If you're a primary NBA ball-handler, you hate to see TJ McConnell coming. When that guy steps on the floor for the Pacers, you're almost guaranteed to be in hell for the entire time he is on the floor, providing his obsessive, 94-foot defensive pressure.
McConnell's presence sparks the Pacers defense often, and it leads to the question — why don't other teams try this more? Would opposing teams need to have someone as good as McConnell to see a positive impact from full-court pressure?
I don't believe so; a good on-ball defender should still be able to wreak some havoc, and other teams would benefit from tossing their biggest dawg in the backcourt when opponents are bringing the ball up. The Pacers have definitely set the blueprint for harassing guys, and they're proud of it:
"There were, I don't know the exact number... We were in the mid-900s... We had three guys picking up full court, in the backcourt... And the next closest team was somewhere in the mid-400s," Pacers head coach Rick Carlisle said on The Zach Lowe show, in reference to the number of full-court pressures last season.
Of course, the Pacers didn't invent full-court pressure. This has been part of basketball since its inception (I think, I wasn't alive in the 1800s). But they did it so much more than other teams, and it worked so well, that it feels like other teams are just leaving meat on the bone by not at least trying it.
Pacers are giving out ideas, but other teams don't want to try it
Teams often try to emulate strategies that successful franchises implemented, but the Pacers have been doing this for a few years now — and while other teams have started to press full-court a bit, none of them have really made it part of their team identity like the Pacers have.
Often imitated, never duplicated, or whatever they say. Pacers fans should be fine with this, for the record. Being the team that will annoy ball-handlers is a pretty good reputation to have. Well, it's a bad reputation because everyone else is annoyed to play you, but a good reputation because it means... you get what I'm saying.