Mailbag: Around the Association

Answering questions about the playoffs, checking in on some former Pacers, and building a new Pacer out of non-stars from other teams

By: Caitlin Cooper I @C2_Cooper

Mackenzie Estelle:  I have a coaching question! I've been hearing media buzz that Thibs is "out coaching" Bickerstaff in this NY/CLE series and I'm curious what your take on that is? To my untrained eye, I find myself sort of at a loss as to why CLE is struggling so much, especially considering how much of a non-factor Randle has been. Would you credit the Knicks defensive prowess (i.e their bigs dominating the glass or Mitchell getting effectively shut down in the 4th quarter of game 4) to overwhelming effort/physicality/experience or is Thibs defensive scheme really the difference maker? And to bring it back to the Pacers, how would you suggest a casual fan evaluate Carlisle in this upcoming season?

Surely everyone will agree, while ignoring the years 1993, 1994, and 1999, that there is no better way to kick-off a mailbag hosted by a blog dedicated to the basketball played by the Indiana Pacers than to discuss the basketball that is currently being played in the playoffs by the New York Knicks! My apologies to any dissidents who might be out there, but I'm going to give this my best shot. Feel free to think about 1995, 1998, 2000, and 2013, if you need to. It will all be over soon. Ok, here it goes.

Isaac Okoro didn't log action in Game 4 until there was 31.7 seconds remaining in the first quarter. At the time, Josh Hart was at the line, preparing to shoot his second of two free throws for New York. With roughly a four-second differential after Caris LeVert grabbed the rebound, this meant that Okoro, who isn't exactly known for his floor spacing, essentially came into replace Jarrett Allen's rim protection for the purpose of dotting the corner of what was the final offensive possession of the frame for Cleveland. Granted, the Cavs managed to create something out of nothing in the form of a dunk from Evan Mobley as LeVert was slipping to the floor, but the timing of the substitution was certainly … interesting. And the same could be said with regard to Darius Garland being assigned to Jalen Brunson.

Given that the Knicks have been doing a lot of mismatch hunting with guard screens, the thought process likely was that Garland would be screened out of the action in favor of a non-Garland defender, but what about when there wasn't a screen? Also, why would there be a screen, when Brunson could simply go at the match-up he otherwise would've targeted, like so:

Plus, even when there was a screen, as was the case here, when Brunson had his pick of preferable match-ups between Garland and Donovan Mitchell, the Cavs typically trapped, which augmented the rebounding advantage for New York out of the side pick-and-rolls as a result of sacrificing a defender.

So, just to boil things down, the Cavs were basically trying to outmaneuver an adjustment that New York no longer needed to make while also further handicapping themselves on the glass as a result of lack of trust in a match-up they willfully chose. It was puzzling, to say the least.

As for Mitchell, this is a tough scene. In addition to showing on guard screens so as to avoid putting Brunson in the line of fire, there are just so many possessions where the Knicks have been brazen in their Thibsian willingness to defend three players with two, flooding over to the strong-side with passive size as a deterrent.

Meanwhile, Okoro was subbed out after missing two threes at the start of the fourth quarter and never returned. Osman, in theory, provides more in the way of credible spacing, but he isn't always adept at sliding into the light of passing windows. LeVert, as was so often the case with the Pacers, has a penchant for pulling-up and calling his own number even when the roll-man is open. Overall, Bickerstaff doesn't have a lot of levers to pull (surprise, wings matter!), but he also hasn't exactly been the most discerning with which of those levers he has chosen to pull and when.

Generally speaking, coaching can be very nebulous and difficult to gauge -- especially when the goal for the season, as it currently pertains to Carlisle, is more about growing young talent than optimizing winning in the playoffs. In that context, the job should arguably be evaluated in broader strokes, analyzing how and what principles are being instilled and whether players have been put in the position to progress. For whatever reason, when it comes to the postseason, coaches seem to get the credit for good defense and blamed for bad offense, whereas players often get blamed for bad defense and credited for good offense. The current state of the Cavs-Knicks series, however, seems to rage against those presumptions -- at least from the perspective of what's gone wrong for Cleveland.

Sam Osbourne: Is there anything you’ve seen in the playoffs whether it’s a certain tweak to a scheme, an awesome play, or how a team is utilizing a certain player that you would like to see the Pacers draw from for next season?

After being critical of some of the process for the Cavs, it only makes sense to take a page from the Cavs, right? Well, this action isn't necessarily unique to Cleveland, but it can add an element of uniqueness in that it lacks a set pattern. With three players intentionally converging at the same spot, one guard will slip or make a basket cut while the other comes off a down screen from the big, who remains high and then potentially goes into another action. It looks like this.

Because the defenders are in such close proximity to each other, there can be a natural tendency to switch and make mistakes. Here, even though Quentin Grimes manages to stay attached to Donovan Mitchell as his original assignment, all of the commotion still has the potential to make the opposing big late with the ball-screen coverage after sagging off to protect against the cut. In this case, with the Knicks switching what becomes a double drag, Darius Garland easily steps into a shot.

For the Pacers, this could be another means for Haliburton to attack switches, only with the twist of leveraging his shooting away from the ball, buzzing around in an unpredictable clump with Nembhard initiating, Mathurin as the other cutter, and Myles increasing the likelihood that the big will be out of position -- somewhere.

Jeff Young: Are you taking former Pacers questions? What is Draymond doing that is affecting Sabonis so much (Kings/Golden State playoffs). Is there something specific Golden State is running on defense that is bothering him?

So, there's a few things. Mainly, the Warriors are aiming to destroy Sacramento's natural rhythm and reads by ignoring Sabonis and dropping either Draymond or Kevon Looney to the rim, which allows the other four players on the floor to apply maximum pressure knowing they always have size at the basket. In essence, when Sabonis is above the break, whoever is at center for the Warriors is playing free safety, daring him to be a scorer, when his first instinct has always been to pass.

Here's a snapshot of the strategy in a nutshell, with Golden State stagnating the possession through their denials of both Huerter and Fox.

To be fair, Fox could probably make himself more dangerous in that situation by curling around Sabonis and catching a late pass, but Looney would still be waiting in the wings. Of course, even when the hand-offs get completed, the Warriors have also intermittently complicated matters by next-ing the drives, with the "next" nearest defender jump-switching onto the ball while the on-ball defender peels off to nearest player on the perimeter.

To counter, Sacramento has run those types of actions toward the empty-side of the floor, where there isn't an available defender one gap away, but Huerter has shot a miserable 3-of-21 from deep through the first four games of the series.

They need more from him, and they need Sabonis, who is averaging 9.3 potential assists compared to 12.7 during the regular season, to be slightly less impervious to game-planning and take what the defense gives him. Then again, if the Kings had flattened out on the final possession of the game instead of forcing the ball out of De'Aaron Fox's hands, they might have returned to Sacramento with a 3-1 series lead. Executing this type of coverage is exhausting for the players responsible for denying passing lanes, which is to say nothing of the pace of play. This has been, and hopefully will continue to be, a really fun series.

Amy Hamilton: Hi, I am so happy that a woman writes sports columns that most men probably don't even understand. Not saying I do either, but you've achieved something really rare. I do have a question! I was really glad that Sabonis and Brogdon were traded because they bored me silly. Just curious if you've noticed them playing any differently in the context of their new teams.

First of all, thank you. I'm glad you are enjoying the blog, though I will say that if anyone doesn't understand my work, that's on me as the writer. As to your question, for the first part of the season last year, the Pacers were very resistant to empower Sabonis as a fulcrum. His post-ups were slashed, and there didn't seem to be much meeting of the minds as far as playing out of triangle concepts or allowing him to do point guard things until their hands were forced when the team was depleted due to health and safety protocols. That said, they also didn't have the shooting to support the type of lyricism with which the Kings are currently surrounding him. After all, this was a real possession last season.

And so was this, even when he didn't have the ball.

During the 2021-22 campaign, the Pacers ranked 29th in points scored per possession on hand-offs, whereas the Kings finished third this season in efficiency, as well as first in frequency. With Justin Holiday overburdened as the only viable movement shooter, and the team also having a weird allergy to pocket passes for a large portion of the season, the difference between the play context for Sabonis in Sacramento compared to his final season with the Pacers is like watching a fountain that no longer has a burned out pump.

As for Malcolm Brogdon, after several seasons of getting rundown while trying to run offense for the Pacers, he took a step back to take a step forward with the Celtics. His touches and percentage of plays as the pick-and-roll ball-handler are down, but his conversion rate from deep has rebounded back to where it was in Milwaukee, when he played in more of a spot-up role. In Boston, 65 percent of his threes have been assisted, which is up from 58.6 percent with the Pacers. As sixth man, he gets to fit into more of a bigger picture, rather than standing out -- and being schemed for -- as the focal point.

Jeff Hasser: Create your own Frankenstein's Monster out of current players that would be the ideal fit on this team. I would recommend the limitation of no All-Stars or current Pacers players, but feel free to add any additional restrictions of your own as well. Bonus points if you name the monster.

Excluding All-Stars, it would probably be some combination of O.G. Anunoby, Mikal Bridges, and Quentin Grimes. When the Raptors played the Lakers following the trade deadline, Anunoby was assigned to Anthony Davis similarly to what the Pacers tried last season with Aaron Nesmith. But, here's the difference. In addition to being strong as an ox. Anunoby is also a wing-sized wing, which means he can hold his spot fronting the post and still spring up with the length to impact overhead passes.

Additionally, the Lakers didn't dare running much offense for Davis to handle side-to-side above the break, and if the Pacers want to keep Turner low and out of ball screen coverages, Anunoby is capable of switching from the big to the guard and back to the big again without surrendering any touches to the interior.

That said, as he demonstrated against the Pacers in what looked like the lower and upper halves of his body were existing on two separate planes, his pull-up game is basically non-existent, which is what Mikal Bridges has shown in Brooklyn would come into play without sacrificing defense. Anunoby isn't going to lead the dance after engaging the big in drop coverage, like this.

As for Grimes, the list of players who can stay in front of Haliburton and beat him to his spot following a screen rejection is brief. Given that Jrue Holiday isn't an option for selection, if the Pacers want to play drop with Turner, Grimes would be worthy of consideration while still providing credible floor spacing and attacking closeouts.

Altogether, this three-headed, two-way monster would be of a variety in size and shape that the Pacers haven't seen in quite awhile.

Let's call the Frankenstein, 3-and-D+more.

Kyle Taylor: 1. What plays did you suggest to Rick? 2. What’s something that’s caught your eye in the playoffs (any team)? 3. I think the rules/officiating favor offense too much. Some amount of hand-checking, relaxed verticality, and being allowed to slide with your guy and not getting called for a foul when he jumps into you are some changes I’d like to see. Do you agree or disagree with this/why?

Wow, that's a lot of questions. For now, my answer to your first inquiry is that this was just my attempt at a witty caption. This isn't actually what we were talking about, but I can't say what we were actually talking about. There will be more about my experience at fan appreciation night in the second part of the mailbag, promise!

Coming soon (eyeballs emoji!!)!

With regard to something that's caught my eye in the playoffs, I'll refer you to my prior response on Cleveland's bunch action, while also offering a hat tip to the way in which Nikola Jokic transformed what looked like a cross-screen for a post touch into a double drag for Jamal Murray to get downhill.

That's nifty and might be worth it for the Pacers to adopt as a counter when teams deny the ball to Turner after he receives a cross-screen, changing sides of the floor out of their wedge action. My apologies that the angles aren't quite right here, but hopefully this demonstrates the concept.

As for rule changes, this is probably going to be contrarian to popular opinion, but there's something to be said for adversity being the mother of invention. The push and pull between creating space and shrinking space breeds new wrinkles on both sides of the ball. For example, during the final game of the regular season, the Pacers tried a suggested combination of pick-and-roll coverages, switching the initial ball-screen and fronting the post with the guard before peeling on the penetration to cover the potential drop-off pass.

Granted, this is somewhat match-up dependent and isn't going to radically change the way that offense is played, but they defended against the screening action and the mismatch without needing to involve a third defender. Can teams continue to find avenues for slowing down attacking ball-handlers while also staying home on the perimeter? What about reimagining the weak-side and strong-side based on playing the numbers game and eliminating single-side tags? Can defense be as random as offense? Innovation is what keeps the game interesting, let's not stifle the evolution.

(There will be another edition of the mailbag covering only the questions that were submitted specifically about the Pacers before the end of the month.)