first and then back in with 6 left in the second? Thats my biggest gripe with the rotation.

  12. #9
    Member VideoVandal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Coatesville, IN
    Posts
    351

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Possible lineup changes?

    I'd like to see Vogel experiment with bringing out an extra starter at the same time as Lance and playing 2 starters with the bench unit rather than just Lance.....I'm thinking David but Roy might not be a bad option either and we can run some plays through Roy or David while the 2nd unit is out there. Would give us more reliability in the 2nd quarters.

  13. #10
    Formerly PacerFanInAZ Cactus Jax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Tucson AZ
    Age
    30
    Posts
    4,018
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Possible lineup changes?

    Quote Originally Posted by VideoVandal View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I'd like to see Vogel experiment with bringing out an extra starter at the same time as Lance and playing 2 starters with the bench unit rather than just Lance.....I'm thinking David but Roy might not be a bad option either and we can run some plays through Roy or David while the 2nd unit is out there. Would give us more reliability in the 2nd quarters.
    Roy usually plays the entire 1st and 3rd quarters, no way he could be used, best bet would be to insert Scola in pretty early, then bring back West early in the 2nd/4th quarter. Usually, PG and Lance play most all the 2nd half in a close game. I'm pretty sure come playoff time there won't be the Lance/PG + 4 bench players at any point. I'm guessing the Pacers are trying to shoot for only 3 bench players on the court at any time. PG and Lance can pretty much play an entire game if needed, George Hill can easily play 36 minutes and having CJ isn't a bad option. West and Hibbert are the wild cards, if they play too much at one time it really affects their games, got to be smart.
    "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

    ----------------- Reggie Miller

  14. #11
    Member Sollozzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    16,347

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Possible lineup changes?

    Vogel should give Copeland a chance in games like last night when no one on the bench is providing any offense. We're paying the guy $3 million. When his teammates are playing bad, throw him out there and see if he can get anything going. At least give the guy a chance.
    Last edited by Sollozzo; 01-31-2014 at 08:13 AM.

  15. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Sollozzo For This Useful Post:


  16. #12
    Member owl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    4,131

    Default Re: Possible lineup changes?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sollozzo View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Vogel should give Copeland a chance in games like last night when no one on the bench is providing any offense. We're paying the guy $3 million. When his teammates playing bad, throw him out there and see if he can get anything going. At least give the guy a chance.
    I think the Pacers have a problem giving players a chance, ie Green and Plumlee, and now Copeland.
    This team needs some more EFFICIENT scoring and by that I mean at a higher percentage from the 3 point line.
    Give Copeland a chance with the second unit. Sometimes West gets on my nerves with his relying too much on his fade away jump shot.
    Maybe give Copeland a chance with a few starters. The starters are playing very poor defense the first part of the game anyway.
    {o,o}
    |)__)
    -"-"-

  17. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to owl For This Useful Post:


  18. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Lifelong Indy-area resident
    Age
    62
    Posts
    4,635

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Possible lineup changes?

    I think Roy playing longer stretches is purposeful on Vogel's part. He wants Roy's stamina built up to the point that he is able to play as much as needed in the playoffs. Playing him now for 12 to 14 minute stretches is a good way to prepare for that.

    As for the other players, I would change nothing. I would urge a few of the players to get out and put up 300-400 shots a day. Our shooting from mid-range and especially the perimeter has fallen off lately.

  19. #14
    Administrator Unclebuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    32,685

    Default Re: Possible lineup changes?

    35-10, no lineup changes.

  20. #15
    Member Sollozzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    16,347

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Possible lineup changes?

    Quote Originally Posted by Unclebuck View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    35-10, no lineup changes.
    There are drastically different degrees of lineup changes though.

    Changing the starting lineup of a 35-10 team? Yeah, that would be foolish and completely unnecessary.

    Giving one bench player (Copeland) a few minutes when the other bench players are off? That's nothing drastic and I see no reason not to try it. It honestly just boggles my mind how we don't even give the guy a chance on a night like last night when the other bench players are awful. We know the guy can shoot. At least give him a chance.

    Obviously Vogel is a fantastic coach, but he didn't give Plumlee a chance last year and look how he is tearing it up in Phoenix. Sure, Phoenix's run and gun style is far more suitable for Plumlee, but it does seem like Vogel is prone to not give certain players a chance to prove themselves. Copeland deserves a chance out there. A bench player's best asset is giving the team some offense while starters are resting, and we know that Plumlee can score. I'm not a big fan of his signing, but we're paying him $3 million and might as well give him a chance.

  21. The Following User Says Thank You to Sollozzo For This Useful Post:

    RWB

  22. #16
    Member Ragnar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Fort Wayne, IN
    Age
    42
    Posts
    5,832

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: Possible lineup changes?

    I would make a case for Copeland but at the 3 or even 2 not the 4 he is NOT a PF, he can guard small forwards (especially bench small forwards) and man sometimes we need a guy who can just hit that three. Let Danny guard the 2 Cope the three and I think our second unit would be better.

  23. #17
    Administrator Unclebuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    32,685

    Default Re: Possible lineup changes?

    I don't think Cope is the answer. His defense isn't good.

  24. The Following User Says Thank You to Unclebuck For This Useful Post:


  25. #18

    Default Re: Possible lineup changes?

    Quote Originally Posted by owl View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I think the Pacers have a problem giving players a chance, ie Green and Plumlee, and now Copeland.
    This team needs some more EFFICIENT scoring and by that I mean at a higher percentage from the 3 point line...
    Copeland and Plumlee, I hear you. But to say Green didn't get plenty of chances last year is crazy. He played in 60 games, started 7, and was a 36% shooter, turnover machine, and couldn't guard a ball boy. It appear that he had some sort of mental/ confidence issue last year, given how he is playing now, but I can't blame the pacers for how he freaked out and played far below his ability for a whole season.
    The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!)

  26. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Slick Pinkham For This Useful Post:


  27. #19
    Whale Shepherd cdash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    The Sprawl
    Age
    29
    Posts
    16,919

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Possible lineup changes?

    Nah, we don't need lineup changes. Every team goes through their swoons. Hell the Heat were something like 6-8 in January last year before they rattled off their 29 game winning streak or whatever it ended up being.

    The only thing I would like to see is a little more offensive assertiveness from George Hill. That move where he drives by his defender, stops at the free throw line and takes a quick jumper usually results in him either getting fouled by the recovering defender or him making a short jumper, or ideally, both...that is golden.

  28. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to cdash For This Useful Post:


  29. #20
    Member Since86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Muncie
    Posts
    20,794

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Possible lineup changes?

    I don't think Copeland needs to get regular minutes, but last night he should have gotten some. If your defense is struggling to matchup with a team trying to space you out, why not put him in at the 4? Channing Frye wasn't going to take him off the dribble, so you don't really need to worry about his lack of lateral speed.

    He brings a very different skill set and ability than your other two pfs. They just weren't getting it done in the first half.
    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right. ― Ricky Gervais.

    What if someone from a school of business or management school were to ask, How did you do this? How did you get the Pacers turned around? Is there a general approach you've taken that can be summarized?

    Larry Bird: Yeah, patience.

  30. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Since86 For This Useful Post:


  31. #21
    Member Ace E.Anderson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    4,947

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Possible lineup changes?

    Quote Originally Posted by cdash View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Nah, we don't need lineup changes. Every team goes through their swoons. Hell the Heat were something like 6-8 in January last year before they rattled off their 29 game winning streak or whatever it ended up being.

    The only thing I would like to see is a little more offensive assertiveness from George Hill. That move where he drives by his defender, stops at the free throw line and takes a quick jumper usually results in him either getting fouled by the recovering defender or him making a short jumper, or ideally, both...that is golden.
    This. George Hill definitely needs to take some of the perimeter scoring/ballhandling pressure off of Paul and Lance. I don't think we need to make any lineup changes, but I think we definitely need to get back to the basics offensively. More ball movement, more assertiveness, and less flashy/careless type of plays. Last year, a lot of our turnovers were the "trying to make the extra pass" variety. This year it's the "I'm trying to force something out of nothing" variety.

  32. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Ace E.Anderson For This Useful Post:


  33. #22

    Default Re: Possible lineup changes?

    Quote Originally Posted by Unclebuck View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    35-10, no lineup changes.
    I'm with you. I don't really know how to say this, but the Pacers have 8 1/2 guys that can play. They need to get the minutes. No one on the bench will make the rotation stronger.

    If you want to tinker with the rotations to change the mix of guys on the court or run a different mix of plays, I'm cool with that. But the guys that are playing are the best players on the team.

  34. The Following User Says Thank You to xIndyFan For This Useful Post:


  35. #23
    Member Sollozzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    16,347

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Possible lineup changes?

    Quote Originally Posted by Unclebuck View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I don't think Cope is the answer. His defense isn't good.
    I don't think anyone is saying that he's the answer on a consistent basis. But on a night like last night where everyone off the bench was garbage, it certainly wouldn't have hurt to throw him out there and see if he could have got anything going. It just seems stubborn of Vogel to completely refuse to play him under any circumstances aside from garbage time.

  36. The Following User Says Thank You to Sollozzo For This Useful Post:

    RWB

  37. #24
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Indy
    Posts
    7,755

    Default Re: Possible lineup changes?

    I think Vogel needs to look at how he has the back-ups offense running. It is usually just Lance dribbling, with Granger and Watson sitting in the corner doing nothing, and Scola maybe or maybe not setting a screen. While the pick and pop is the most effective way to get Scola in scoring position, having Granger and Watson sit in the corners waiting for a Lance pass doesn't really take advantage of their abilities fully. It causes the bench to be too reliant on how well Lance is playing, and how well the shooters are shooting. It is essentially designed to be inconsistent. The offense really needs to be 1/3rd Scola, 1/3rd Granger, and 1/3 Stephenson, with a little Watson thrown in for some spice. Instead we have something more along the lines of 9/10th Stephenson, 1/10th Scola. Simply put, Stephenson hasn't been that consistently good to earn that kind of share consistently.

    I do not know why it has changed, but when Granger was scoring 10+ points 8 games straight he wasn't playing the role of stand in the corner and wait for the pass. The bench was playing extremely well during that period. Recently he has been playing more of the Brandon Rush role in the offense.

  38. #25

    Default Re: Possible lineup changes?

    Quote Originally Posted by Unclebuck View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I don't think Cope is the answer. His defense isn't good.
    As opposed to the brilliant defense being played of late, though? I think it's an in-game thing. If defense is out the window anyway, as it has been far too often in the last 4-5 games, you may as well give him some burn.

  39. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Dr. Hibbert For This Useful Post:


Posting Permissions

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