What Roy Hibbert’s Shot Selection Says About the Pacers

Roy Hibbert’s Second Chances

The four-year trend shown in the chart below has clear implications: Roy Hibbert’s ability to get on the offensive glass has directly impacted his shots at the rim.

In his first two full seasons under Frank Vogel and his staff, Roy Hibbert became much more effective as an offensive rebounder. This was rewarded with a significant increase in “at the rim” attempts.

However, both have followed the same downward slope over the last two years, something we started to notice last year as the Pacers offensive started spiraling the drain.

This curve is further emphasized by Synergy data that shows Hibbert has only scored 10% of his points on putbacks this season — down 13% from even last year’s low totals and well below the 20% number he posted in the 2012-13 season.

Does one decline cause the other?

Frank Vogel was asked if the increased perimeter play was driving the drop in offensive rebounding.

Hibbert has only scored 10% of his points on putbacks this season — down 13% from even last year’s low totals and well below the 20% number he posted in the 2012-13 season.

“His offensive rebounding dropped last year, before we asked him to play on the perimeter more,” the Vogel said. “I think he’s just getting more attention. A couple years ago, he was a dominant offensive rebounder, so the league takes note. They understand if you don’t get a body on him early, he’s gonna hurt you.”

That increased attention probably isn’t limited to keeping him off the glass.

The 2013 Eastern Conference playoffs showed that Roy Hibbert — who averaged 17 points and 10 rebounds on 51% shooting — as a player who could hurt you at both ends. After that playoff run, opponents began to game plan for Roy in earnest.

Any increased attention would detract from offensive rebounding opportunities. A quick look at the top five career offensive rebounders (by offensive rebounding percentage) shows you Moses Malone (at #2) surrounded by non-scorers: Dennis Rodman (1), Larry Smith (3), Jeff Foster (4) and Chris Dudley (5). (Former Pacer Dale Davis also clocks in at 7th.)

Another factor here is the Pacers defense — both in its physical nature and in the focus given to it by the coaching staff. Hibbert’s mastery of verticality necessarily results in constant collisions and falls. Does this take away from the big man’s ability to get position offensively or get offensive rebounds?

“I think [that’s true] for all of our guys,” Vogel said. “[We] look at how to improve our motor on the offensive end, but we demand a lot of them on the defensive end. All of them. One through five. We make them work. When you’re working that hard for 23, 24 seconds on the defensive end — chasing and being in a stance, being on point with all of your assignments — it probably takes a little bit of our offensive legs.”

But don’t expect the Pacers to sacrifice at the defensive end to shore up the offense.

“I know that defense wins for us,” Vogel said.

Are the Pacers Doing What Opponents Want?

It takes no great leap of imagination to believe that opposing defenses are giving Roy Hibbert jump shots. Even if he is making them at a good clip, it is still a relatively low percentage look. Plus, it takes Hibbert off the offensive glass, and it reduces the chances for a foul.

Are teams forcing this shot to him?

“I wouldn’t say ‘forcing’ it to him,” Vogel said, “but I’d say 80% of the teams in this league keep their center in the paint on pick-and-rolls.”

Most teams are probably fine with Hibbert getting uncontested 17-footers — within reason — while Frank Vogel and the Pacers would far prefer that the Big Fella’s shot distribution look more like it did two years ago.

Unfortunately, Vogel doesn’t have many more attractive options.

The Pacer coach finished his answer by adding, “If we had elite, perimeter pick-and-roll players — perimeter attackers — then probably more stuff would be freed up. It’s just a way to get him some looks.”

That lack of options is really at the root of all of the Pacers’ problems.

Symptoms of a Larger Issue

Adjusting Roy Hibbert’s shot selection is a reasonable patch by itself. But when taken as part of the larger Pacers offensive environment, it is just one more set of compromises Indiana is being forced to make.

It is impossible to disagree with Vogel’s assessment of the Pacers’ perimeter players’ skill sets. With George Hill missing all but 10 games so far this year, Rodney Stuckey, Donald Sloan, and a hobbled C.J. Watson have shouldered the bulk of the ball-handling duties. This is a group that strikes fear into absolutely no one.

The Pacers rank 23rd out of 30 teams in both “drives per game” and “points per 48 minutes from drives,” while sitting 24th in field-goal percentage on drives. Given these numbers, the Blue and Gold’s perimeter “attack” can more accurately be described as a “polite inquiry.”

One indicator of the ineffectiveness of Indiana’s perimeter attack can be seen in perusing SportVU’s driving statistics. The Pacers rank 23rd out of 30 teams in both “drives per game” and “points per 48 minutes from drives,” while sitting 24th in field-goal percentage on drives. The Blue and Gold’s perimeter “attack”can more accurately be described as a “polite inquiry.”

This issue is further exacerbated by the team’s inability to hit shots.

At 32.3%, the Pacers stand 25th in the NBA in 3-point shooting. Successful drive-and-kicks generated by this offense often die in the hands of Stuckey (33.3% behind the arc), C.J. Miles (31.1%), or Solomon Hill (30.2%).

And due to the team’s lack of players who can create for themselves, Indiana gets a league-leading 30 catch-and-shoot attempts per game. Unfortunately, they only generate an eFG% of 47.4% on these shots, which ranks them 23rd in the NBA.

The long and short of all these numbers related to driving and shooting is that the Pacers do neither well. They cannot attack the rim nor can they hit jumpers. And an offense without those two threats is really no offense at all.

Next: Part III: The Ball Movement Solution