Re: Pacers Defense

[bird <birdw@aloha.net>]

>From: Jim Hill <jahill@leasingservice.com>
>
>>[Warwick wrote:]
>
>  >Were the Pacers really that clean?
>
>No they weren't, IMO.  The Ref's were terrible!  The Ref's just weren't
>calling fouls you would expect.  It seems that if your not really trying
>hard the Ref's swallow their whistle.

Thing is, Walker was trying like a mofo and the refs still swallowed. 
Generally, the refs were ... poor.  28-15 against Boston on FTAs. 
And I can't say the C's weren't taking it to the hoop.  In fact, that 
was part of the problem -- taking it into paint against the 
collapsing defense and not kicking it out.  You could say guys don't 
deserve the foul then, but players were getting fouled and the fouls 
weren't called.  Well, that's the way it goes.

There's nothing you can do about that.  What you _can_ do something 
about is trying to win these winnable games against teams with the 
same record as you and some of the same problem when -- get this -- 
you're playing at home.  Because the C's defense was ... poor.  They 
gave away many a layup.  That, and the fact that, except Walker, many 
an evil, goatee-wearing, non-passing Celtic showed up.  Walker had a 
great game, though; nice numbers and really seemed to think about 
getting teammates their shots.  I thought Randy Brown did that in the 
first half for a while, but didn't see much of it late.

I'm not sure what to make of Pierce so far.  The numbers are often 
there, as they were against Indy, (29 pts, 9 rebs, 3-5 3pt, 6 TO), 
but didn't play as well as he could have.  I don't think that's such 
a big deal, because he'll probably make most of the adjustments to 
improve his game, but he and Walker both played 45 minutes in that 
game.  Pitinoball, in addition to giving up layups, also says not to 
play these guys as much as they have been.  If Pitino is going to 
live and die by his system (and I think he is), then I hope he's 
going to go for broke, because I just don't think the hybrid system, 
of the sort we've seen the past couple of years, works ... uh, any 
better, anyway.

I guess you could wonder why some basic, seemingly unchangeable 
characteristics of Pitinoball are implemented (Walker not playing the 
three, defensive matchups/traps, the "press", all that sort of 
thing), I mean I sure have, but it also seems clear that, when it 
comes to many of those Pitinoball elements, that's just the way it's 
gonna be.  Walker's not going to the play the three, and many of the 
things people question, like why our pg's are directed to pick up 
opposing centers defensively, are just a part of the system.  You may 
not like it, hell, I find it prety weird, too, but that's the way it 
is.

Systems, schema, paradigms, and just plain plans often have a much 
better chance of being successful when they're implemented 100%, or 
close to it.  I think part of why is because then the plan can more 
easily take into account eventualities that result from the plan 
itself.  For example, the double team comes to the post, and the rest 
of the defense is supposed to rotate.  But when that rotation doesn't 
happen, the system breaks down.  And when the _system_ breaks down 
..., well you know the rest.  But the defense can work.  Seen it 
work.  Not as often as I'd like, but it has happened.  Don't ask me 
to explain why we double-team anyone just about _anyone_ in the post, 
though, because I don't have a clue. What I _do_ know is that it will 
keep on happening.

The team's got to break out for a few games, and soon.  Offensively, 
the team is a Pitinoball cliche ("Think pass first") away from 
humming.  Defensively, ... uh, we've really got to work on the 
defense.

Regards,

Bill, indeed the Celtic "Tird"