Boston Celtics 94, Indiana Pacers 87: Porous Defense at Critical Stretches Lead to Pacers Loss
It is true the Indiana Pacers are a better defensive team this year than in years past. It's also true they probably aren't as good on that side of the ball as the first 17 or so games have seemed to suggest. It's not a bad thing, though. Certainly, being above average defensively, or at least better than the Pacers have been in past years, is a huge step forward, but for a team that's had to use defense as a stabilizer to their really poor offensive play, they really do need to be as good as their #1 in the league FG defense suggests they are. And you know, tonight, they just weren't.
The problems began, as they seem to often do, when the second unit took control of the game, turning a 19-17 game the Pacers trailed, a game where Danny Granger and Darren Collison seemed to have all the momentum for the blue and gold, into an 11-2 Celtics run that put Boston in control of the game. Even still, as the Celtics seemed to control the game while the second unit kept shooting blanks, Dahntay Jones and Paul George were able to cut the lead to six.
Even at six, it felt like a 25 point game, but Indiana had a golden opportunity to make it a game. But there was Brandon Bass. There was poor Pacers offense. And there was Paul Pierce. Suddenly, the game was back at ten, an all too familiar sight the Pacers hit the replay button on the rest of the night.
As has been the trend in just about every game this season, the Pacers stormed out of the half, erasing the eight point halftime lead in an instant. At 46 all, Indiana had just made it a game! Then Paul Pierce decided to show up. Paul George had nothing. Danny Granger had nothing. But Pierce had something; 17 of his game high 28 points in the third quarter, to keep the game right at the double digit marker, aided by more poor defense that allowed former Purdue Boilermaker E'Twaun Moore an easy look at the basket to wind down the third.
The Pacers continued to flirt with the game; using an 10-0 run to cut a 16-point lead to just six, but once again, when they needed a critical defensive stop, there was a breakdown to immediately erase all the good will and good momentum the Pacers spent possession after possession building up. The end result, even as the Pacers seemed to eternally have the game within one good run, was one they earned; a loss.
While this game was ultimately lost on the defensive side of the ball and the team's inability to make critical stops while letting players blow by and get easy or open looks, there were a number of contributing factors that helped solidify the loss. Poor shooting remains a constant. Despite a 7-13 start, the Pacers finished just 35% from the field, a pretty average number for this team, but not one you can expect to win consistently with. They went just 1-19 from three point range, notably missing their last 18. Add in struggles getting second chance points, holding onto the ball, getting points off of turnovers (until it was too late), and getting no ball movement, and it's really impressive this game ended up within ten.
After the jump, a hold your breath moment:
- Roy Hibbert struggled, as did the whole team, finishing with 11 and 7, but also 6 TOs. However, it's a sigh of relief the big fella was even able to finish the game, when he came down and turned his ankle late in the second quarter. After going out for a few minutes (leading to further concerns for depth as Lou Amundson was out for a spell after being poked in the eye), Hibbert returned with a light ankle sprain he was able to play with.
- Danny Granger and Paul George both played fairly well offensively, but they both played fairly poorly defensively. It's hard to really give either a lot of credit, even as they both shot as well as anyone on the Pacers did. George struggled early, but came on strong late in the game, even though most was too little too late.
- Even though the Celtics bench didn't exactly cause levels of concern outside of Chris Wilcox's fourteen, it was the Pacers bench that just played so poorly it didn't matter. Boston's bench didn't offer a lot of scoring, but did offer an 11-19 shooting efficiency to come up when they needed it. For the Pacers, just 4-21 shooting, including 2-13 for 10 points between Tyler Hansbrough and George Hill.
Even though the Celtics were short Rajon Rondo and Ray Allen, ask the Orlando Magic how that worked out in their two losses. The Celtics, despite not even being competitive against the Pacers in the first two games, have four straight wins, a light schedule for the foreseeable future, and a golden opportunity to jump back into the rat race that is the top six seeds in the East.
The Pacers, on the other hand, fall to 12-6, and will face the same Orlando Magic team that not only blew a 27-point lead to Boston, but was waxed in New Orleans. It seems Orlando takes getting rolled to personal levels just before Pacers games, offering up another tough challenge for the blue and gold. This time, however, the Pacers are coming off a tough defeat of their own, and need to come out in Florida with a chip on their shoulder if they hope to snag another key road victory as they continue to weather a tough portion of the schedule coupled with endless road games.
17 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
embarassing, if pacers want to be taken seriously they have to win games that they should
ugh, sometimes i want to just smack granger upside the head and say, PLAY OFFENSE AND DEFENSE, NOT JUST 1 OF THEM
I'm reading a book about anti-gravity. It's impossible to put down.// I wondered why the baseball was getting bigger, Then it hit me// A hole has been found in the nudist camp wall. The police are looking into it.
Wilcox
Wilcox scored 14pts?? When I mentioned this guy to be signed instead of P-Graph I was chastised and was told he was aging and over the hill. What Ever! I think now some of you can see what I was concerned about 6 -8 games in the season. Weakness’ are being shown and total inconsistency. Still Love My Pacers but damnit, someone make a move here.
***Forever Grunge...Man!***
*Gotta Finish at the rim when your a foot from it*
Our bench needs to play much better.
The bench has been struggling the past couple weeks and it has really let us down, If you look at the plus minus tonight it will tell the story. I thought George Hill was a good defender? If he’s not making shots he really doesn’t offer a whole lot, I really hope he finds his shot soon because he needs to be the spark we need off the bench.
I'm not gonna make much of this loss.
This team has been awful on offense the whole year, but beside two games they have had a chance to win all of the games in the last quarter. Same thing again tonight, although Granger was on his game offensively. I believe the offense will come around and, when it does, this team will look really, really good.
"A champion is someone who gets up when he can't."
- Jack Dempsey
by infinityzero.systemerror on Jan 28, 2012 3:26 AM EST reply actions
We are not nearly as deep as I thought we would be when the season started
www.themindofshadow.blogspot.com/
by dbcb on Jan 28, 2012 8:37 AM EST via mobile reply actions
Ditto.
I also hate when Vogel goes with the entire bench for a stretch. Hill is the only one that can create, and he’s under sized. Tyler has struggled all year. I still don’t think Tyler will last long in this league if he continues to shoot around 30%, that’s just embarrassing. There should be at least 1 starter in at all times. Coach will take PG out around the 6 minute mark and not bring him back till mid 2nd quarter. That’s just too long on the bench.
And it's now my sig
by Bronn on May 17, 2011 4:56 PM EDT
I don't know if we always need a starter out there.
But they certainly need to come back sooner than what they do. DJ has played well lately. Problem is that Hill and Hansbrough have been struggling and Foster has been injured. If those guys are playing like they are truly capable, or in Foster’s case play at all, then we probably don’t have this conversation.
Just a suggestion, but perhaps we should let Stephenson create as opposed to Hill more often than what he does right now. Not saying he’s better, just that Hill is better skilled at playing off the ball and Stephenson is better with the ball in his hands. Don’t know if it will work, but it’s worth a thought I think.
"A champion is someone who gets up when he can't."
- Jack Dempsey
by infinityzero.systemerror on Jan 28, 2012 9:26 AM EST up reply actions
Maybe
Stephenson tends to make a lot of risky passes. The outcome is invariably either spectacular or else a turnover.
BTW, it seemed to me that the officiating was really biased in the Celtics favor early in the game. I’m not one who usually likes to gripe about refs, but it appeared to drag the Pacers down, emotionally, and they had trouble recovering.
by Manfred James on Jan 28, 2012 10:01 AM EST up reply actions
I didn't get that feeling from the game personally.
Felt the Pacers were just really sloppy with the ball.
I don’t know if it’s so much he’s making risky passes as much as he catches the other guys by surprise. He certainly does things that no one else on the team and, honestly, few guys in the league can.
"A champion is someone who gets up when he can't."
- Jack Dempsey
by infinityzero.systemerror on Jan 28, 2012 10:10 AM EST up reply actions
We need Price out there, a real point guard for the second unit
I wrote the same thing during the game last night. Hill is a better shooting guard, at least when he’s hot, and Stephenson is still learning (sort of). Tyler needs a point guard to help him get the ball in position. Neither Collison nor Hill pass it to him when he is cutting, or moving to an open spot for a jumper. After awhile, it saps your confidence.
Also, not having Foster there means there is no true center—Lou is flat-out terrible. So that means defenses can and do collapse on Tyler when he gets the ball or moves toward the basket. He has done well on defense and boxing out, at least. He had some nice moves in the Chicago game.
I dunno
Although the Pacers did play poorly, I still feel the refs compounded their problems. Kind of like trying to move the ball while being observed very closley and not ever getting a break while the other team got them all. Maybe it’s just me, though.
Personally, I feel pro basketball refs are the worst…even when things are going our way. Calls are altered by superstar status, home court advantage, personal feelings toward players, commercial preference, momentum, and any number of other things that I’ve forgotten to mention here. I’ve been watching pro basketball for 40 years—tell me I’m wrong.
As for Lance, you may be right. I feel he has a chance to develop into a very good PG, but at this point in his career he’s still pretty raw. He needs more work with those guys, and in this shortened season there’s just not much time.
Oh most certainly.
Stephenson needs tons of work and the refs are far too influenced by such things. That whole Tim Donaghy situation just makes it worse. Everyone knows that the NBA gives preferential treatment to superstars and larger franchises. NFL does it too, but they seem more consistent at least.
"A champion is someone who gets up when he can't."
- Jack Dempsey
by infinityzero.systemerror on Jan 28, 2012 9:13 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah
Its time to look into Wilson Chandler. He’ll be ready to play NBA mid feb. I dont think you can count any negatives in signing this guy. Obviously we’ll have to throw back someone to Denver unless Chandler refuses to play for them. Sign the due…4yr deal. He can run the 2, the 3, post up, burn ya, block, rebound and score at the rim which is just hideous right now for the Pacers.
***Forever Grunge...Man!***
*Gotta Finish at the rim when your a foot from it*
Inconsistency and weakness
Currently backup center has trouble holding on to ball (small hands- no strength?) and lacks shooting talent. After George H there isn’t a guard coming off bench creating shots, particularly against zone defense. New Orleans is shopping Kamen and certainly there may be interest in moving Gordon since he becomes RFA at end of season. Granger and cash could be of interest to NO (Stern greed). We have the SG/SG personnel with the room on the cash. We then would have another dressed player to make it through this season and hopefully minimize the effect of individual players have down games. Something to consider.
Richard E Schultz



























