What's the difference?

[LikeMike22]

I know one look at my sig, and some hate might get thrown my way. But I come to you guys with a question.

What are the key differences between O'Brien's Pacers and Vogel's Pacers?

I know the simple answer is Vogel has different rotations, but can someone explain it in detail? I don't watch many Pacer games and I am curious of what is the driving force behind Pacer's "2nd wind."

[Kuq_e_Zi91]

O'Brien played outside-in. He favored quick, three point shots over establishing the post. He played Hibbert in the high post and used him as a facilitator.

He had a motion system, so he wanted the ball and players constantly moving. This is one of the reasons why Dunleavy was an excellent fit under O'Brien and why the point guards in his system often struggled. The system called for the point to bring the ball up and quickly swing it around, and remain in motion. He disregarded Collison's strengths in the pick-and-roll game.

He favored veterans over the rooks, which is probably like most coaches, however O'Brien especially favored veterans who can space the floor and knock down threes (think James Posey and Troy Murphy).

O'Brien constantly jerked around the players' minutes, and this led to many different rotations, a lack of consistency, and overall a poor product on the floor because as Vogel realized, the younger guys actually gave us a better chance to win. He had a set time when players would come in, when they would sub out. He had a terrible feel for in-game adjustments, often pulling a player when hot.

O'Brien was often highly critical of the players in the press. A prime example around here is when he called one of McRoberts' better games against the Lakers irrelevant because we lost the game. Or when Hibbert started the season playing well and talks of MIP were mounting, O'Brien said he wasn't even close and he had much to improve on. From there, Hibbert began having mental issues, his confidence took a hit and he even began seeing a sports psychologist.

There's probably more, but that's what just came to me right now.

As for Vogel, he's pretty much the complete opposite. The Good Cop to O'Brien's Bad Cop. The first thing he did when he got the job was emphasize that this team would play inside-out, smash-mouth, physical basketball. They wouldn't take bad, rushed shots anymore and they would grind teams out. They also installed more pick-and-rolls for Collison and placed more of the decision making in his hands, while also getting Hibbert more touches in the low post rather than out near the elbow and almost near the top of the three. He's essentially simplified the offense to a handful of plays, using Hubie Brown's teams as an example.

He cleared up the rotations so everyone has a defined role and they know what to expect in terms of minutes. That alone has done wonders to establish some chemistry and consistency, especially for the young guys in terms of growth. I also get the feeling he knows his personnel better, he knows how to place his guys in a position where they can exceed.

I think more than anything he's instilled a breath of fresh air, some hope into this season. He's always positive, always encouraging, yet he manages to still demand the best from his players and they've responded emphatically.

Also, just because you're a Bulls fan doesn't mean we can't have a good conversation about basketball. As long as you're respectful, I welcome your comments.

[Wizop]

I agree with most of those comments but I think the solidified rotations aspect is overstated. Vogel has changed rotations too. what he changed in terms of who played was that he committed to JMac and PsychoT and benched Posey and Solo. he never wavered on that even though he's altered the playing time between the two young 4's quite a bit.

your absolutely right about letting Collison be Collison.

I happen to like Hibbert playing high some of the time. he finds cutters well. I suspect if Vogel returns we'll see Hibbert play both high and low as time goes on. keeping him low could have been simply part of simplifying things.

the big thing has been confidence and optimism.

[Indy4Life]

Allowing Tyler and Jeff to be the physical players they are was a big change as well. We aren't the pretty team that drains 12 threes a night anymore but we play a physical game where we have a chance to win nearly every night.

We are simply missing the 'creator' that can handle the rock and get good looks or go to the line down the stretch.

[8305]

I think the biggest difference tactically was O'Brien's complicated offense vs Vogel immediately simplifying things. The more complicated approach in O'Brien's mind necessitated using veteran players. Once things were simpler the younger more athletic guys became more comfortable and confidence followed.

Another thing I observed was O'Brien often went away from a potential advantages (like the HIbbert can create with his size in the post) to better match up with whatever the other team was doing. The problem with this approach was any talent advantage we might have had disappeared. This match up approach generally put our veteran players on the floor. And, frankly our veterans aren't very talented.

[CelticPacer]

Vogel installs confidence in our players, lets Collison play the way he wants to, and actually wants the ball going into the post.

His style of coaching is a lot more simplistic, and guys like Dahntay Jones, Tyler Hansbrough, and Paul George are getting minutes as opposed to Solomon Jones, and freaking James Posey

[Gremz]

It must be the shoes.