A day with hard candy

Pacers VS Knicks G3

G3 Thibodeau let Miro start. I guess Thibodeau's idea is not to value the effect of the two towers, but to see from G1G2 that Miro's series is very effective. G2 Towns was in a bad shape, and Thibodeau cuts down Towns' time significantly. But Towns is one of the core teams and the offensive end is also very important. Thibodeau cannot set up a starting Miro & to replace Towns. The one who was taken down was Hart, who let the two towers start together to use it.

Strictly speaking, using the double tower itself did not reverse the situation, for two reasons:

First, Miro cannot appear in the basket protection position in large quantities, and he wants to turner. This is not because of the problem with the counter-arrangement of Thibodeau, but because the quality of the Pacers' starting shooter is a bit amazing. G1 makes Nesmith the gods, G2 makes Sika a sanctify, not to mention the two defenders who have both good shooting and passes, so Miro can only defend Turner;

The second is Miro's front board, and Towns' low-post advantage at the No. 4 position is not shown. The Pacers seemed to have predicted the Knicks' double tower offensive logic, and the G3 rebounds were very well-organized. After the substitute lineup replaced the mop with Bradley, the rebound position became much better during this period. Towns's effect on the offensive ends like Sika and Nesmith in G2 is not good enough, and there is no sense of presence on the offensive end of the first three quarters of G3.

However, the Knicks G3's defense has improved. Even in the first two and a half quarters behind the score, the senses have improved a lot. For example, when preventing TJ-McConnell, no longer excessive delays, no unnecessary missing balls, and when preventing external disassembly, you will appropriately replace the defense or teammates will fill up the position nearby and quickly find the match. Simply put, the Knicks will not be like the G1G2, because the defense is unclear about the explanation, giving the Pacers a lot of simple opportunities.

The Knicks are good at defending but not as good as being able to hold the Pacers' attack. In the first half, the Pacers' offensive efficiency was as high as 123.4, which was in the case of 3 of 13 three-pointers. The Pacers' mid-range distance is too accurate, and most of the mid-range distances are punishing, such as the mid-range distance between the close-range basket with big and small misalignment, the mid-range distance between the defender's pick-and-roll and ball shooting, the mid-range distance after getting rid of the emergency stop after the save defense at a fixed point, etc. This is a hidden attribute that Pacers are difficult to defend against. They dominate the ball, convert, three-pointer, empty cut, and no-ball running. In addition to these advantages of creating easyball opportunities, Pacers and other people can also be lucky and shoot mid-range, punishing misalignment while punishing "anti-magic ball defense".

In turn, the Knicks' own offense has never been able to rise. This does not require much explanation, nor is it a question of placing the double towers. It is normal for Towns to go to the No. 4 position to shrink its offensive value. If it were the former Timberwolves, I would indeed say Towns + a No. 5 position with weak tactical participation ability = a major offensive relegation. The problem is, this is the Knicks, who have used similar gameplay in the past to achieve offensive levels at the top of the league. The G3 Knicks' attack in the first half of the attack was not good, it was purely Bronson and Donsla. Bronson was in a sluggish state and was in trouble with fouls, while Towns didn't wake up until the fourth quarter.

And after waking up, Towns...

How did the Knicks turn over this game?

The following four elements are indispensable.

Element 1: The Pacer's Law of Conservation of Character Large Callback

The Law of Conservation of Character I am talking about here is not the Pacer's 20% three-point shooting rate. Although the Pacers' sights always have to be pulled back, compared to this, Miller has always been playing indefinitely as if he doesn't have money to play, and it really looks like he gets stuck in a system bug. The Pacers paid back the bill in the third quarter today, and the whole fortune was all over. First, Nesmith sprained his ankle (luckily it was not a big deal), then he tied the empty basket and couldn't put it in. Then Harry made a low-level mistake by passing the ball across the side, and then Bradley, Toppin and Mathering made three consecutive offensive fouls. After finishing the third quarter, I thought I was watching the Warriors' regular season last year.

Element 2: The Knicks' defensive strength continues to be online

This is a bit unfamiliar. He plays a lot of centers, especially after Towns comes up in the fourth quarter, the Knicks' performance in the replacement is still OK. Although Halliburton's ability to hold the ball one-on-one was relatively weak, in the fourth quarter, Harry threw it to his teammates after he caught the misplaced, and this choice is still worth discussing.

is similar to G2, when Bronson ended in the fourth quarter, the Knicks were chasing points. The conclusion is similar to the G2 review. If someone can stand up and solve the score, playing the Pacers with one single defense weakness is an improvement. Of course, Bronson scored a key goal after returning to the court, and was completely unaffected by the sluggish feel and long rest, and his hands were still hard.

Element 3: Carlisle's use of center is very "in" and bad things are all catching up with

On how Carlisle uses Turner, this is the third episode. The G1G2 Pacers won, so naturally no matter how you discuss it, it is Carlisle's right. If G3 loses, it is still possible to argue. Turner played in G3 for 33 minutes and had no trouble with fouls (although 5 fouls, the fifth foul has been scored after the basic win and loss), which is roughly the same as before. Unlike G1G2, G3 Carlisle did not try a center lineup without a team, giving Bradley all the time behind Turner. Bradley is counting on completing the task, but he has not completed the task in excess. The second quarter ended, Carlisle ended with Bradley, who dragged the space twice to make Miro play a role, which is the difference between him and Turner.

Interestingly, Turner's performance in the fourth quarter seemed to suggest that his time was unsatisfied - the effect of defending Downs was a bit poor. One-on-one defense breakthrough cannot stand, prevent three-pointers and one distracted, and the opportunity to change defense is too early, which has become a background board...

Perhaps when Towns is single center, Carlisle can try the 4/5 dislocation defense, let Sika stick three-pointers against Towns, and let Turner improve Hart's assisting defense.

Element 4: The hard candy in the fourth section was too amazed

Downs' performance in the fourth section was a concentrated outbreak of his personal technical characteristics. The instant three-pointer with a very short front shake + a straight line break through the raw center, showing absolute dominance. In addition, Towns' performance on the defensive end in the fourth quarter also exceeded expectations. The Knicks want to continue to win the Pacers, they need to have this hard candy all the time.

0-3 and 1-2 are completely different worlds. The Knicks saved themselves from the edge of the cliff, and the series continued, and the result was also suspense again. The Pacers were careless. Although some content in the third and fourth sections were not a crime of war, they could have used the method of increasing load and concentration to nail the opponent's coffin before the Knicks took his last breath.

Letting the tiger return to the mountain is a hidden danger after all.